One Nation, One Election: Constitutional Feasibility and Challenges

One Nation, One Election: Constitutional Feasibility and Challenges

The concept of “One Nation, One Election” (ONOE), proposing simultaneous elections for the Lok Sabha (the lower house of India’s Parliament) and all State Legislative Assemblies, has gained significant traction in recent Indian political discourse. Proponents argue it can streamline the electoral process, reduce expenditure, and enhance governance. However, its implementation presents substantial constitutional, logistical, and political challenges, making it a complex reform proposal for a federal democracy like India.

Historically, India conducted simultaneous elections for its Lok Sabha and State Assemblies until 1967. However, with the premature dissolution of some State Assemblies and the Lok Sabha thereafter, this synchronicity was disrupted. The Law Commission of India, NITI Aayog, and various parliamentary committees have explored the idea, recognizing both its potential advantages and intricate hurdles.

Constitutional Feasibility of ONOE

Implementing ONOE necessitates significant amendments to the Indian Constitution and electoral laws. The primary articles affected include:

• Article 83(2): Pertains to the duration of the Lok Sabha, which is five years unless sooner dissolved.
• Article 172(1): Specifies the duration of State Legislative Assemblies, also five years unless sooner dissolved.
• Article 356: Deals with the imposition of President’s Rule in states, which can lead to the dissolution of assemblies.
• The Representation of the People Act, 1951: Governing the conduct of elections, would require amendments regarding the timing of elections.

Key aspects of constitutional feasibility include:

• Fixed Terms: Establishing fixed terms for both Lok Sabha and State Assemblies, removing the possibility of premature dissolution, or setting clear mechanisms to align election cycles if dissolution occurs.
• No-Confidence Motions: Introducing constructive vote of no-confidence mechanisms, where a government can only be removed if a successor can immediately prove majority support, preventing mid-term elections.
• President’s Rule Alignment: Re-evaluating the implications of President’s Rule under Article 356, ensuring it doesn’t destabilize the synchronized election cycle.
• State Ratification: Many of these constitutional amendments would likely require ratification by at least half of the State Legislatures, given their impact on the federal structure and state autonomy.

Potential Benefits of Synchronous Elections

Proponents highlight several advantages of conducting simultaneous elections:

• Reduced Expenditure: Significant savings for both the government (on security forces, polling personnel, equipment) and political parties (on campaigning).
• Improved Governance and Policy Implementation: Minimizes the duration of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC), which often brings developmental projects to a halt, thus ensuring continuous governance.
• Reduced Burden on Administration: Frees up administrative and security personnel who are frequently deployed for election duties.
• Enhanced Voter Turnout: A single election event might encourage more citizens to vote, potentially simplifying the process for voters.
• Focus on National Issues: May lead to elections being contested more on national policy issues rather than fragmented local concerns.

Key Challenges and Concerns

Despite the perceived benefits, ONOE faces formidable challenges:

• Constitutional Hurdles and Federalism: Altering the terms of elected bodies or forcing their dissolution to align with a new cycle could be seen as an infringement on states’ autonomy and the federal structure of India. The requirement for state ratification of amendments is a major hurdle.
• Logistical Complexities:
  • EVMs and VVPATs: Requires a massive increase in the production and procurement of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) and Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trails (VVPATs), along with storage and maintenance.
  • Security Forces: Mobilizing adequate security forces for a nationwide single election simultaneously across all constituencies would be an unprecedented logistical challenge.
  • Polling Personnel: Training and deploying millions of polling personnel simultaneously would strain administrative resources.
• Impact on Voter Behavior: Concerns exist that voters might favor the same party at both national and state levels, potentially diluting regional political diversity and the unique issues of state elections.
• Disadvantage to Regional Parties: National parties with greater resources and wider reach might gain an undue advantage over regional parties, which often thrive on local issues and sentiments.
• Model Code of Conduct (MCC) Duration: While reducing the frequency, a single, prolonged MCC period could still impact governance for an extended period nationwide.
• Scenario of Hung Parliament/Assembly: What happens if a government falls mid-term? Mechanisms like a constructive vote of no-confidence would need robust legal backing, and even then, fresh elections would disrupt the synchronicity.

The “One Nation, One Election” proposal is a monumental undertaking requiring extensive constitutional amendments, political consensus across the spectrum, and robust logistical planning. Its feasibility hinges not just on legal provisions but also on the willingness of political parties to cede certain powers and on a comprehensive re-evaluation of its impact on India’s diverse democratic landscape.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. What is the “One Nation, One Election” concept?
It proposes holding simultaneous elections for the Lok Sabha and all State Legislative Assemblies across India, aiming to reduce costs, improve governance, and streamline the electoral process. The goal is to synchronize the election cycles.

2. Why were simultaneous elections discontinued in India?
They were disrupted post-1967 due to the premature dissolution of some State Assemblies and later the Lok Sabha itself, primarily caused by no-confidence motions, political instability, and realignments, leading to staggered election cycles.

3. What major constitutional changes are required for ONOE?
Key amendments would be needed for Articles 83 (duration of Lok Sabha), 172 (duration of State Assemblies), and 356 (President’s Rule). The Representation of the People Act, 1951, would also require modifications regarding election timing and terms.

4. How might ONOE impact federalism in India?
Critics argue that ONOE could dilute the autonomy of states by forcing the dissolution of assemblies or altering their terms to align with the national election cycle. It also might overshadow regional issues with national narratives, affecting state politics.

Stay Updated with Daily Current Affairs 2025