In the complex landscape of Indian democracy, the idea of “One Nation, One Election” has resurfaced as a potential electoral reform, aiming to synchronize elections across all states and the Lok Sabha. This proposal, which echoes historical practices until 1967, has been the subject of discussions, proposals, and recommendations from various quarters, including the Election Commission, Law Commission, and Niti Aayog.
The historical context of simultaneous elections in India sheds light on the evolution of electoral practices. The initial proposal surfaced in 1983, gaining momentum with the Law Commission's inclusion in 1999 and Niti Aayog's working paper in 2017. The Law Commission's comprehensive recommendations in 2018 highlighted the need for constitutional amendments to realize the ambitious goal of “One Nation, One Election.”
However, the path to implementing this reform is fraught with challenges. One of the critical hurdles is the synchronization of terms between the Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies. Varying term durations create a logistical puzzle, with some assemblies recently concluding elections while others are on the brink of them. The required constitutional amendments, including changes to Articles 83 and 172, pose a substantial legislative challenge.
India's parliamentary system, where the government is accountable to the Lower House, introduces another layer of complexity. The possibility of a government falling before completing its term, triggering unscheduled elections, challenges the concept of fixed-term elections inherent in “One Nation, One Election.” Achieving political consensus among diverse parties with conflicting interests further complicates matters.
The logistical challenges associated with simultaneous elections are equally formidable. The need for double the number of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) and Voter Verified Paper Audit Trails (VVPATs) raises resource allocation concerns. Augmented polling staff, transportation challenges for election materials, enhanced security demands, and the existing EVM storage issues present formidable obstacles.
Amid these challenges, potential solutions emerge. Drawing from India's electoral history, where simultaneous elections were successfully held from 1951-52 to 1967, serves as a compelling precedent for the feasibility and effectiveness of “One Nation, One Election.” Extending the concept to include local body elections could further streamline the electoral process.
Emulating the United States' model of fixed election dates could provide a structured approach, ensuring synchronization of national and state elections. Alternative methods of government formation, such as inviting the second or third leading person in the house or allowing the House to choose its leader, offer flexibility in the face of government instability.
Constitutional amendments, particularly those facilitating synchronization when state assembly terms coincide with Lok Sabha elections, represent a proactive step toward realizing the “One Nation, One Election” vision.
The journey toward implementing “One Nation, One Election” in India is riddled with challenges, both constitutional and logistical. However, by learning from historical precedents, exploring innovative solutions, and fostering political consensus, the nation can pave the way for a more synchronized and efficient electoral process, ensuring the vibrancy and strength of its democratic foundation.
