A heated debate is underway in India concerning the ambitious 'One Nation, One Election' initiative, which aims to synchronize national and state elections under one voting schedule. The proposal was brought to the forefront when Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal introduced two key bills—the Constitution (129th) Amendment Bill and the Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill—in the Lok Sabha on December 17, 2024.
The move has sparked significant discussion, marked by both enthusiasm and skepticism across party lines. Supporters argue it promises to streamline the electoral process, effectively reducing the substantial costs associated with staggered elections. A recent estimate suggested the 2019 general election alone cost India around 60 billion rupees (approximately $7 billion).
Following the introduction of the bills, various parliamentary procedures took place, including a vote where 269 members supported the initiative, and 198 opposed it. This marked the first use of the electronic voting system introduced to the new Parliament building. The next step involves forming a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) tasked with extensive consultations on the proposed amendments.
Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla is expected to finalize the JPC's membership, which typically includes 21 members from the Lok Sabha and can have up to 10 from the Rajya Sabha. This formation is particularly urgent as parliamentary sessions are set to conclude soon. Failure to establish the JPC before the session ends could render the proposed bills null, requiring them to be reintroduced.
While the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) remains optimistic about the initiative, asserting it will reduce administrative burdens and improve governance, opposition parties are expressing deep concerns. Congress leader Manish Tewari has passionately spoken against the proposal, claiming it directly challenges the nation’s federal structure and undermines the independence of state governments. "The federal design of the Constitution makes states co-equal to the union and does not subordinate the states to the union" (Original quote in Hindi: "संविधान का संघीय प्रारूप राज्यों को संघ के समकक्ष बनाता है और राज्यों को संघ के अधीन नहीं करता").
Opposition grows as the critique expands beyond federal concerns to logistical challenges inherent with such significant changes to the electoral framework. Critics highlight potential costs involved with organizing simultaneous elections, including enhancing capacity for prompt auditing and securing necessary electronic voting machines. They argue this could add another layer of financial and operational complexity to the electoral process.
The BJP, meanwhile, has pushed back against these critiques. Former President Ram Nath Kovind, who chaired the high-level committee recommending the 'One Nation, One Election' policy, remarked, "This model will boost India’s GDP by 1.5 percent," arguing such measures will help redirect focus toward governance rather than continuous campaigning, noting, "Every work is linked to elections" (Original quote in Hindi: "हर काम चुनावों से जुड़ा होता है").
The argument for simultaneous elections harks back to their historical precedent; India conducted synchronized elections from 1951 until 1967 before disruptions introduced through premature dissolutions of legislatures altered this status quo. Now, the BJP is adamant about reinstilling this system, advocating tangible alignment of Lok Sabha and state assembly terms.
Further complicacy arises from political dynamics within the BJP itself, which is reportedly seeking clarifications from several absent MPs during the vote on the bills, valuing adherence to party discipline as integral to their strategy. Key ministerial figures were noted to be among those who failed to attend, prompting scrutiny and repercussions within party ranks as they gear up for this momentous legislative undertaking.
Members of the JPC, once formed, will engage not only with parliamentary colleagues but also legal and constitutional experts—including former judges and Election Commission authorities—to garner opinions on the amendments and their implementation. Stakeholders from various sectors are also expected to provide insights, broadening the consultation spectrum to inform the legislative process extensively.
With this initiative, the BJP emphasizes not only fiscal prudence but also political efficiency, indicating the fundamental changes expected if successful. Success hinges largely on their ability to navigate opposition sentiments and secure the necessary parliamentary votes for the amendments.
Looking beyond voting dynamics, the potential consequences of implementing the 'One Nation, One Election' model could reshape not just electoral procedures but also alter overall governance frameworks. Each political party will likely stake its claims on the outcomes, reflecting unique priorities and regional sentiments.
Whether pushed as efficient governance or criticized as diminishing state autonomy remains the crux of this debate. Observers note the complexity of reconciling national objectives with regional governance, hinting at broader repercussions for India's democratic fabric. For now, all eyes will remain on the proceedings following the establishment of the JPC as both proponents and opponents prepare for the next chapter of this compelling political saga.
