New Delhi: With Prime Minister Narendra Modi making a fresh pitch for holding synchronised, simultaneous polls in the country, the polarising ‘one nation, one election’ issue is back in focus.
As the PM seeks to discuss the idea — which is seen as a step that would “reboot the Indian polity” — with all political parties in a meeting Wednesday, ThePrint looks at what simultaneous polls really mean, the arguments for and against them, and their long term ramifications for Indian democracy.
What are simultaneous polls?
Simply put, the concept of simultaneous polls refers to an arrangement wherein a citizen casts her vote for all the three tiers of government — the Lok Sabha, the state legislature and the municipal bodies or the panchayats — on the same day.
However, since the elections to the municipal bodies and panchayats are organised by the State Election Commissions, as opposed to the Central Election Commission, they have largely been kept out of the discussion on simultaneous polls. So in the current discourse around the issue, simultaneous polls refer to the simultaneous conduct of the Lok Sabha and all state assembly elections.
While PM Modi has brought the issue back into public discourse in the last few years by making a strong pitch in favour of simultaneous polls, the idea itself is not new. Between 1951 and 1967, general and state assembly elections took place together. However, with state assemblies beginning to get prematurely dissolved, the cycle of simultaneous polls got disrupted.
The contentious issue made its way back into the public discourse in 2015 when a parliamentary standing committee decided to look into its feasibility. Since then, several players like the NITI Aayog, Law Commission, Election Commission, etc. have backed the idea — albeit with some caveats.
Last year, in its draft report, the Law Commission supported the idea of simultaneous polls and called for a public debate on the issue. It is in this context that the PM, back in power with a full majority, has reopened the passionate and polarising debate.
Why simultaneous polls?
While PM Modi and his BJP have made a persuasive case for holding simultaneous elections — arguing that it is imperative to ensure uninterrupted development in the country — reports of several government bodies too have backed the idea.
According to a highly cited paper by the NITI Aayog, since the last 30 years, there has not been a single year in which there was no election — state or national — in the country. This constant election mode in the country interrupts governance on four accounts, the paper argued.
Firstly, with the Model Code of Conduct imposed, the government goes into stand-by mode for prolonged periods of time, thereby suspending all governance and developmental activity.
Secondly, the government expenditure on frequent elections is substantially greater than what it would be if elections were held simultaneously, the paper said. The government, for example, spent nearly Rs 4,000 crore on the conduct of the 16th Lok Sabha elections held in 2014. Close to Rs 200-300 crore were spent on each state election thereafter.
However, according to an estimate by the Election Commission of India (ECI), if elections are held simultaneously, the entire exercise can be conducted in Rs 4,500 crore — substantially cutting down the cost.
Thirdly, winding up elections for all the states and the Lok Sabha in one go would ensure that security forces are not kept engaged in election work throughout the year, the paper said. Since every election requires the deployment of the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs), holding elections in one go would ensure that they are not used for election work throughout the year.
Lastly, a host of miscellaneous factors — disruption of public life due to frequent elections, perpetuation of religion, caste and communal issues across the country and compelling the government to think about immediate gains to woo voters instead of working for long-term gains — make simultaneous polls desirable, it argued.
To add to this, the BJP has given the cause a nationalistic underpinning with the slogan ‘one nation, one election’.
Also read: India should abolish state governments since Modi can run the country all by himself
Why the polarisation then?
All is not rosy with the idea. Some of its critics are as passionate about their reservations as its supporters are about its advantages.
Critics say the reform is a calculated political attempt to change the nature of Indian democracy from a parliamentary to a presidential style — thereby, giving an edge to national parties and marginalising regional and local players.
Key political parties, including the Congress, All India Trinamool Congress, Communist Party of India, All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen, Nationalist Congress Party etc., have expressed serious concerns regarding the proposal and called it politically motivated, and a threat to India’s vibrant federal structure.
Making a strong argument against the concept, psephologist Sanjay Kumar had once said, “Simultaneous elections will curb the voice of people living at the margins of the society by strangulating the scope for regional parties which reflect local aspirations/issues. This will reverse the process of deepening democracy.”
The argument is corroborated by studies as well. According to a study published by the IDFC institute, “on average, there is a 77 per cent chance that the Indian voter will vote for the same party for both the State and Centre when elections are held simultaneously”.
Former chief election commissioner S.Y. Quraishi, who has also expressed some reservation regarding the idea, said in 2016, “Having to face electorate more than once every 5 year enhances the accountability of politicians and keeps them on their toes.”
There can be other concerns as well. Assembly elections in the state of Jammu and Kashmir have been postponed consistently by the Modi government on account of the security situation, lack of enough security personnel, etc.
While the elections in the state could have taken place simultaneously with the recently concluded Lok Sabha elections, the government itself has not allowed that to happen — begging the question if it would be in a position to ensure that elections in each state and union territory across the country can be synchronised with national polls.
Moreover, it is believed that it may not be a feasible proposal since it would place an enormous burden on the Election Commission to ensure that there are enough government resources, officials, voting machines, security troops, etc. who can be deployed simultaneously across the country at once.
Constitutional amendments needed
Even though the BJP and its allies like the Janata Dal (United), Akali Dal and All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK), and other parties like the Samajwadi Party and Telangana Rashtra Samithi, have supported the idea, it is widely accepted that the reform cannot be brought about without significant amendments to the Constitution and the Representation of People’s Act.
For the constitutional amendments to go through, the government would need to pass the amendments in both Houses of Parliament with two-thirds majority. Further, at least 50 per cent of the states would have to ratify the constitutional amendments.
Last year, when the government sought the poll body’s views on the issue, the EC told the Centre that simultaneous polls would require five constitutional amendments in Article 83 of the Indian Constitution, which deals with the duration of Houses of Parliament, Article 85, which deals with the dissolution of Lok Sabha by the president, Article 172 which pertains to the duration of state legislatures, Article 174 which relates to dissolution of state assemblies, and Article 356 which deals with the President’s Rule.
According to the Representation of People’s Act, “…Provided that where a general election is held otherwise than on the dissolution of the existing House of the People, no such notification shall be issued at any time earlier than six months prior to the date on which the duration of the House would expire under the provisions of clause (2) of Article 83.”
This provision of the Act will have to be amended in order to synchronise elections across the country.
Speaking to ThePrint last year, CEC Sunil Arora too had said that the goal of simultaneous elections is desirable, but would require a slew of amendments to the Constitution and the RP Act.
But what happens during a no-confidence motion? In its draft report submitted last year, the Law Commission had said that the government may only be removed through a no-confidence motion if there is confidence in another government. This, it argued, should be coupled with a provision of limiting the number of such motions during the term of the House and the state Assembly.
Also read: Yogendra Yadav: Respecting people’s mandate doesn’t mean worshipping those who win elections