Hyderabad: While inviting the views of political parties on the pros and cons of the much debated One Nation One Election policy in December last, the Law Commission posed six questions. The most important of all the queries raised by the Law Commission was – will the policy be detrimental to the democracy, to the basic structure of the Constitution and the federal polity?
None of those, who are today enthusiastic about simultaneous election to the local bodies, State Assemblies and the Parliament, are answering this question. In a latest development, the Central government has appointed a committee led by former President of India Ramnath Kovind, to study the issue of holding simultaneous elections.
However, in the 7 points of reference for the Committee, there is no mention of the question raised by the Law Commission. The responsibilities of the Central and State governments are separate. Similarly the local bodies are responsible for issues like drinking water, drainage and sanitation. Voters should be aware of the responsibilities of the three tiers of governance.
They should be able evaluate the performance of the respective tiers. The people’s verdict based on that understanding will infuse life into the country’s democracy. If elections are simultaneously held to all the platforms in one go, from the local bodies to Lok Sabha, the local issues will be overshadowed due to the hoarse campaigning over national issues.
It is also feared that the winning parties will emerge as unquestionable dictatorial camps, sinking the prospects of the regional parties. This issue was mentioned in the draft report of the previous Law Commission. Simultaneous elections, which do not contribute anything good to the federal structure of the country, are not only undesirable but practically impossible also as they overshadow the system which accords equal importance to the country’s diversity, the regional aspirations and the national perspective.
Simultaneous elections under One Nation, One Election policy are being justified by arguing that they would enable saving a lot of money. The argument does not hold water. When compared with the financial year of 2022-23, this year the size of the Central budget increased by 7.5 percent and reached Rs 45.03 lakh crores.
On the other-hand reports appeared a few months ago that the GDP of the country has reached Rs 3.75 lakh crore in 2023. While India glows as the 5th largest economy of the World, the expenditure on its elections is negligible. Another argument being put forth by the votaries of simultaneous elections is – the governance is coming to a halt as a result of elections being held frequently in one State or the other.
This is also a meaningless argument. The model code of conduct (MCC) restricts the announcement of freebies meant to lure the voters as they tended to benefit the ruling party. The MCC does not impede the usual administrative matters. As the Law Commission has said, it is improper to blame everything on the MCC.
If the One Nation One Election policy has to come into effect, the Assemblies in some States will have to be dissolved. In some other States, their stint should be extended. The Constitution should be amended for that. On several occasions earlier, the judiciary had clearly stated that the amendments that seek to disturb the basic structure of the constitution are invalid.
Dissolving State Assemblies with the sole objective of conducting simultaneous elections is against the basic tenets of the Constitution. Former Supreme Court judge Late Justice P.B. Sawant had stated that simultaneous elections are legally untenable. The Central government had itself stated in the Rajya Sabha in July last that in-order to be able to hold simultaneous elections, consensus will have to be achieved among all State governments and political parties.
In the contemporary political situation, such a consensus is impossible. In these circumstances, one fails to understand the mystery behind the sudden predilection towards simultaneous elections. During the era in which one party was ruling the entire country, simultaneous elections used to be held for the State Assemblies and the Lok Sabha.
After the regional forces emerged as the embodiments of people’s aspirations, that trend changed. If the old ways are restored, what will happen if a hung house, in which nobody has a majority, comes into being as a result of fractured verdict? A healthy democratic ambience is seen in foreign countries where political parties that have got just one seat more than their rivals are allowed to rule for the entire tenure of the house.
In our country, the evil practice of dividing parties to dethrone governments is common. Earlier on there were suggestions that the anti-defection law should be amended to prevent political instability after simultaneous elections. Will it be in the interest of the nation to throw the gates open for defections on the pretext of ensuring legislative stability?
There are also fears that if simultaneous elections became a norm, the Centre will get opportunity to rule over States through President’s rule. The Supreme Court had ruled earlier that the people’s good should be the ultimate objective of all the actions taken by the government and the laws enacted by it.
The benefits of the government’s actions and laws should not be confined to some people or some groups of people, the court had said. The lovers of democracy will not welcome simultaneous elections and the Constitutional amendments to be effected for that purpose. The evil politics having the tendency of buying votes and power with money are prevailing in the entire country.
To restore the prestige of our democracy the faulty voter lists should be cleansed first. Law should be made for the immediate abrogation of the memberships of leaders, who win their election on the symbol of one party but switch over to another. Such leaders should not be allowed to contest any election for five years.
The elements that have fattened themselves through corruption should be caught kept under leash if the use of black money in elections is to be banished. The anonymous donations that are reaching the coffers of political parties should be stopped. Political parties should distance themselves from the tendencies of igniting caste and communal cauldrons for electoral gains.
They should stop offering allurements to the voters and refrain from the practice of suppressing dissidence. Taking up simultaneous elections, instead of taking all those steps amounts to tightening the noose around the democracy, which is already gasping for breath.
(The editorial was first published in Eenadu on Oct 4, 2023)
