One nation one election conundrum

NEW DELHI: The BJP-led government’s desire to have simultaneous elections to the Lok Sabha and state Assemblies is well-known. It has frequently floated that trial balloon.

But the haste with which it has set up a high-level committee to examine the proposal in double quick time has left analysts wondering if this weren’t yet another ploy by the BJP to serve its own political ends.

The flurry of action started on the last day of August with the government announcing a five-day special session of Parliament from Sept. 18 to 22. It revealed no agenda and did not explain why there was a need for a hasty convention of Parliament so soon after the monsoon session.

Then late last week, the government set up a high-level committee under former President Ram Nath Kovind to examine the possibility of holding all popular elections—including for the Lok Sabha, state legislatures, municipalities and village panchayats—together.

It lost no time naming the eight members of the panel: Apart from Kovind, Home Minister Amit Shah, leader of the largest party in the Lok Sabha Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury, former leader of the opposition in the Rajya Sabha Ghulam Nabi Azad, jurist Harish Salve, former Central Vigilance Commissioner Sanjay Kothari, ex-chairman of Finance Commission NK Singh and former secretary-general of the Lok Sabha Subhash Kashyap.

The terms of reference were drafted post-haste too. The panel has been asked to give its recommendations on seven questions, including what amendments have to be made to the Constitution and whether those would have to be ratified by the states, and how to resolve mid-term political exigencies that might arise (hung assemblies, fall of governments) and logistical and manpower challenges that might be encountered in conducting a simultaneous election.

As is the wont of this government, there are signs of sleight of hand all over these developments. The tone of the announcement nudges the panel towards recommending One Nation, One Election. The committee is packed with friendly members, barring Chowdhury, who has declined to be part of this exercise.

There is no place in the committee for any representative of regional parties who might have given a state perspective, nor for any current or former chief election commissioner, who might have given inputs on the logistics of such a huge exercise.

Curiously, there is place in the committee for Ghulam Nabi Azad, a former leader of the opposition in the Rajya Sabha but not the current incumbent in that capacity, Mallikarjun Kharge.

The most crucial question for the committee is whether the One Nation One Election proposal would need ratification by states. That depends on the type of Constitutional amendments this panel will recommend.

Some amendments need only a simple majority in both Houses of Parliament, some require a two-thirds majority of members present and voting (with a quorum of at least half the members) and some need, in addition, ratification by at least half the state Assemblies in the country.

State parties are sure to have strong views on the proposal, which has implications for the federal character of our polity. To not aim for a consensus on such a crucial matter would injure the spirit of the Constitution.

To not consult state parties at all would be a wanton violation of it. That is not to say there are no benefits to the country from this proposal. Savings on expenditure and better logistical efficiency are important considerations.

Frequent elections tie down hundreds of thousands of government servants. Simultaneous elections will spare them for the service of the country. That includes the Prime Minister, who too will be spared for his onerous duties if elections were less frequent.