Verghese V Joseph.
In response to the Central Government’s January 4, 2024 public notification on the ‘One Nation, One Election’ (ONOE) proposal, the Indian Catholic Forum, a collective of concerned Indian Catholics for church reform and national integration, sent its detailed response to the high-level committee overseeing the proposal on Monday. January 15th was the last day for submission.
In order to facilitate simultaneous elections throughout the nation, the government had requested recommendations for relevant modifications to the current legislative administrative structure through a public notice in newspapers. A high-level committee for the “One Nation, One Election proposal” has been established by the government, according to the notification.
The government had invited suggestions through a public notice in publications from members of the general public for making appropriate changes in the existing legal administrative framework to enable simultaneous elections in the country. The notice said the government has constituted a high-level committee for the ‘One Nation, One Election proposal’.
The ‘One Nation, One Election’ proposal is under consideration by the Government of India to synchronise elections for the Lok Sabha and all state assemblies. It intends to hold these elections simultaneously, either on a single day or within a specific time frame.
As per the terms of reference, the committee is required to make recommendations for the creation of an appropriate legal and administrative framework for holding simultaneous elections on a permanent basis, identification of necessary amendments to the Constitution and related election laws, preparation of common electoral rolls, logistics such as EVMs/VVPATs, etc.
All suggestions received by January 15, 2024 will be placed before the Committee for its consideration, the notice said.
In response to the notification and on behalf of the Indian Catholic Forum, chhotebhai, Convenor, has submitted the following response:
- NOTIFICATION: For such an important issue that could have a major impact on the future of the nation, the notification, in a small newspaper advertisement and the small window afforded to the public for submitting written submissions, is grossly inadequate; raising a basic question, “Is the government really serious about ascertaining public opinion”?
- OBJECTIONS: The Indian Catholic Forum hereby submits and raises serious objections to the idea of “One Nation One Election” (ONOE) for the reasons given below:
- LOGIC: The main logic/ reason given for the ONOE is that it will reduce costs and limit the repeated abeyance of Government schemes because of the Model Code of Conduct. This does not hold water as the difference in expenditure if at all, will be minimal. Whether elections are held simultaneously or at different times, the Model Code of Conduct will remain in force. In fact, a nationwide halt at all levels, down to the Municipal/ Panchayat/ Cantonment levels would pose a greater danger to the nation, bringing it to a standstill.
- SECURITY: At present elections in large States like U.P. are staggered over several phases because of security constraints. In a recent judgment on Article 370, the Supreme Court asked for elections in J&K to be held, preferably with the Lok Sabha elections in 2024. However, the Government rejected the proposal for security reasons! This flies in the face of its own convoluted logic for simultaneous elections.
- COMMON ELECTORAL ROLL: This may seem good on paper for Parliament, Assemblies, Municipal and Panchayat elections. What about the 62 Cantonments that have a separate electoral roll that excludes those in municipal limits and vice versa? Cantonment Boards also have an unenviable record of postponing elections indefinitely. Hence this is NOT FEASIBLE.
- TERMS OF OFFICE: It is a reality that various elected bodies have various terms of office that begin and end at different times, sometimes even years apart. It would therefore be grossly unfair to curtail or extend the terms of such bodies just to accommodate a notional ONOE. Some corrupt, criminal and incompetent representatives would get more time for their nefarious activities; while on the other hand, some honest and competent representatives could find their good work abruptly cut short. This would amount to a FRAUD on the electorate.
- ISSUES: The issues at municipal/ panchayat/ cantonment levels would vary from those at the State or National level. Hence the ONOE would only obfuscate, confuse, and compound issues affecting the electorate.
- COLLAPSE OF ELECTED BODIES: In the recent past we have seen elected bodies having their majority reduced by allurement or coercion of the representatives. This is making a mockery of the electoral mandate. How will the ONOE respond to such scenarios? Will the Governor’s/ Administrator’s rule be perpetuated ad infinitum? Besides, the role of Governors has become much more partisan and politicised in recent times.
- COALITION POLITICS: When democracy in our country was in its infancy politics was largely binary in nature, with just two options. However, as the electorate has matured it has veered towards coalition governments and diversity at national, state, or local levels. Coalition politics is more pronounced in European countries that have had a longer history of democracy. Israel boasts of its economic and military prowess, and is politically the most fragile, with repeated elections and coalition governments. This undermines the very basis of the ONOE that claims to strengthen the nation.
- BYPOLLS: They are often caused by the death, resignation of representatives, or adverse judicial pronouncements. Will such constituencies be deprived of elected representatives till the next ONOE? Bypolls cannot be deferred indefinitely.
- DIVERSITY: We have a diversity of languages, castes, and religions. We also have geographical diversity. If it is hot and dry in one part of the country, it is cold and wet in another part. The ONOE doesn’t factor in this Diversity.
- PRESIDENTIAL FORM: This proposal seems to be a backdoor entry for a Presidential form of government, where an individual becomes greater than the country or even the party. This is contrary to the nation’s basic federal structure. Even in the USA that has a Presidential election, with campaigning stretching over a year, there are separate polls for Governors, Senators, and House Representatives. They are held by rotation, depending on their terms of office.
