India’s one-nation election proposal

India, the world’s largest democracy, is almost always in election mode.

With 28 states, eight union territories and nearly a billion eligible voters, polls are a permanent feature of the nation’s political landscape.

For years, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has supported the idea of ​​”One Nation, One Election” – a proposal to hold simultaneous state and federal elections every five years. time.

On Tuesday, India’s law minister introduced a bill to implement the system in parliament, sparking a debate about power dynamics.

Advocates say this approach would cut campaign costs, ease the strain on administrative resources and streamline management.

Former President Ram Nath Kovind, who led a nine-member committee that proposed holding elections around the same time last year, called it a “game changer”, citing economists who said it could can boost India’s GDP by up to 1.5%.

However, critics warn it could erode India’s federal structure, concentrate power at the center and weaken the autonomy of states.

India’s democracy operates on multiple levels, each with its own election cycle.

There are general elections to choose members of parliament, state elections to choose lawmakers, while rural and urban councils hold separate votes for local governance. By-elections fill vacancies caused by representatives who resign, die or are removed.

These elections take place every five years but at different times. The government now wants to synchronize them.

In March, one control panel led by Kovind proposed holding state and general elections together in its 18,626-page report. It also recommended local body elections within 100 days.

The commission suggested that if the government lost an election, fresh polls would be held, but the government’s tenure would last only until the next synchronized election.

While this may sound stressful, simultaneous polls are not new to India. They were the norm from the first elections in 1951 until 1967, when political upheavals and the premature dissolution of state assemblies led to staggered elections.

Efforts to revive the system have been debated for decades, with proposals from the Election Commission in 1983, the Law Commission in 1999 and Niti Aayog, a government think tank, in 2017.

The biggest argument for holding simultaneous elections is to cut election costs.

According to the Delhi-based non-profit organization Media Research CenterIndia spent more than 600 billion rupees ($7.07 billion) on the 2019 general election, making it the most expensive country in the world at the time.

However, critics say the same goal – reducing costs – could be counterproductive.

With 900 million eligible voters, ensuring there are enough electronic voting machines, security forces and election officials will require extensive planning and resources.

According to the 2015 National Assembly Committee report According to the Ministry of Law and Justice, India spent 45 billion rupees on general and state elections.

The report mentions that if simultaneous elections are held, a total of 92.84 billion rupees will be needed to purchase new voting machines and voter-verifiable document checker (VVPAT), distribute a paper with the symbol of the party the voter has chosen. These machines will also need to be replaced every 15 years.

Former Chief Election Commissioner SY Quraishi has raised concerns about high costs. He said that these issues should have been addressed in the Kovind committee report, especially since reducing election costs was the main reason behind the proposal.

Conducting simultaneous elections requires formal changes or amendments to specific provisions (or provisions) of the Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land. Some of these changes will need to be ratified by at least half of India’s 28 state assemblies.

Although the BJP-led alliance has a majority in parliament, it falls short of the two-thirds majority required for such amendments.

The Kovind Committee studied models from countries like South Africa, Sweden and Indonesia, recommending best practices for India.

In September, the cabinet approved a proposal to hold simultaneous elections and backed two bills promoting the system on Thursday.

Union Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal introduced the bills in parliament.

One bill proposes to amend the constitution to allow joint federal and state elections, while another aims to regulate assembly polls in Delhi, Puducherry and Jammu & Kashmir with general election schedule.

The government said it is ready to refer the bills to parliamentary committees and consult with political parties to build consensus.

The Kovind Committee reached out to all Indian parties for feedback, with 47 parties responding – 32 were in favor of simultaneous elections, while 15 were opposed.

Most of the supporters are allies or friendly parties of the BJP, citing savings in time, costs and resources.

The BJP argues that the model code of conduct has cost India “800 days of governance” in the last five years by delaying welfare schemes.

Prime Minister Modi has favored simultaneous elections.

“Frequent elections are hindering the country’s progress,” he said in August. “With elections taking place every three to six months, every plan involves the polls.”

Opposition partiesled by the Congress, has called the simultaneous polls “undemocratic” and argued that they weaken the country’s parliamentary system of government. They argue that such a setup would give national parties an unfair advantage over regional parties.

The parties also recommended increased transparency in the funding process as a better solution to address concerns about election costs.

Follow BBC News India on Instagram, YouTube, Twitter And Facebook.