One Nation One Election In India

Introduction

President Droupadi Murmu received the report from the High-level Committee (HLC) on One Nation, One Election, which was led by former President Ram Nath Kovind.

Within 100 days, synchronized local body polls should be conducted by the panel's recommendations. Nine of the former chief justices of the high courts were in favour of simultaneous elections, while three expressed reservations or objections.

One Nation One Election

It means holding elections to Lok Sabha, all state Legislative Assemblies, and urban and rural local bodies (municipalities and panchayats) at the same time.

Key Recommendations of Kovind Committee On One Nation One Election

The One Nation One Election report spans 18,626 pages and is divided into 11 chapters in addition to annexes.

Chapter VI:- It addresses the objections made by people for a variety of reasons against holding simultaneous elections.

Purpose

• Cut back on spending: ?3,870 crore is projected to have been spent by the public coffers on the 2014 general elections.

• One argument is that holding regular elections for the State Assemblies and the Union Parliament would drastically cut spending.

• Government operation: the Model Code of Conduct has two five-year cycles that impact how smoothly government business is conducted and cause "governance downtime."

• The system will assist ruling parties in shifting their attention from perpetual election mode to governance.

• Voter turnout will rise as a result of it, the Law Commission predicts.

• Additionally, it will lessen the burden on the security forces and administrative infrastructure.

• It will guarantee prompt administration of programs and administrative attention to development initiatives rather than political campaigning.

It also provides clarifications regarding the four following concerns:

• Fear of Unconstitutionality and Opposition to the Doctrine of Basic Structure:- The opponents contend that the requirement for early dissolution of state Legislative Assemblies resulting from simultaneous elections is unconstitutional since it goes "against the will of the people." They further contend that any modifications to the terms would go against the fundamental framework of the Constitution because it sets fixed terms for Parliament and Assemblies.

• Concern about Democratic Principles Being Violated:- One Nation, One Election would infringe upon citizens' rights and impede the electoral process.

• Fear of Federalism Undermining: State rights will be violated by simultaneous elections.

• Fear of the Plan Not Addressing the Problem of a Hung Parliament/Assembly:- Several political parties have expressed concern that the One Nation, One Election plan does not include any measures to address the issue of a hung parliament/ assembly.

Logistical Preparations Recommended for Simultaneous Elections

• It is recommended to prepare logistically for simultaneous elections using a detailed plan. To ensure seamless execution of the simultaneous elections, the Kovind committee on one nation, one election recommends that the Election Commission of India, in consultation with State Election Commissions, prepare a detailed plan for the procurement of necessary equipment, such as EVMS and VVPATS, and ensure the deployment of polling personnel and security forces.

• Modification to Article 325: To simplify voter identification and lessen duplication between various electoral rolls and ID systems, the panel recommends revising Article 325 to allow for a Single Electoral Roll and Single Elector's Photo Identity Card.

Clarification Regarding the Allegations of Unconstitutionality and Opposition to the Basic Structure Doctrine

• No Minimum Mandate:- Articles 83 and 172 specify that the term shall not exceed five years, but they do not establish a minimum term length of five years.

• Previous Cases:- Despite their size, Legislative Assemblies and Parliament have occasionally been dissolved before their five-year term because of unstable political environments or a lack of solid majorities.

• No Effect on Basic Structure:- The right to the rule of law, the rights of people under Part III, or any other aspect like a free and independent court are not "impinged upon" by simultaneous elections.

• Fundamental Doctrine of Structure:- It stands for several essential elements of the Constitution, such as the so-called "Golden Triangle" of Articles 14, 19, and 21, as well as other fundamental liberties included in Part III and "the balance between Part III (Fundamental Rights) and Part IV (DPSPs), secularism, and federalism."

• The most crucial constitutional values are an independent judiciary, rule of law, and free and fair elections.

Several fundamental queries regarding the One Nation, One Election, along with the committee's responses

Challenge 1:- How can all three types of elections—local, assembly, and Lok Sabha—be held simultaneously?

The committee suggested holding the first phase's elections for the State Legislative Assemblies and the Lok Sabha (House of the People) simultaneously. Additionally, in the second phase, elections for State Legislative Assemblies and the House of the People might take place up to 100 days after elections for Municipalities and Panchayats.

Challenge 2:- One Nation, One Election is called unlawful

Expert on the Constitution Subhash Kashyap said in the report that there was sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the "Constitution-makers envisaged only simultaneous elections for House of the People and State Legislative Assemblies".

According to him, the same Constitution applied to the first four state assemblies and House of People elections, which were held nearly concurrently. "They could not be held as being unconstitutional," he stated, noting that "mid-term elections were largely forced only after 1967 as a by-product of large-scale defections and frequent toppling of governments".

