The 360° UPSC Debate | Does India Need Simultaneous Elections?

ARGUMENT 1: ‘One Nation, One Election’

“The implementation of simultaneous elections for Lok Sabha and state assemblies would lead to several benefits”

In 2018, the Law Commission presented a comprehensive report in support of the concept of simultaneous elections. The report proposed that such an approach would yield several benefits, including cost savings for the public, alleviation of strain on administrative structures and security forces, enhanced efficacy in the implementation of governmental policies, and the ability for the administrative machinery of the nation to remain consistently focused on developmental efforts, rather than being consumed by electoral campaigns. Nevertheless, it is important to note that the feasibility of conducting simultaneous elections is hindered by the current constitutional framework. This necessitates the requirement for amendments in no fewer than five Articles of the Constitution, namely Articles 83, 85, 172, 174, and 356.

According to the draft report of the 21st Law Commission, they have expressed their conviction regarding the feasibility of conducting simultaneous elections for both the House of the People and the State Legislatures. Simultaneous elections are often considered a potential solution to address the issue of the country being in a perpetual state of election mode.

According to Rajiv Mehrishi, a former civil servant, the implementation of simultaneous elections would lead to significant cost savings for the government and prevent the duplication of efforts by administrative and law enforcement agencies in conducting multiple elections. The implementation of this measure has the potential to generate significant cost reductions for political parties and candidates during their election campaigns. In holding two separate elections, expenses, including those borne by political parties, nearly double. The economic costs associated with the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) should also be taken into consideration. Time overruns have a direct impact on cost overruns. However, it is important to note that significant expenses are still being accrued due to salaries and other administrative costs. In addition to the visible costs, it is important to consider the intangible costs associated with a lack of leadership. Ministers, being politicians, are required to engage in various activities such as campaigning, candidate selection, and strategic planning for their respective parties. Despite working 16-18 hours a day, the ministers experience a significant decrease in the time available for their ministerial duties. The financial and economic costs are incurred on a recurring basis.

Former Law Minister Kiren Rijiju stated that the department-related Parliamentary standing committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice, in its 79th report, emphasised that South Africa holds elections for national and provincial legislatures simultaneously for a duration of five years, while municipal elections are conducted two years later. In Sweden, elections for the national legislature (Riksdag), provincial legislature/county council (landsting), and local bodies/municipal assemblies (Kommunfullmaktige) are scheduled to take place on a specific date, which is the second Sunday in September, every four years. The term of Parliament in the UK is regulated by the Fixed-term Parliament Act of 2011.

The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice’s report from 2015 titled ‘Feasibility of Holding Simultaneous Elections to House of People (Lok Sabha) and State Legislative Assemblies was compiled under the leadership of E M Sudarsana Natchiappan. According to the report, the implementation of simultaneous elections for Lok Sabha and state assemblies would lead to several benefits. These include a reduction in the significant costs associated with conducting separate elections, the avoidance of policy paralysis caused by the Model Code of Conduct during election periods, minimised disruption to the delivery of essential services, and a decrease in the strain on manpower resources during election time.

N.M. Ghatate, the former vice-chairman of the Law Commission wrote in the article ‘Why simultaneous elections make sense’, “We have a parliamentary democracy with a federal set up. This system worked fairly well with the Congress dominating the political scenario for the first two decades since Independence. But with the collapse of the Congress’ dominance, there emerged strong national and regional parties, each ruling some states with substantial strength in Parliament. How can stable and efficient governance be brought about in a multi-party parliamentary system like the one that exists in India? Fortunately, the normal duration of elected bodies is five years. Article 83 (2), which speaks about the duration, states that the Lok Sabha “unless sooner dissolved, shall continue for five years…” Same phraseology is applied for state assemblies vide Article 172. The rider “unless sooner dissolved “ is an exception.

It is pertinent to note that a no-confidence motion is not mentioned in the Constitution or any law, for that matter. It finds place in Rule 198 of the Rules and Conduct of Business of the Lok Sabha, which states that 50 or more members can move a no- confidence motion. If it succeeds, the government has to resign and if no other party or parties can form the government, premature elections follow.

