Q. What do you understand by ‘One Nation, One Election’? Discuss the steps taken by the Govt. of India in this regard. Give arguments in favour and against the arrangement.
Ans: One Nation, One Election (ONOE) is a proposal to synchronize elections for the Lok Sabha, State Legislative Assemblies, and possibly local bodies across India. The objective is to conduct all major elections simultaneously every five years, streamlining the democratic process and improving governance efficiency.
This system seeks to reduce the frequency of elections, which often disrupt administration due to repeated imposition of the Model Code of Conduct, drain financial resources, and fragment policy continuity. Though India practiced synchronized elections until 1967, political developments and constitutional provisions gradually led to the current staggered electoral system.
Steps Taken by the Government of India:
- Formation of a High-Level Committee to examine constitutional and legal feasibility.
- Drafting of the 129th Constitutional Amendment Bill, proposing synchronized elections through new provisions like Article 82A and Article 324A.
- Suggestion to implement ONOE in phases, starting with Lok Sabha and State Assembly elections.
- Cabinet and parliamentary deliberations to build political consensus and address practical hurdles.
Arguments in Favour of ONOE:
- Cost Efficiency: Significant savings in expenditure on logistics, manpower, and materials.
- Governance Stability: Fewer interruptions to development schemes and administrative functioning.
- Voter Convenience: Encourages higher turnout by reducing election fatigue.
- Policy Continuity: Enables governments to focus more on governance than electioneering.
- Streamlined Security Deployment: Reduces stress on law enforcement and paramilitary forces.
Arguments Against ONOE:
- Federal Concerns: May compromise the autonomy of States to dissolve Assemblies independently.
- Legal and Constitutional Challenges: Requires multiple amendments and ratification by States.
- Logistical Overload: Managing simultaneous elections nationwide demands massive coordination.
- Dilution of Regional Issues: National narratives may overshadow local concerns, weakening democratic representation.
- Uneven Term Cycles: Aligning terms may require curtailing or extending existing mandates, which could raise legitimacy questions.
Conclusion:
While ONOE offers benefits in terms of efficiency, economy, and streamlined governance, it raises valid concerns about constitutional sanctity, federalism, and democratic depth. Its success depends on creating a bipartisan consensus, phase-wise implementation, and ensuring that regional representation and institutional independence remain uncompromised.