Challenge 3:- However, hung assemblies might still occur during concurrent elections; what would happen if a government fell in the middle of the term?

It was argued that if simultaneous elections are held, no measures have been taken to address the issue of a hung parliament or assembly. When neither political party secures a definite majority in the legislature, it is known as a hung assembly. When the ruling party decides to change alliances or loses its majority in the parliament, a government may fall.

To solve this problem, the Committee suggested that in the case of a hung house, no-confidence vote, or any other circumstance when the overthrow of a government is likely, new elections might be conducted to form the new House.

"Where fresh elections are held for the House of the People (Lok Sabha), the tenure of the House of the People will be only for the unexpired term of the immediately preceding full term of the House of the People (till the next election round) and the expiration of this period shall operate as a dissolution of the House," the report stated.

The committee proposed that the "new Legislative Assembly unless sooner dissolved, shall continue up to the end of the full term of the House of the People" in cases when new elections are held for State Legislative Assemblies.

Challenge 4:- The fundamental framework of the Constitution is violated by changing the terms of assembly.

State Legislative Assemblies will need to be prematurely dissolved to implement simultaneous polling. Changes to the fixed terms of Parliament and State Legislative Assemblies are argued to contravene the fundamental framework of the Constitution, which stipulates that the lifespan of each body will be five years "unless dissolved sooner."

According to the report, the tenure shall be five years and no longer; the founding fathers of the Constitution did not fix the term at five years or make it a minimum of five years. Instead, they carefully wrote Articles 83 and 172. Parliament may change the Constitution under Article 368.

Challenge 5:- Constitutional amendment legal challenges

Legal obstacles to 'One Nation One Election' implementation, according to ASSOCHAM President Ajay Singh, include the requirement to alter the 1951 Representation of the People Act and the Constitution. To change the set term of assemblies, amendments are needed.

In light of this, the Committee suggested adding Article 324A to allow for concurrent elections in Panchayats and Municipalities with the State Legislative Assemblies and the House of People's general elections. To enable the Single Electoral Roll and Single Elector's Photo Identity Card, it also suggested amending Article 325.

"Entry 5 of Schedule VII, Part IX, and Part IX A of the Indian Constitution addresses State issues; hence, approval by the States is mandated by Article 368(2) of the Indian Constitution. In its findings, the panel stated that the State is not required to ratify the first stage, which is to hold simultaneous elections for the State Legislative Assemblies and the House of the People.

It further stated that to change Article 83 (Duration of Houses of Parliament) and Article 172 (Duration of State Legislatures), a Constitution Amendment Bill must be introduced in Parliament. "This Constitutional Amendment will not need ratification by the States," it read.

Challenge 6:- Personnel and logistics-related, including EVMs and VVPATs

The Committee suggested that the Election Commission of India develop a strategy for setting up the necessary infrastructure to hold simultaneous elections for state and Lok Sabha assemblies. The commission can budget ahead of time for the purchase of equipment, like VVPATs and EVMs, the deployment of poll workers and security guards, and other required procedures.

Regarding the Municipalities and Panchayat elections, a similar suggestion was made to the State Election Commission or commissions.

Conclusion

The One Nation, One Election report from the High-level Committee, led by former President Ram Nath Kovind, has been given to President Droupadi Murmu. In line with its recommendations, the committee suggests holding coordinated local body elections within a hundred days. Remarkably, three chief justices of previous high courts voiced misgivings or objections, while nine former top justices endorsed the idea of holding simultaneous elections. This range of viewpoints highlights how important and complicated the problem is. By emphasizing synchronized elections, the report hopes to improve governance efficiency and lessen logistical constraints by streamlining the electoral process. Nonetheless, concerns expressed by some legal professionals suggest that more thought should be given to the ideas and that they may need to be improved.

References

• Govt. Of India:- https://onoe.gov.in/
• The Hindu:- https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/watch-one-nation-one-election-what-did-the-panel-recommend/article67953798.ece
• Mint:- https://www.livemint.com/news/india/is-one-nation-one-election-unconstitutional-key-challenges-legal-logistic-explained-but-many-questions-remain-11710521753243.html
• Next IAS:- https://www.nextias.com/ca/editorial-analysis/24-01-2024/feasibility-of-one-nation-one-election
• The Indian Express:- https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/ashutosh-varshney-writes-why-how-one-nation-one-election-divisive-9217944/
• The Economics Times:- https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/how-to/one-nation-one-election-returns-to-headlines-a-look-at-history-challenges-benefits-and-the-latest-buzz/articleshow/107252168.cms?from=mdr