Published : Sep 03, 2023 10:27 IST – 10 MINS READ
COMMents 
Follow Us
SHARE
READ LATER
A new panel will examine the feasibility of holding simultaneous elections, taking into account the existing framework under the Constitution of India and other statutory provisions. | Photo Credit: Viswanatha Sastry
The Modi government move to set up a high-level committee to examine and make recommendations on holding simultaneous elections in the country seems to have kicked up a political storm. On Thursday, August 31, the Centre’s surprise announcement of holding a five-day special session of Parliament between September 18 to September 22, had already triggered a debate, with the opposition hinting this could be a move to table the controversial One Nation, One Election Bill.
On Friday, endorsing opposition concerns, the government set up a high-level committee (HLC) under former President Ram Nath Kovind to examine the possibility of holding Lok Sabha and Assembly elections together. Immediately after the announcement, BJP chief J.P. Nadda met the ex-President and the opposition quickly smelt a “conspiracy” to postpone polls in the country
On Saturday, the Centre announced the eight-member panel. It will have as members Home Minister Amit Shah, Congress Leader and Lok Sabha MP Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury, former Leader of Opposition in Rajya Sabha Ghulam Nabi Azad, jurist Harish Salve, former Chief Vigilance Commissioner Sanjay Kothari, ex-chairman of Finance Commission N.K. Singh and former secretary general of Lok Sabha Subhash C Kashyap. The panel meetings will also be attended by the Minister of State, Ministry of Law and Justice.
Congress leader Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury wrote to Home Minister Amit Shah declining the invitation to be a part of the HLC. | Photo Credit: By Special Arrangement
Congress leader Chowdhury, however, declined to be a part of the HLC. In a letter to Home Minister Amit Shah, Chowdhury called the entire exercise “a total eyewash.” Meanwhile, veteran Congress leader K.C. Venugopal said on social media that the move is “a systematic attempt to sabotage India’s parliamentary democracy.” Venugopal questioned the move to exclude Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge from the panel. “What is the reason behind Kharge ji’s exclusion?” he posted on X.
The HLC will examine and make recommendations for holding simultaneous elections to the House of the People (Lok Sabha), State Legislative Assemblies, Municipalities, and Panchayats. The HLC will also suggest amendments to the Constitution and other laws as may be required.
The panel will examine the feasibility of holding simultaneous elections, taking into account the existing framework under the Constitution of India and other statutory provisions. It will also recommend specific amendments to the Constitution, the Representation of the People Act, 1950, the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and any other law or rules which would require amendments for the purpose of holding simultaneous elections.
The HLC will also examine if the amendments to the Constitution would require ratification by the States. The HLC will analyse and recommend possible solutions in a scenario of simultaneous elections emerging out of a hung House, adoption of a no-confidence motion, or defection or any such other event.
Also Read | How the vision of ‘One Nation’ suppresses alternative voices
The committee will also suggest a framework for synchronising elections, including the phases and time frame within which simultaneous elections may be held if they cannot be held in one go. It will recommend necessary safeguards for ensuring the continuity of the cycle of simultaneous elections. The HLC will also examine the logistics and manpower required, including EVMs, VVPATs, etc., for holding such simultaneous elections.
The HLC will also examine and recommend the modalities of use of a single electoral roll and electoral identity cards for identification of voters in elections to the House of the People (Lok Sabha), State Legislative Assemblies, Municipalities, and Panchayats.
Immediately after Parliamentary Affairs Minister Pralhad Joshi announced the high-level committee, opposition alliance INDIA ridiculed it saying this was a move by an NDA government “rattled” and “scared” seeing the opposition unity. While the committee’s detailed structure and terms of reference are not yet public, Joshi suggested that finalising anything will take some time.
India held simultaneous polls for both the Centre and States from 1951 to 1967. However, due to the premature dissolution of some State Assemblies, separate elections for the Lok Sabha and Assembly became necessary. Furthermore, in 1971, Lok Sabha polls were advanced following the split in the Congress party.
