In a first past the post electoral system, holding of simultaneous elections is full of contradictions. Many constitutional changes are imperative to bring the idea into practice.
In line with the BJP’s almost two decade old cherished goal of simultaneous assembly and parliamentary elections and its reiteration in party’s 2014 and 2019 manifestos — ‘One Nation, One Poll’ — Prime Minister Narendra Modi lost no time in calling an all party meeting on 19 June to discuss the issue to put into action as early as possible.
While leaders of 21 political parties out of the 40 invited for the meeting attended the deliberations, 19 parties including the Congress, SP, BSP, DMK, did not turn up citing their opposition to the idea. The meeting, presided by the Prime Minister, decided to set up a committee under Defence Minister Rajnath Singh to evolve a consensus on the issue and present a report about the feasibility of its implementation.
Though various experts have been expressing their opinion for a long time, idea was concretely mentioned by the Law Commission in its 170th report in June 1999. It was politically picked up by the then Deputy Home Minister L.K. Advani who was a determined votary of strong Center and a strong leader.
Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee also backed the proposal in 2003, but the NDA lost the general election and it receded in background but, Modi resurrected it by sending a message to the former Chief Election Commissioner H.S. Brahma to look into the issue.
Later, former CEC O.P. Rawat had even announced on 4 October 2017 that the Election Commission is “logistically equipped” to hold simultaneous polls for the Lok Sabha and Assemblies by September 2018. But, the Prime Minister, tactically, did not respond and not even pressed for holding Lok Sabha elections along with Maharashtra, Haryana and Jharkhand where state assembly elections are due to be held within few months of the Lok Sabha polls.
In a media interview in November 2016, Modi said:
“The Indian voter today is very mature. He votes in one fashion in the Lok Sabha elections, he votes in a different manner in the State assembly elections. We have seen this in 2014; the general elections coincided with the Odisha assembly elections. The same electorate gave one judgement for Odisha and another judgement for Delhi.”
Parallelly, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice had examined the issue and had submitted its report on ‘Feasibility of Holding Simultaneous Elections to the House of People (Lok Sabha) and State Legislative Assemblies’ in December 2015.
The government’s leading think tank Niti Ayog too had favoured conducting synchronised two-phase Lok Sabha and assembly polls from 2024 in “national interest,” stressing all elections in the country should be held in a free, fair and synchronised manner to ensure minimum campaign mode disruption to the governance.
In short, all round efforts were made in the first term, but it could not come to fruition because of a set of problems and are being pursued with renewed determination in the second term.
While there are some obvious advantages if the country’s electoral system is switched to holding general and assembly elections together, for this to happen, there is a need for consensus across the entire political spectrum. Majority of arguments in favour of the proposal revolve around impact on governance due to frequent imposition of Model Code of Conduct (MCC), recurring expenditure on conducting frequent polls and deployment of security forces for extended periods along with their movements from one region to another. Another set of reasons given for holding polls together deal with disruption of normal life due to frequent polls, heightening of communal and caste tensions and adverse impact on governance and policy making.
Evolving a consensus among all political players on MCC to make it more effective and governance oriented may prove to be possibly a better option if the objective is really aimed at improving the popular lot.
Opponents argue that holding of simultaneous elections are against the spirit of the Constitution, as it would result in negation of democracy. They would also violate the federative character of the country’s polity. Idea of holding polls together is “very difficult to implement,” stressed former President Mukherjee after relinquishing the post saying that people of state or states “will be denied their representative government” if one tried to hold elections simultaneously.
Prolonging or shortening of the term of assemblies is “anti-democracy, anti-federal” said CPM general secretary Sitaram Yechury because it practically means to bring the president’s rule through the backdoor.
Moreover, the argument for fixing terms for either parliament or state assemblies subverts the status of legislatures while giving the executive more powers and control disturbing the delicate balance between the two as enshrined in the Constitution.
In a first past the post electoral system, holding of simultaneous elections is full of contradictions. Many constitutional changes are imperative to bring the idea into practice. What happens if the government loses confidence of the popularly elected house? Prolonging their legislative lives for the sake of holding simultaneous polls would only mean continuation of a government that has lost people’s confidence.
Another dimension of the whole debate is whether the country needs more democracy that is transparent and people oriented or not. By dismissing those opposed to the exercise of simultaneous polls as anti-development or calling them as working against the national interest, concerted and targeted efforts to usher in an allegedly better and efficient democratic system for people’s welfare becomes suspicious. Entire debate turns skewed.
Therefore, idea should not be pushed irrespective of the costs involved and should not be turned into a prestige issue for the ruling party. Instead, a free and fair assessment is required before it could be implemented.
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.
Satish Misra was Senior Fellow at ORF. He has been a journalist for many years. He has a PhD in International Affairs from Humboldt University ...
Read More +
PREV