- CONCLUSION: In the final analysis, the ONOE is illogical, ill-conceived and seems highly motivated to favour those presently in power. It will bring the country to a standstill. It will be a security nightmare, and is not feasible; it is unfair to the electorate and will be totally confused. It will hinder good governance, it is undemocratic; it goes against the diversity and federal structure of the country. Its only hidden agenda seems to be to introduce a presidential form of government that is against the very idea of modern India. The balance of convenience therefore rests in favour of the status quo ante and the ONOE should be given a swift burial.
Not for one nation and one election
The central idea behind `One nation, One election’ (ONOE) in India is to synchronize the timing of Lok Sabha and State Assembly elections across all States to reduce the frequency of polls throughout the country and ostensibly to reduce cost.
In fact the First General Elections to the House of People (Lok Sabha) and all State Legislative Assemblies were held simultaneously in 1951-52. That practice continued in three subsequent General Elections held in the years 1957, 1962 and 1967. However, due to the premature dissolution of some Legislative Assemblies in 1968 and 1969, the cycle got disrupted.
What are the Challenges associated with ONOE?
1. Feasibility: Article 83(2) and 172 of the Constitution stipulates that the tenure of Lok Sabha and State Assemblies respectively will last for five years unless dissolved earlier and there can be circumstances, as in Article 356, wherein assemblies can be dissolved earlier. Therefore, before (and if at all) a decision on ONOE plan is taken, two serious questions need to be answered by the proponents of the plan:
(a) What would happen if the Central or State government collapses in the middle of its elected tenure?
(b) Would elections be held again in every State or will the President’s rule be imposed?
There are some other very logical impediments as follows:
(1) Logistical Challenges: It will pose logistical challenges in terms of availability and security of electronic voting machines, personnel and other resources. EC may face difficulties in managing such a massive exercise.
(2) Against the Idea of Federalism: The idea of ONOE does not gel with the Constitutional concept of ‘federalism’ and contradicts Article 1 which envisages India as a “Union of States”. In fact in this respect Mamata Banerjee (Chief Minister of West Bengal) has written to high-level committee on ‘One Nation, One Election’ which is headed by former President Ram Nath Kovind. “I regret that I cannot agree with the concept of ‘One Nation, One Election’, as framed by you. We disagree with your formulation and proposal,” she wrote. She further wrote: “Does the Indian Constitution follow the concept of ‘One Nation, One Government? I am afraid, it does not. Our Constitution conceives of the Indian nation in a federal manner. Therefore, the Indian nation has been given a Union Government and several State Governments. If the framers of the Indian Constitution did not mention the concept of ‘One Nation, One Government, how have you arrived at the concept of ‘One Nation, One Election’?” Please refer to the link: https://www.business-standard.com/politics/mamata-junks-one-nation-one-election-stresses-on-federal-nation-124011101105_1.html
(3) Legal Challenges: The Law Commission headed by Justice B. S. Chauhan reported the simultaneous elections are NOT feasible within the existing framework of the Constitution.
(a) It said that the Constitution, the Representation of the People Act 1951 and the Rules of Procedure of Lok Sabha and State Assemblies would require appropriate amendments to conduct simultaneous polls.
(b) The commission also recommended to receive ratification from at least 50% of the States which may not be an easy task.
Also establishing a legal framework is a pre-requisite for ONOE to deal with situations such as no-confidence motions, premature dissolution of assemblies, hung parliaments, etc., that may arise during simultaneous elections.
Amendment of the Constitution, the Representation of the People Act 1951, and the Rules of Procedure of Lok Sabha and State Assemblies will be required to enable simultaneous elections. This would require a two-thirds majority in both houses of Parliament and ratification by at least half of the states.
May Not be so Cost Effective as claimed: Simultaneous elections will increase the costs for deploying far larger numbers of EVMs and VVPATs. They will also put tremendous pressure on the Election Commission to mobilize all the resources namely security/armed personnel, travel, board and lodging arrangements, seamless internet facilities and other logistics.
Last but not the least, in large states like Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, etc. it has become a norm to hold the state assembly elections in several phases. If the Election Commission deems it fit to take eight phases (days) to conduct West Bengal Legislative Assembly election between 27 March and 29 April 2021, it looks quite perplexing how the proponents of ‘One Nation, One Election’ can justify holding simultaneous elections on the same day in the whole of India which also has the largest population in the world.
Whatever electoral reforms are taken up, these have to be according to the Indian Constitution and not in violation of its Basic Principles / Structure. Readers may recall what seven of the thirteen judges in the Kesavananda Bharati case, including Chief Justice Sikri who signed the summary statement, declared that Parliament’s constituent power was subject to inherent limitations. They also declared that Parliament could not use its amending powers under Article 368 to ‘damage’, ’emasculate’, ‘destroy’, ‘abrogate’, ‘change’ or ‘alter’ the ‘basic structure’ or framework of the Constitution.
Considering the huge violence, damage to properties and loss of life we have been witnessing due to post-poll violence, the policy makers may seriously consider online election to do away with voters’ visit to election booths, stand in long queues, and experience booth jam and booth capture by musclemen of various political parties. Online voting can be done from one’s home by use of mobiles, computers, etc. and will nullify poll violence. Mechanisms including security issues and the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to develop this voting system can be devised by a consortium of infotech giants namely Infosys, TCS, Cognizant, etc. Election costs will also come down drastically.