The feasibility of implementing simultaneous elections in a diverse democracy like India remains uncertain

The Union Cabinet has cleared the ambitious proposal of “One Nation, One Election,” aiming to synchronise elections for the Lok Sabha, state assemblies, urban bodies, and panchayats. This monumental shift is grounded in the recommendation of a panel led by former President Ram Nath Kovind, which reported “unanimous” support for the proposal. As the Modi government inches closer to presenting this initiative to Parliament, the question arises: Is this plan feasible, and where do we stand today? At its core, “One Nation, One Election” envisions holding elections for the Lok Sabha, state assemblies, and local bodies concurrently. This system was standard practice from India's first general election in 1951/52 until 1967. However, the cycle was disrupted in the late 1960s due to the premature dissolution of some state governments and the Lok Sabha, breaking the simultaneous electoral rhythm. Implementing  “one nation, one election” is easier said than done, given the present constitutional provisions that allow for dissolution of state governments midway or even the central government if it loses majority in the house.

Reverting to simultaneous elections would require significant constitutional changes and logistical planning. The Kovind panel’s report, submitted in March, outlines the support for simultaneous elections, noting approval from 32 political parties and prominent figures from the judiciary. For “One Nation, One Election” to become reality, the Modi government must navigate significant legislative hurdles. Parliament would need to pass two critical bills -– one addressing Lok Sabha and state assembly elections and the other governing municipal and panchayat polls. Constitutional amendments dealing with the duration and dissolution of legislatures and President's Rule are essential. In the present composition of parliament, it may be rather difficult. While the BJP holds a simple majority, it falls short of the two-thirds majority required for constitutional amendments by 52 votes in the Rajya Sabha and 72 in the Lok Sabha. Support from opposition parties will be crucial, but given the opposition’s resistance it would be tough. In addition to parliamentary approval, the second bill requires ratification by at least half of the states. Currently, the BJP and its allies control 19 states, meaning that even with opposition protests, this step is achievable. According to proponents, synchronised elections will reduce voter fatigue and increase turnout. The government claims that cutting down the number of elections would reduce the deployment of security forces, lower the costs of EVMs, and enable political parties to save on campaign expenditures. But concerns about political power grabs and constitutional violations loom large. Curtailing or extending the terms of state governments undermines democratic norms and could trigger legal challenges. The biggest impediment is India's size and diversity. Whether this ambitious plan becomes a reality will depend on the government’s ability to navigate the legal and political minefields that lie ahead.