The Law Commission of India in its report of 1999 has dealt with the problem of premature and frequent elections. It had recommended an amendment of this rule on the lines of the German Constitution, which provides that the leader of the party who wants to replace the chancellor has to move the no-confidence motion along with the confidence motion. If the motions succeed, the president appoints him as the chancellor. If such an amendment to Rule 198 is made, the Lok Sabha would avoid premature dissolution without diluting the cardinal principle of democracy, that is a government with the consent of the peoples’ representatives with periodical elections.

ARGUMENT 2: Simultaneous Elections Will Compromise Democracy And Federalism

“The impending demise of federalism is inevitable if simultaneous elections comes in”

As per the analysis of many constitutional scholars, the principle of ‘one nation one election’ undermines the fundamental tenet of federalism, which constitutes an integral component of our Constitutional framework. India has embraced a federal system of governance. It is indeed plausible, and frequently observed, for a singular political party to govern the central government while a distinct party assumes control over the state government.

The present system of elections in India has effectively offered a malleable alternative for individuals to exercise their agency in selecting state governments that align with the unique requirements of various regions. The aforementioned attribute endowed India with the requisite elasticity and adaptability, thereby withstanding the trials of time. The impending demise of federalism is inevitable if simultaneous elections comes in. The desired outcome entails the conduction of elections within a unified and comprehensive framework, thereby superseding any localised concerns or ambitions. The proposal of simultaneous elections stands in stark opposition to the fundamental principles enshrined within the federal framework of our Constitution, as well as the inherent flexibility it affords in the realm of governance selection.

S.Y. Quraishi, the former Chief Election Commissioner, argues that the concept of simultaneous elections is contradictory to the principles of the Constitution and federalism. Additionally, it is important to consider the practical challenges that may arise. If simultaneous elections are conducted and the government loses its majority in the Lok Sabha, similar to the situation faced by Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s government within 13 days of taking power, it raises the question of whether new elections would be required in all 29 states, even if the ruling party holds an absolute majority in those states. What are the potential consequences for the States when they are affected by electoral decisions made at the Centre? Simultaneous elections have the potential to blur judgement due to the distinct nature of national and local issues.

According to Suhas Palshikar, a social and political scientist, the reception of grand proposals may not always be positive. The nature of democratic politics often leads to chaos, although there are limitations to how effectively formal legal provisions can address and rectify these issues. From a practical standpoint, it appears to be a favourable proposition to streamline the staggered electoral cycle, particularly in cases where there are more than five State elections occurring annually. The argument is made that the electoral cycle places a heavy burden on parties and the electoral machinery, but this argument may be misleading or deceptive.

Suhas Palshikar further adds that, if elections were held simultaneously, it is likely that parties contesting in only one state would still face similar challenges and difficulties. The complaint appears to prioritise the concerns of national parties over other parties. This questions the reasons behind the lengthy schedule of the electoral machinery. The need to move the necessary security forces is driven by logistical requirements. The constraint would persist even in the scenario of holding simultaneous elections. So, what are the advantages of conducting all elections simultaneously?

Ashish Khetan, a prominent lawyer, raises the question of what occurs in a scenario where no single party or coalition of parties holds a majority. Does this imply that states that fail to provide a clear mandate will be subjected to five years of President’s Rule? What measures can be taken to ensure that simultaneous polls provide equal opportunities for regional parties in comparison to national parties? When the assembly polls are separate from the parliamentary polls, regional parties rely on more direct and personal methods of communication, such as door-to-door outreach, local meetings, small rallies, and phone call campaigns, to make up for the limited funds they have compared to larger political parties. During the Lok Sabha polls, regional parties may face challenges in persuading voters about their assembly election agenda. This is because the public’s attention is primarily focused on national issues such as terrorism, national security, and the selection of the next prime minister. If polls are conducted simultaneously, it is likely that the electoral landscape will continue to be dominated by significant financial resources and influential individuals. The level of resourcefulness possessed by a party directly correlates with its ability to exert control over the public narrative.

For any queries and feedback, contact priya.shukla@indianexpress.com
The Indian Express UPSC Hub is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel and stay updated with the latest Updates.