One nation, one poll conundrum

The Central Government's constitution of a committee to be headed by former President Ram Nath Kovind to explore the possibility of ‘one nation, one poll’ has brought the issue of simultaneous polls to the centre stage of electoral discourse. The convening of a special session of both Houses of Parliament from September 18–22, the agenda of which is yet to be announced, has also triggered speculation in the political circle about the Central government introducing a bill on simultaneous Lok Sabha and state assembly polls in the session along with other bills like the Uniform Civil Code and the Women's Reservation Bill, among others. While the idea of simultaneous polls has many supporters, the legal and constitutional challenges associated with it pose many hurdles to its adoption. The issue gained ground after the 21st Law Commission of India submitted its draft report on simultaneous polls on August 20, 2018. The Law Commission came to the conclusion that holding simultaneous elections would be ideal as well as desirable, but a workable formula is required to be provided in the Constitution. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has also been pushing for simultaneous polls at every level—parliament, state assemblies, and panchayats—and using a common voter list. The 22nd Law Commission issued a public notice on December 16, 2022, seeking the opinion of stakeholders, including national political parties, the Election Commission of India, bureaucrats, academicians, and experts, on six questions put forth by the previous Law Commission related to simultaneous polls. These questions are: will holding simultaneous elections, by any means, tinker with the democracy, the basic structure of the Constitution, or the federal polity of the country? What other Articles of the Constitution may require amendment(s) or insertion of new clauses or Articles other than those discussed in the Draft Report? To hold simultaneous elections, are there any other issue(s) apart from those discussed in the Draft Report that would require an elaborate study? Do any of the suggestions or recommendations made in the draft report of the 21st Law Commission violate the constitutional scheme? If so, to what extent? The Commission’s report, which is still awaited, is expected to shed more light on the legal complexities of conducting simultaneous polls. Convening of the special session for the full five days has also fuelled speculation about advancing Lok Sabha polls and holding assembly polls in 13 states along with general elections. Of these, five states—Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Mizoram, Chhattisgarh, and Telangana—are going to polls before Lok Sabha polls; polls in four states Aruanchal Pradesh, Odisha, Andhra Pradesh, and Sikkim are due simultaneously with Lok Sabha polls, while polls in four states—Delhi, Haryana, Jharkhand, and Maharashtra—are due immediately after the Lok Sabha polls. However, it will require political consensus, which is less likely even though there are no legal hurdles for the Bharatiya Janata Party-led coalition government at the Centre to dissolve the Lok Sabha to advance the general election. The arguments put forward by the 21st Law Commission while recommending simultaneous polls are: it will save public money, reduce burden on the administrative setup and security forces, ensure timely implementation of government policies, and ensure that the administrative machinery is engaged in development activities rather than electioneering. Advancing or postponing polls in states to facilitate simultaneous polls will mean curtailing or extending the term of the elected House, which will require constitutional amendments. Besides, there are other complexities, such as a government falling due to the passage of a no-confidence bill, the defeat of money bills, or the imposition of President’s Rule, which may require fresh polls to elect a new House in a state even after holding simultaneous polls. Settling these constitutional questions is not going to be easy and should not be decided alone by the numbers in parliament and state assemblies, as it might result in legal complexities and a constitutional crisis that may turn out to be difficult to address. Besides, the Election Commission is yet to conduct a comprehensive study to determine if the simultaneous polls would actually reduce the cost or increase it as more Electronic Voting Machines (EVM) will be required to be procured. Manufacturing EVMs is a recurring expenditure, as these have a lifespan of only 15 years. The Law Commission in its draft report pointed out that constitutional amendments and amendments to the Representation of the People’s Act, 1951, will be needed to conduct simultaneous elections, and at least 50% of states should ratify the amendments passed by both Houses of Parliament. The legal and constitutional questions that have cropped up have no easy answers and will require wide consultations involving legal luminaries and constitutional experts to rule out constitutional crises that might arise after the amendments are passed to pave the way for simultaneous polling. The complexities notwithstanding, ‘one nation, one poll’ is going to keep the political pot boiling.