Entities like the Law Commission of India, NITI Aayog, and a Parliamentary Standing Committee had already examined the issue. While the Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice submitted its report in December 2015, the 2018 draft report by the Law Commission on the same led to further feedback collection from all stakeholders during December 2022-January 2023. The 21st Law Commission prepared the draft report after consulting national political parties, the Election Commission of India, bureaucrats, academicians, and experts on crucial points.
The Law Commission’s report stated that simultaneous elections, in addition to saving public funds, would reduce the burden on security forces and promote greater involvement of the administrative machinery in ongoing development work rather than constant election preparations. When the Commission sought views on the issue again in 2022-2023, it raised questions about whether holding simultaneous elections would impact the democratic process, the Constitution’s basic structure, or the country’s federal polity.
The panel also asked whether the appointment or selection of the Prime Minister/Chief Minister, in case of a hung Parliament/Assembly, should be made similar to how a Speaker of the House/Assembly is elected and whether it would require an amendment to the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution.
Also Read | Uniform Civil Code: Another step towards making India a Hindu Rashtra?
The Law Commission concluded that holding simultaneous elections is ideal and desirable but would require a workable formula in the Constitution. It also inquired about any other articles or issues not covered in the Draft Report that might need attention. The questions arose because, even in 2018, the Law Commission recommended simultaneous elections but noted that it was not possible within the existing constitutional framework. The Law Commission, under the leadership of B.P. Jeevan Reddy, had previously advocated for returning to the practice of holding Lok Sabha and Assembly elections together in 1999.
In 2017 NITI Aayog had also suggested simultaneous two-phase Lok Sabha and Assembly polls noting the disruption caused to governance due to frequent polls.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi has consistently advocated for simultaneous elections since his single-party victory in the 2014 Lok Sabha polls. Even the 2014 BJP poll manifesto briefly mentioned it on page 14 under Institutional Reform, stating The BJP “will seek to evolve” a method for “holding Assembly and Lok Sabha elections simultaneously” through consultation with other parties. The BJP’s argument was to reduce election expenses for both political parties and the government while ensuring stability for State governments. Veteran BJP leader Murali Manohar Joshi chaired the party’s Manifesto Committee at that time.
By 2019, when the BJP released another manifesto (Sankalpa Patra) for Lok Sabha polls, it further refined their stance. Under “Good Governance” and “Simultaneous Elections” on page 24, it said it was committed to holding simultaneous elections for Parliament, State Assemblies, and local bodies to reduce expenditure, utilise government resources and security forces efficiently, and enable effective policy planning. It aimed to build consensus on this with all parties. The document also emphasised the goal of a common voter list for all elections to ensure every citizen’s right to vote and avoid confusion caused by multiple voter lists.
Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) units at the EVM warehouse in Vellore. The HLC will examine the logistics and manpower required, including EVMs, VVPATs, etc., for holding such simultaneous elections. | Photo Credit: Venkatachalapathy C
After winning the election, in his address to the nation, Modi acknowledged the debate on simultaneous elections and called for a democratic discussion. Since forming the government in 2014, Modi has consistently advocated for One Nation, One Election. In 2016, the PMO asked a GoM to examine the feasibility of simultaneous elections.
In September 2016, then-President Pranab Mukherjee, during an interaction with students at Rajendra Prasad Sarvodaya Vidyalaya within the Presidential estate, expressed the belief that holding simultaneous polls could be highly beneficial, suggesting that the Election Commission could work towards this goal.
In June 2019, Modi discussed the issue of simultaneous polls with party leaders in Parliament at an all-party meeting. Afterward, the idea to form a committee to explore the possibility was mentioned. In 2022, the Election Commission stated it was ready to hold polls but could only do so after amending the Constitution, a task reserved for Parliament. The EC had advocated for One Nation, One Election back in 1982-83.
