The Union Law Ministry plans to place before the Cabinet the report of the high-level committee on ‘One Nation, One Election’ at the earliest as part of the 100-day agenda of the Legislative Department.

The committee’s report, presented to President Droupadi Murmu, details extensive recommendations and proposed constitutional amendments to enable this significant transformation.

About Simultaneous Elections 

• Simultaneous elections involve synchronising the electoral cycles of the Lok Sabha (Parliament) and State Assemblies so that voters in a constituency cast their votes for both on the same day. 

• This approach was common until 1967 but has since seen separate elections for Parliament and state Assemblies due to various political developments in subsequent years.

• The Election Commission first proposed the idea of simultaneous elections in 1983, which was further explored by the Law Commission and NITI Aayog. 

• It is important to note that simultaneous elections don’t necessarily mean that every constituency across the country votes on a single day. Instead, they can be conducted in phases, where voters in specific constituencies participate in both state Assembly and Lok Sabha elections on the same day.

What are the key recommendations?

1) Amendment to Article 82A: The Committee recommends amending Article 82A of the Constitution to allow the President to set an ‘Appointed Date’ for starting simultaneous elections to the House of the People and Legislative Assemblies. After this date, state Assemblies would align their terms with the Parliament, enabling synchronised elections.

2) Term Synchronisation: If the recommendations are adopted after the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, the first simultaneous elections could be held in 2029. Alternatively, if aiming for the 2034 elections, the appointed date would be set after the 2029 Lok Sabha polls.

• States with elections scheduled between June 2024 and May 2029 would have their terms end with the 18th Lok Sabha, potentially resulting in shorter terms for some state Assemblies as a one-time adjustment.

• States like West Bengal, Kerala, Tamil Nadu (2026), Punjab, Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh (2027), and Karnataka, Chhattisgarh, Telangana (2028) would adjust their election cycles accordingly.

The government elected post-2024 will decide when to start simultaneous elections, either in 2029 or 2034.

3) Premature Dissolution Measures: To maintain synchronisation in case of early dissolution of Parliament or a state Assembly, fresh elections would be held only for the remaining term until the next simultaneous elections. This ensures that any hung House or no-confidence motions do not disrupt the overall timeline for synchronised elections.

4) Synchronisation of Local Body Elections: Parliament is advised to pass legislation, possibly via Article 324A, to align municipalities and panchayats elections with General Elections. This law would set the terms for local bodies to match the national electoral schedule.

5) Electoral Roll Preparation and Management: The Committee proposes amending Article 325 to enable the Election Commission of India (ECI) to create a unified electoral roll and Elector’s Photo Identity Card (EPIC) for all levels of government, in consultation with State Election Commissions (SECs). Currently, the ECI prepares electoral rolls for Lok Sabha, while SECs handle local bodies. Harmonising these processes would prevent duplication and protect voter rights.

6) Logistical Arrangements and Expenditure Estimation: The Committee calls on the ECI to provide detailed logistical and expenditure plans for simultaneous elections. Comprehensive plans should cover equipment, personnel deployment, and security measures, developed in coordination with SECs.

7) Impact on Governance and Development: The Committee emphasizes that certainty in governance is crucial for effective decision-making and sustained development. Synchronised elections can help avoid policy paralysis and create a favorable environment for progress.

Arguments in favor of simultaneous elections

• Policy Paralysis: Frequent elections result in prolonged periods under the Model Code of Conduct (MCC), halting development programmes, welfare schemes, and capital projects, causing a governance deficit.

• Financial Expenditure: Elections entail significant costs borne by political parties and candidates, often leading to overspending and fostering corruption and black money circulation.

• Security Deployment: Elections necessitate heavy deployment of security forces, impacting their availability for other critical internal security duties.

• Disruption of Public Life: Frequent elections disrupt normal public life and essential services, whereas simultaneous elections could confine this disruption to a defined period.

• Social Harmony: Frequent elections exacerbate societal divisions based on caste, religion, and communal lines, whereas synchronised elections might mitigate such polarizing effects.

• Governance Focus: Constant elections divert political attention towards immediate electoral gains rather than long-term governance and policy-making, potentially undermining developmental priorities.

• Voter Turnout: The Law Commission suggests that Simultaneous Elections could enhance voter turnout, simplifying the electoral process for citizens.

Arguments against simultaneous elections: 

• Operational Feasibility: Synchronising the electoral cycles for the first time poses logistical challenges. There are concerns about the procedure if the ruling party or coalition loses majority before the completion of the fixed term of 5 years. Additionally, the Election Commission may face significant logistical and administrative hurdles in conducting elections on such a massive scale.

• Constitutional Issues: Implementing simultaneous elections would require amendments to various constitutional provisions, including terms of the House of the People and State Legislative Assemblies, as well as changes to the Representation of People Act, 1951. Such amendments would also need ratification by the states, which could complicate the process.

• Differential National and State Issues: National and state-level issues differ significantly, and holding simultaneous elections may influence voters to favor larger national parties over local or regional ones, potentially undermining local governance and representation.

• Government Accountability: Frequent elections ensure politicians remain accountable to the electorate, as they face regular scrutiny and feedback from voters. Simultaneous elections could reduce this accountability by extending the interval between electoral checks on government performance.

• Federalism Concerns: Simultaneous elections might infringe upon federalism principles, as postponing state elections until synchronised phases could necessitate imposing President’s rule during interim periods, undermining state autonomy.

• Homogenization vs Plurality: Instead of promoting diversity and local/regional leadership, simultaneous elections might inadvertently bolster national parties at the expense of regional diversity, potentially homogenizing political representation across the country.

(The author is a trainer for Civil Services aspirants.)