Giriraj Singh, Union Minister of Textiles
New Delhi: In a landmark move aimed at reforming India’s electoral system, the Union Cabinet has approved the recommendations of a high-level committee chaired by former President Ram Nath Kovind on implementing the “One Nation, One Election” policy. The government has expressed its intention to gradually introduce this system across the country within the next five years, emphasizing that this is not a political agenda but a pressing national requirement.
The idea of synchronizing elections is not new and has been discussed at various levels over the years. Reports from the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Law and Justice (2015), suggestions from the NITI Aayog, and initiatives by the Law Commission and the Election Commission have all highlighted the need for a unified election cycle. The proposal also found mention in multiple speeches by the President and Prime Minister, underlining its importance.
What is “One Nation, One Election”?
India’s democratic framework often finds itself entangled in continuous elections, given the unsynchronized timelines of Lok Sabha, state assemblies, and local body elections. This perpetual electoral cycle affects governance, policy-making, and the exchequer. “One Nation, One Election” aims to streamline this process by holding simultaneous elections for the Lok Sabha, state legislative assemblies, municipal bodies, and panchayats.
Under the Kovind Committee’s recommendations, elections would be conducted in two phases:
- Phase 1: Elections for the Lok Sabha and state legislative assemblies.
- Phase 2: Elections for municipal corporations and panchayats, to be completed within 100 days of the first phase.
To implement this, the tenure of some assemblies might need to be curtailed or extended. The committee engaged with 47 political parties, out of which 32 supported the proposal, while 15, including Congress and some Left parties, opposed it.
Why is “One Nation, One Election” Necessary?
1. Reduced Policy Disruptions
Frequent elections impose repeated implementation of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC), halting government initiatives and delaying crucial policy decisions. With a unified election cycle, the MCC would only be enforced once in five years, allowing uninterrupted governance and development activities.
2. Cost-Effectiveness
The rising cost of elections is a significant concern. While the 1952 general election cost only ₹10 crore, the expenditure skyrocketed to ₹11,000 crore in 2009, ₹40,000 crore in 2014, and an estimated ₹55,000-60,000 crore in 2019. The 2024 elections are projected to cost ₹1.35 lakh crore, making India’s elections the most expensive in the world. A synchronized election system could drastically reduce this burden.
3. Curbing Black Money and Corruption
Simultaneous elections could mitigate the flow of black money and the prevalence of corrupt practices in the electoral process. By limiting the frequency of elections, the scope for financial malpractices would be reduced significantly.
4. Efficient Resource Management
Elections require the deployment of over 1.5 crore personnel, including teachers, government employees, and security forces, disrupting their regular duties. A synchronized election would minimize this disruption, ensuring better utilization of human resources and reducing public inconvenience caused by repeated election-related activities.
5. Encouraging Voter Participation
Frequent elections can lead to voter fatigue, reducing turnout. A unified election system, held once in five years, is likely to boost voter enthusiasm and participation, strengthening the democratic process.
6. Historical Precedence and Global Examples
India has successfully conducted simultaneous elections in the past, particularly in the first four general elections (1952, 1957, 1962, and 1967). Countries like Sweden, Belgium, and South Africa also conduct synchronized elections, setting precedents for India to follow.
Challenges and Opposition
While the concept has garnered significant support, several opposition parties have raised concerns about its feasibility. Issues such as the logistical challenge of conducting nationwide elections simultaneously, the constitutional amendments required, and the potential dilution of regional issues in national narratives need to be addressed.
The Road Ahead
Implementing “One Nation, One Election” will require a multi-pronged approach, including amendments to the Constitution and consultations with stakeholders. Measures such as preventing the criminalization of politics, curbing black money, and fostering political awareness among the electorate must accompany this reform.
The success of initiatives like “One Nation, One Tax” (GST) demonstrates India’s capability to implement transformative policies. Similarly, adopting a unified election cycle could streamline governance, reduce costs, and enhance the efficiency of India’s democratic framework.
As the world’s largest democracy, India stands at a crossroads. Embracing “One Nation, One Election” is not merely a matter of administrative convenience but a progressive step toward fulfilling the nation’s aspirations.