In 2018, the Law Commission had organised a two-day consultation on simultaneous polls. But only four parties—Shiromani Akali Dal, the AIADMK, the Samajwadi Party and the Telangana (now Bharat) Rashtra Samithi supported the idea. Nine parties—BJP ally Goa Forward Party, Trinamool Congress, Aam Aadmi Party, DMK, Telugu Desam Party, CPI, CPI-M, Forward Bloc and the JD(S) opposed it. They found the move “undemocratic” and against the principles of federalism. CPI-M termed it anti-Constitution.
Now, with the government calling a brief special session and establishing the HLC on One Nation, One Election, there is speculation that it will attempt to pass related legislation soon. However, time for consultations appears limited, and doubts remain about State cooperation. Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.K. Stalin called it “BJP’s attempt to impose uniformity in everything,” while BRS, governing Telangana, believes the BJP introduced it out of “fear of losing Lok Sabha polls”.
Also Read | The Centre’s controversial makeover of crucial criminal codes can have far-reaching impacts
Chief Ministers of the BJP-ruled States support the idea, whereas BJD, governing Odisha, has welcomed the move, along with the AIADMK and Shiromani Akali Dal. BSP MP Danish Ali was candid, “One Nation, One Election is infeasible in a diverse country like India. The RSS-BJP’s desire for one nation-one law, one leader, one culture, and one religion won’t align with Indian realities. They can’t impose it here. They are now raising issues like the Uniform Civil Code and One Nation One Election as they lose ground.
Given the strong protest lodged by the Opposition parties, many of which rule a number of critical States, the One Nation, One Election Bill looks like a hard nut to crack for the government. Some opposing the move believe it’s an attempt by the Modi government to shift from a Parliamentary to a Presidential system. Others argue it undermines diversity, favouring national parties over regional ones.
Some fear that if State politics influence national elections, it may lead to unstable governments, contrary to federalism. Additionally, the possibility of unclear mandates could necessitate frequent fresh elections. While cost reduction is cited, expenses have risen even in non-partisan panchayat and local body polls. Many view combining these polls as unrealistic and a threat to democratic ideals in the long term.
“If you want to amend that provision so that State elections can be synchronised with Lok Sabha polls, Parliament cannot do so as it will be infringing on the federal structure of the Constitution.”P.D.T. AcharyFormer Secretary General, Lok Sabha
The exercise of holding simultaneous elections as per the recommendations of the Law Commission would require at least five Constitutional Amendments—in Articles 83, 85, 172, 174 and 356. The Law Commission’s Draft report on simultaneous polls in 2018 also suggested that at least 50 per cent of the States should ratify the constitutional amendments. Of this, Article 174 deals with the dissolution of State Assemblies while the key Article 356 is concerned with the imposition of the President’s Rule in States.
“The planning of holding simultaneous elections is a non-starter,” Former Secretary General of Lok Sabha, P.D.T Achary told Frontline. He reasoned that since the pattern of elections has changed, going back to the previous practice of holding Lok Sabha and Assembly elections together will require all existing Assemblies to be dissolved, which currently have different tenures, with some even only half-way. “Assembly can be dissolved either if the ruling government in the State recommends this voluntarily and Governor gives assent or when there is a breakdown of Constitutional machinery and the President gets involved through a recommendation of the central government,” said Achary.
According to Achary, since it cannot be presumed that there is a complete breakdown of Constitutional machinery in all States in order for the President’s intervention, the other option is that the Union Government amends the Constitutional Provision of Article 172, which says every legislative Assembly of every State, unless sooner dissolved, shall continue for five years from the date appointed for its first meeting.
“If you want to amend that provision so that State elections can be synchronised with Lok Sabha polls, Parliament cannot do so as it will be infringing on the federal structure of the Constitution. The Union government/ Parliament cannot impose its will on States. The Union government can otherwise only get the States ruled by the BJP to voluntarily recommend the dissolution of the State Assemblies. But States ruled by the opposition will not agree,” Achary told Frontline.
COMMents Follow Us
SHARE
BACK TO TOP
Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide to our community guidelines for posting your comment