Devanshi Batra, TwoCircles.net
New Delhi: The approval of the proposed ‘One Nation, One Election’ by the Central Cabinet has attracted sharp criticism from Opposition parties, social scientists and academics who view it as a tool to undermine political dynamics and issues of individual states, making them subordinate to national concerns, which goes against the federal spirit of the Indian Union. They fear that the exercise can potentially alter how elections are conducted in the country.
Based on recommendations of a high-level committee led by former President Ram Nath Kovind, the proposal is set to be introduced as a Bill during the upcoming Winter Session of Parliament. If enacted, this would synchronise the elections for the Lok Sabha and all state assemblies across the country.
The concept of ‘One Nation, One Election’ aims to hold all elections — both of the Lok Sabha and state assemblies — simultaneously, as opposed to the staggered manner currently in place. The panel noted in its report that frequent elections foster uncertainty and hinder effective policy-making.
The committee also recommended the adoption of a unified electoral roll, requiring collaboration between the Election Commission of India (ECI) and state election commissions.
The government argues that this move will significantly reduce election-related expenditures, lessen the burden on administrative machinery and prevent disruptions to governance caused by frequent elections.
Devang Dave, a member of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) election management committee, believes simultaneous elections could enhance stability and reduce the costs associated with repeated elections.
“India has previously implemented this policy for conducting elections; but unfortunately, it was changed. At present, a significant amount of machinery must be mobilised for each election, and with some states holding elections every few months, it becomes a cumbersome process that halts many developmental projects,” he said.
However, Hilal Ahmad, an associate professor with the Lokniti programme at the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS), stated, “The concept of ‘One Nation, One Election’ is problematic for three key reasons. One, on a technical level, it forces an already established electoral system to operate in a manner that could lead to overall destabilisation. Two, it challenges the principles of federalism. And three, it undermines regional diversity and the unique political timelines of different regions. We have always celebrated diversity in India, not just sociologically but politically as well. Each state has its own political rhythm, and this must be respected.”
Congress leader Kumar Raja believes this is not the right time to introduce such a policy. With coalition governments often collapsing and leading to re-elections in states, he questions how these challenges will be addressed.
Samajwadi Party spokesperson Dr Aziz Khan asserts that more pressing issues, such as unemployment, religious tensions, the Manipur crisis and the Kashmir issue, are being overshadowed by this proposal, which he views as a distraction.
Why is the Proposal Controversial?
Despite government optimism, the proposal has ignited intense debate across the political spectrum. Major Opposition parties, including the Congress, the Trinamool Congress (TMC), the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), the Samajwadi Party (SP) and the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), have expressed strong opposition. They argue that the ‘One Nation, One Election’ system could undermine federalism, as state issues might be overshadowed by national narratives.
Senior Congress leader Pawan Khera stated, “The entire exercise undermines the political dynamics and issues of individual states, making them subordinate to national concerns, which goes against the federal spirit of the Indian Union. States will lose their agency, and the national narrative will overshadow their own.”
He added, “This move reflects the mentality of those aiming to strip states of their right to hold elections according to their own timelines, narratives and issues.”
In contrast, Dave contends that the Opposition’s criticism stems from a general aversion to ruling party decisions. He noted that the Kovind committee considered the viewpoints of all political parties, including the Opposition, most of whom supported the policy.
“It is unfortunate that the Congress party has consistently opposed all decisions, even those that are in the national interest. They seem to oppose simply for the sake of opposition. ‘One Nation, One Election’ was discussed during the UPA regime as well, so why oppose it now?” he questioned.
However, SP’s Dr Khan argued, “This wasn’t even discussed with the Opposition. Even the Kisaan Bill (the three contentious farm laws that were rolled back after a year-long protest), which was such a major piece of legislation, was not brought to the Opposition for discussion. If the BJP’s intentions are truly honest, they should have a dialogue with the Opposition on this matter.”
Critics also warn that the policy could lead to a ‘presidential-style’ campaign, where national parties with more resources could dominate state politics, diluting regional voices and concerns.
Dave responded, “Elections are conducted by the Election Commission, not by the ruling party. When ‘One Nation, One Election’ was previously implemented, no one accused the Congress of controlling the elections. This is just their tactic to mislead the public.”
