‘One nation, One election’ through the decades

WHAT DOES ‘ONE NATION, ONE ELECTION’ MEAN?
Holding simultaneous elections to all state assemblies as well as the Lok Sabha A full-fledged and ideal ‘one nation, one election’ model would call for elections to all three tiers — panchayats/urban local bodies, state assemblies and Lok Sabha — synchronised to be conducted together. It means a voter casts his vote for the Lok Sabha, his state assembly and local body on a single day and in a single polling booth. This will lead to the formation of a new Lok Sabha, Vidhan Sabhas and local bodies with the same timeline.

Also Read: One nation, one election: Former President Kovind panel set to submit report before Lok Sabha polls


HISTORY
The first general elections in 1951-52 were held in sync with all Vidhan Sabha polls, and the practice continued for the next three rounds of Lok Sabha polls in 1957, 1962 and 1967. Hung assemblies in a clutch of states in 1968-69 disrupted the trend. In 1970, the Lok Sabha was prematurely dissolved under the Indira Gandhi regime and fresh elections were called in 1971. The term of the fifth Lok Sabha was extended until 1977 under Article 352. The simultaneous poll calendar was further derailed as the Lok Sabhas formed after elections in 1977, 1980, 1989, 1996, 1998, 1999 were all prematurely dissolved. A similar situation happened in several state assemblies.

(Also read: Ex President Ram Nath Kovind-led panel to study One Nation, One Election)

HOMEWORK DONE SO FAR
While the realignment did not happen since, the issue has been discussed even before the current dispensation led by Prime Minister Modi pitched it. The Election Commission of India has consistently expressed its support for a simultaneous poll plan. It first stated it in its 1983 annual report and backed it again as recently as in a 2022 meeting with the 22nd Law Commission.

The ECI has consistently maintained that provided required legal amendments are effected and logistical requirements of adequate EVMs and security deployments are met, it is well placed to conduct simultaneous polls.

LAW COMMISSIONS HAVE ALSO BACKED THE PLAN
The 107th report of the Law Commission in 1999 advocated putting an end to the ‘cycle of elections every year’ and said a separate election to a legislative assembly should be “an exception not the rule”. The 22nd Law Commission in its 2018 draft proposed “restoration” of simultaneous polls.

In 2015, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice backed the plan with a series of suggestions on addressing sticky points that could arise. It reported support from the AIADMK, Asom Gana Parishad, Shiromani Akali Dal, Indian Union Muslim League among others. The Indian National Congress, Nationalist Congress Party, Communist Party of India and the All India Trinamool Congress rejected it as impractical and undemocratic.

In 2017, a Niti Aayog paper suggested a two-phase switch to simultaneous polls starting from the 2019 Lok Sabha elections. While the last general elections saw no such move, a lot of synchronisation has since happened on a common electoral roll.

FOR AND AGAINST
It is argued that multiple elections are a drain on state resources, keep political parties on a perpetual ‘campaign’ mode, also leading in effect to huge and often illegal money inflows and corrupt practices. The constant cycle of elections also disrupts policy making and policy stability at all levels, it is argued.

On the other hand, critics argue that apart from the sheer enormity of conducting a single election, there is a possibility of misuse of power by the Centre in effecting the process and exercising undue influence over regional parties and state politics.

NO CAKE WALK
Simultaneous polls require constitutional amendments by a two-thirds majority in Parliament and ratification by at least half the states. Articles 83, 85(2) (B), 174(2)(B) on the term of the House and dissolution of state assembles, besides Article 356 on President’s rule and Article 75(3) on collective responsivity and no-confidence motion, will need amendments -- a not so easy pathway given opposition presence across several states. The Representation of People’s Act, 1951 will also need to be amended. Ensuring adequate EVM availability and polling and security staff will also prove a challenge, though considerable work has been done on that over the years.