PrintFriendlyPrime Minister Shri Narendra Modi has strongly advocated for One Nation, One Election, stating, “One Nation, One Election is not just a matter of debate, but it is the need of India. The country cannot be in a constant state of elections. If this system was good for the first two decades of independence, why can it not be reintroduced now?” This statement highlights the urgency and importance of synchronized elections in ensuring efficient governance and stability in India’s democratic framework.
The idea of One Nation, One Election has been a cornerstone of the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) vision for a more efficient and stable democratic system in India. The concept aims to synchronize elections for the Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies, thereby reducing the frequent disruptions caused by the current cycle of elections happening at different times across states. The idea has been under discussion for decades, with the first general elections in India (1952, 1957, 1962, and 1967) being conducted simultaneously. However, political instability in the late 1960s and early 1970s led to the fragmentation of this practice.
The practice of simultaneous elections was initially followed in India until 1967. After the premature dissolution of some State Assemblies in 1968 and 1969 and the Lok Sabha in 1970, the election cycle got disrupted. Since then, elections have been held at different times in different states, leading to frequent electoral cycles. The idea of One Nation, One Election has been revisited several times. The Law Commission of India (170th and 255th reports) and the Election Commission of India have explored its feasibility. The NITI Aayog also submitted a discussion paper on the subject in 2018, highlighting the potential benefits and challenges of the reform.
India, as the world’s largest democracy, conducts elections at regular intervals across its 28 states and 8 Union Territories. The frequent electoral cycles result in a continuous state of political campaigning, governance disruptions, and excessive expenditure. The Election Commission of India (ECI) and various political analysts have often highlighted the challenges posed by such fragmented election schedules. The BJP believes that implementing One Nation, One Election will not only reduce election-related expenses but also enable the government to focus on long-term policy execution without frequent interruptions due to the Model Code of Conduct (MCC).
One of the major advantages of One Nation, One Election is the significant reduction in electoral expenditure. Conducting multiple elections throughout the year incurs significant costs for the government, political parties, and candidates. According to estimates, the 2019 Lok Sabha elections alone cost around ₹60,000 crore, with an increasing trend in electoral spending over the years. A unified election will lead to a substantial reduction in public expenditure, allowing funds to be directed toward developmental initiatives.
Frequent elections also lead to policy paralysis, as governments often hesitate to make crucial decisions fearing electoral repercussions. With synchronized elections, policymakers will have a longer, uninterrupted tenure to focus on governance. This will also strengthen federalism by ensuring stability in state governments and reducing instances of premature dissolution or political instability. Additionally, a unified election will likely result in higher voter turnout as citizens will only need to cast their votes once in a given cycle, making the process more convenient and impactful. Studies have shown that voter fatigue due to frequent elections reduces participation over time.
Former Prime Minister Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee once said, “Elections are the heartbeat of a democracy. But if the heartbeat is too fast, it signals a problem.” His words resonate deeply with the issue of frequent elections in India. When elections happen too frequently, they divert governance, drain public resources, and disrupt policy execution. Vajpayee’s statement highlights the need for a balanced electoral structure that maintains democratic vibrancy while ensuring efficient governance.
Another major benefit of ONOE is that it will reduce the burden on security forces and the Election Commission. The deployment of security forces and election staff for multiple elections stretches resources thin. A single election will ease logistical challenges, reduce manpower costs, and enhance efficiency. Moreover, it will boost national policy execution, as governments at both central and state levels can work in synergy to implement policies, economic reforms, and welfare schemes effectively without being affected by election-time populism.
Despite these advantages, there are several challenges in implementing One Nation, One Election. The biggest hurdle is the need for constitutional and legal amendments. Implementing this reform requires changes to Articles 83, 85, 172, 174, and 356 of the Indian Constitution. These changes would require a broad political consensus, as they impact the tenure and dissolution of state assemblies. Additionally, many regional parties oppose the idea, arguing that simultaneous elections may overshadow local issues with national narratives, reducing their electoral influence.
A crucial question arises: What is the I.N.D.I.A alliance’s basis for opposing One Nation, One Election? The opposition bloc has strongly resisted this reform, often citing concerns over federalism and democratic representation. However, their resistance raises deeper questions. Are they genuinely concerned about governance, or is the opposition merely a political strategy to counter the BJP’s push for electoral efficiency? If conducting simultaneous elections was once a norm in India’s early decades, why is the opposition now portraying it as an attack on democracy? A closer analysis suggests that parties within the I.N.D.I.A alliance may fear losing their regional strongholds if national and state elections are held together. With a consolidated election cycle, the electorate might prioritize national issues over state-specific concerns, making it harder for regional parties to gain traction. Moreover, the reduced frequency of elections could curb the cycle of populist promises made before every state election, compelling political parties to focus on governance rather than short-term electoral gains.
The Ram Nath Kovind-led High-Level Committee, constituted in 2023, provided key recommendations to facilitate the implementation of ONOE. Some of the major recommendations include:
- Synchronizing Elections in Two Phases: The committee suggested that elections be conducted in two phases—one for the Lok Sabha and a set of State Assemblies, followed by another for the remaining states at the mid-point of the Lok Sabha’s tenure.
- Amendments to the Constitution: The committee highlighted the necessity of amending Articles 83, 85, 172, 174, and 356 to align the electoral timelines of states and the center.
- A Common Electoral Roll: The proposal emphasized the need for a single electoral roll and voter ID database to streamline the election process and prevent duplication.
- Stability Mechanism for Premature Dissolution: The committee proposed provisions to ensure that in case a state assembly or Lok Sabha is prematurely dissolved, interim arrangements should be made to maintain the election cycle.
- Extensive Use of Technology: The implementation of advanced technology, including blockchain-based voting and digital electoral systems, was suggested to ensure transparency and efficiency in large-scale elections.
- Strengthening the Election Commission of India (ECI): The report recommended equipping the ECI with greater resources and autonomy to conduct synchronized elections smoothly.
BJP’s push for One Nation, One Election is not just a political agenda but a vision for a progressive and stable India. By reducing electoral costs, ensuring uninterrupted governance, and strengthening democracy, this reform can set a new benchmark in India’s democratic journey. As the nation deliberates on this critical reform, a collective approach involving all stakeholders is essential to turn this vision into reality
Author
(The views expressed are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect the position of the organisation)