They responded to the allegation, saying that the BJP lacks proper planning and implementation strategies, often making hasty decisions that coincide with election periods. “When four states were supposed to hold assembly elections, the BJP couldn’t manage it, and eventually, elections were only held in two states. How do they expect to conduct elections nationwide? Where will they find the necessary machinery, staff, funding, and security? I believe this is merely a show, and they won’t actually implement this policy,” asserted Raja.
In response, Dave stated, “The government has been discussing this issue since 2019, and we plan to implement it by 2029. Over the next five years, the entire machinery will be prepared. We have received feedback and reviews from nearly all committees and political parties across the country.”
Congress’ Raja criticised the BJP’s push for simultaneous elections. He argued it overlooks the diverse political landscapes of individual states. “Holding elections from Kashmir to Kanya Kumari requires considering numerous local factors, which the BJP seems to ignore,” he emphasised.
Critics argue that the party’s initiative disregards how leaders from various regions engage with their voters, making it crucial to respect local electoral timing.
Hilal Ahmad noted, “If elections are synchronised, political leaders will develop their own strategies to mobilise people. Voters are fully aware of the kind of elections they are participating in and the political timing. This is why they vote differently in Lok Sabha elections compared to assembly elections.”
Proponents of the Bill, including the ruling BJP, argue that conducting simultaneous elections will streamline governance and allow elected representatives to focus more on development work rather than being in a constant state of election mode. They emphasise that holding elections every few months disrupts government functioning, and repeatedly deploying security forces for polls strains resources. However, Opposition leaders view this as a “distraction”.
Dave asserted, “The fragmented election cycle delays the announcement of new policies, with national, state, and municipal elections occurring throughout the year. This results in substantial expenses for central and state governments as well as political parties. I believe this policy would help reduce corruption and drastically cut costs associated with the electoral process.”
Khera countered, “This is merely a distraction. It is not about ‘One Nation, One Election’; it is about ‘One Nation, Another Distraction’. With the conclusion of elections in Jammu and Kashmir and Haryana and upcoming polls in Maharashtra, Jharkhand, Punjab and Delhi assemblies and the BJP on the back foot in these states, they want to shift the national conversation away from local issues.”
He added, “They could not even conduct elections in four assemblies (Jammu and Kashmir, Haryana, Jharkhand and Maharashtra) simultaneously, yet they are proposing ‘One Nation, One Election’. It is utterly absurd.”
The government cites data showing the financial benefits of simultaneous elections, arguing that a single and consolidated election could save thousands of crores of taxpayers’ money, which could be redirected towards welfare programmes and infrastructure development.
Khera emphasised, “Is there any price too high to protect the democracy and federal structure of our country? If ‘One Nation, One Election’ were to become a reality, it would exact a heavy toll on the federal framework of our polity.”
What’s Next?
With the Winter Session of Parliament approaching, political analysts expect the introduction of the ‘One Nation, One Election’ Bill to be among the most contentious issues on the agenda. The Bill’s fate will largely depend on whether the ruling party can garner enough support from allies and neutral parties, given the strong resistance from most of the Opposition.
Hilal Ahmad sees the concept as ‘un-Indian’. “We often try to adopt and imitate Western models, but our democracy has evolved uniquely, and there is no need to copy them. India’s distinct democratic traditions do not align with this idea. We must honor the post-colonial history of our politics and elections,” he said.
Dr Khan emphasised, “The Kovind committee should engage in consultations with various stakeholders, including political parties, the ECI and constitutional experts, to address concerns, weigh the pros and cons and clarify how this transition would function. However, questions still linger about the logistics of implementing such a large-scale change, particularly in cases where state assemblies may need to be dissolved early to align with the Lok Sabha schedule or vice versa.”
As the debate over ‘One Nation, One Election’ intensifies, it remains to be seen how this proposal will shape the country’s political and electoral landscape. Will it mark a new chapter in India’s democratic journey, or will it encounter insurmountable resistance from political parties and civil society? The upcoming Winter Session promises to be a defining moment for this ambitious electoral reform.