Introduction
In a recent interview with former heads of the Election Commission of India, the much-debated concept of ‘One Nation, One Election’ has once again come under scrutiny. The idea, which aims to synchronize Lok Sabha and state assembly elections across India, is gaining momentum, but the ex-EC chiefs believe it’s easier said than done.
The Union government’s decision to form a committee to explore the feasibility of this ambitious electoral reform has reignited discussions surrounding the topic. While ‘One Nation, One Election’ has been a recurring theme in Indian politics, implementing it is far from straightforward.
Former Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Manohar Singh Gill, who served in this capacity for six years from 1996, expressed scepticism about the feasibility of holding simultaneous elections. He pointed out a fundamental hurdle: the Indian Constitution, as it stands, does not permit such synchronization. States have elections and terms that span different dates and months, making it practically impossible to align them all simultaneously.
One Nation One Election
Gill emphasized that any attempt to enact ‘One Nation, One Election’ would necessitate constitutional changes—a formidable task in itself. States in India have their unique political calendars, and aligning them would require careful consideration and broad consensus among political parties and state governments.
He further remarked, “If it is to be done, the Constitution has to change. It is very difficult. Parties talk about it for political benefits.”
The discussion on ‘One Nation, One Election’ is not new. Several studies have been conducted on this issue in the past, and in July, the government informed the Rajya Sabha that the matter had been referred to the Law Commission to develop a practical roadmap and framework. Additionally, NITI Aayog, the government’s think tank, has expressed support for the idea, reminiscent of the electoral practice in India until 1967.
However, the ex-EC chiefs’ insights shed light on the complexities involved in making such a significant electoral reform a reality. Constitutional amendments, political consensus, and logistical challenges all stand as formidable barriers to the concept’s implementation.
Conclusion
As the debate surrounding ‘One Nation, One Election’ continues to evolve, it is clear that any meaningful progress will require meticulous planning, open dialogue, and a concerted effort to address the inherent challenges. While the idea may hold promise, the path to its realization remains a complex and arduous one.
