Dr Asangba Tzudir
Will it be dangerous for Indian Democracy?
With the recent union cabinet approval of a proposal for holding simultaneous nationwide elections for the Lok Sabha and all State Legislative Assemblies in India, the report of which was submitted by a high-level committee chaired by former President Ram Nath Kovind, the idea of “One Nation, One Election” (ONOE) has once again gained significant footing in India’s political landscape. The Report, comprising 18,626 pages, is said to be a result of extensive consultations with stakeholders, experts and research work of 191 days, since its constitution on 2 September, 2023. This would necessitate significant constitutional amendments and changes to various election related laws and processes.
One of the common arguments for ‘one nation, one election’ is that it will enhance governance by reducing the frequent interruptions caused by elections at various times, and which allows governments to focus on long-term policy measures and implementation rather than short-term electoral and electioneering strategies. Further, it is said that the cost of conducting multiple elections will be ‘potentially’ lowered and also streamline the electoral process.
On the other hand, beyond the cost effectiveness and time, it raises certain concerns on the issue of federalism and political representation. Critics have strongly pointed out that simultaneous elections may overshadow local political dynamics and also marginalize regional parties, while favoring national parties and reducing political diversity. The challenge also comes from logistics of having to conduct simultaneous elections while also accounting for the need to be fairly represented across diverse demographics. These are issues that require careful consideration.
However, this is not a new thing. During the years 1951 to 1967, elections to the Lok Sabha and most State Assemblies were held simultaneously. But this practice eroded due to political factors and premature dissolutions of assemblies. The election cycle only diverged further due to political instability and defections in the 1960s.
On the cost reduction argument, it is seen that simultaneous elections could lead to significant savings in resources like security personnel, polling staff, and election materials. Also, the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) operational costs could decrease due to streamlined processes. Simultaneous elections is also seen to mitigate the “policy paralysis” caused by short-term electoral strategies and the Model Code of Conduct, while also reducing resource strain, constant campaigning, and corruption among political parties. Also, there will be reduced disruptions to public life, benefiting educational institutions often used as polling stations and teachers put on election duty. It is also argued that, simultaneous elections would lead to an increase in voter turnout. Another argument is that it might diminish the influx of black money and pressure on businesses for monetary contributions. Statistically, the cost of Lok Sabha elections in India also shows a significant increase from Rs 10.5 crore in the first election of 1951-52 to Rs 50,000 crore in 2019, which reflects the increasing scale of the electoral process.
While the proponent’s arguments look favorable on paper, they are not time tested and has been put forth as a possibility. For instance, even if the costs may be reduced how about the technologies, and man power requirement to conduct simultaneous elections? Yes, the time frame of elections may be shorter but the entire nation will come to a standstill and engaged only in the electioneering process, and there is every possibility of a centralized system collapse and various other risks associated, the ramifications of which will be overwhelming.
Also, the Lok Sabha elections and the State Legislative Assembly elections being very different will have a negative impact on the voting dynamics where regional party politics may be made redundant. Synchronizing national and state elections is bound to overshadow local issues, as the central narrative may dominate the entire electoral discourse and process. Smaller regional parties will definitely find it difficult to compete against national parties having larger influence, thereby overshadowing regional issues. Another issue also stems from the possibility where certain governments fall mid-term leading to prolonged periods of President’s Rule in states.
The arguments presented are mostly based on the possibilities, however, there is a perceived danger beyond the cost effective and time argument, that, the centralization under ONOE is going to have an impact on central-regional party dynamics and the greater acquisition of power and control which will be dangerous for Indian democracy.
(Dr Asangba Tzudir writes guest editorials for The Morung Express. Comments can be mailed to asangtz@gmail.com)
