Explained: What 'One Nation, One Election' Bill means for India's electoral process; know key features & more

Union Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal on Tuesday (December 17) introduced much-debated 'One Nation, One Election' bill in the Parliament. With the Union Cabinet's approval, this proposal is  aiming to streamline elections for Lok Sabha and state legislative assemblies, fundamentally altering India's electoral process.

Let's break down on how it could transform the way elections are conducted across the country.

Priyanka Gandhi doubles down with 'Bangladesh bag', day after Palestine row, Opposition MPs join (WATCH)

What is 'One Nation, One Election'?

India's democratic framework thrives on the vibrancy of its electoral process, empowering citizens to actively participate in governance at all levels. Since independence, over 400 elections to the Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies have highlighted the Election Commission of India's dedication to fairness and transparency. However, the frequent and fragmented nature of elections has sparked debates about the need for a more efficient system, reviving interest in the concept of "One Nation, One Election."

This idea, also known as simultaneous elections, proposes synchronising the election cycles of the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies. Under this system, voters would cast their ballots for both levels of government on the same day in their constituencies, though polling might still occur in phases across the country. By aligning electoral timelines, the approach aims to address logistical challenges, reduce costs, and minimise disruptions caused by repeated elections.

The High-Level Committee Report on Simultaneous Elections, released in 2024, outlined a detailed roadmap for implementing this vision. On September 18, 2024, the Union Cabinet approved the committee's recommendations, marking a significant step toward electoral reform. Proponents argue that this system could improve administrative efficiency, cut election-related expenditures, and promote policy continuity.

Historical background of One Nation, One Election

The concept of simultaneous elections is not new to India. After the adoption of the Constitution, elections to the Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies were held simultaneously from 1951 to 1967. The first general elections to both the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies took place in 1951-52, a practice that continued seamlessly for the next three general elections in 1957, 1962, and 1967.

However, this synchronised cycle was disrupted in 1968 and 1969 due to the premature dissolution of some State Legislative Assemblies. The Fourth Lok Sabha was also dissolved early in 1970, prompting fresh elections in 1971. While the First, Second, and Third Lok Sabha completed their full five-year terms, the Fifth Lok Sabha’s term was extended until 1977 under Article 352 during the Emergency. Since then, only a few Lok Sabha terms—such as the Eighth, Tenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth—have completed their full tenure. Others, including the Sixth, Seventh, Ninth, Eleventh, Twelfth, and Thirteenth, were dissolved prematurely.

State Assemblies have faced similar disruptions over the years, with frequent premature dissolutions and term extensions becoming recurring challenges. These developments have significantly disrupted the cycle of simultaneous elections, resulting in the current staggered electoral schedule across the country.

High-Level Committee on Simultaneous Elections: Key Takeaways

The High-Level Committee on Simultaneous Elections, chaired by former President Ram Nath Kovind, was established by the Government of India on September 2, 2023. The committee's primary mandate was to assess the feasibility of holding simultaneous elections for the Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies. To achieve this, the committee gathered extensive feedback from the public and political stakeholders and consulted experts to evaluate the potential benefits and challenges of this electoral reform. This report provides a comprehensive analysis of the committee's findings, its recommendations for constitutional amendments, and the expected impact of simultaneous elections on governance, resource management, and public sentiment.

Public Response:
The Committee received over 21,500 responses from across the country, including regions like Lakshadweep, Andaman and Nicobar, Nagaland, and Dadra and Nagar Haveli. Of these, 80% favored the concept of simultaneous elections. The highest number of responses came from Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Kerala, West Bengal, Gujarat, and Uttar Pradesh.

Responses from Political Parties:
A total of 47 political parties submitted their views. Among them, 32 parties supported simultaneous elections, citing advantages such as resource optimization and enhanced social harmony. However, 15 parties expressed concerns, warning of potential anti-democratic effects and the marginalization of regional parties.

Expert Consultations:
The Committee consulted Former Chief Justices of India, Former Election Commissioners, and legal experts. The majority supported the proposal, highlighting the significant resource wastage and socio-economic disruptions caused by frequent elections.

Economic Impact:
Business organizations like CII, FICCI, and ASSOCHAM endorsed the proposal, emphasizing its potential to enhance economic stability by reducing disruptions and costs associated with continuous election cycles.

Legal and Constitutional Analysis:
To enable simultaneous elections for the Lok Sabha, State Assemblies, and local bodies, the Committee proposed amendments to Articles 82A and 324A of the Indian Constitution.

Electoral Roll and EPIC Harmonization:
The Committee identified inefficiencies in the preparation of electoral rolls by State Election Commissions. It recommended creating a Single Electoral Roll and Single EPIC (Electors Photo Identity Card) for all three tiers of government. This would minimize duplication, reduce errors, and safeguard voter rights.

Public Sentiment on Frequent Elections:
Public feedback revealed widespread concern over the adverse effects of frequent elections, including voter fatigue and governance disruptions. Simultaneous elections are expected to address these challenges effectively, improving governance and voter engagement.

How will ONOE be implemented?

The proposed changes will take in phases:

• First Phase: Elections for the Lok Sabha and all state assemblies will be held simultaneously.
• Second Phase: Elections for municipalities and panchayats will gradually be synchronised, to be held within 100 days of national and state polls.

In the event of a hung parliament, a no-confidence motion, or other unforeseen scenarios, fresh elections will be held. However, the tenure of the newly elected Lok Sabha or assembly will last only for the remaining term of the previous full tenure.

To support this, the Election Commission (EC) will prepare a single electoral roll and uniform voter identity cards in consultation with state election commissions.

Additionally, logistical planning for equipment, polling personnel, and security forces will be mapped out in advance to ensure smooth implementation.

What problem does One Nation, One Election aim to solve?

Promotes Consistency in Governance:
The frequent cycle of elections across various regions often diverts the attention of political parties, leaders, and both State and Central Governments from governance to election preparations. Simultaneous elections would shift the focus back to developmental activities and the implementation of policies aimed at improving the welfare of the population.

Prevents Policy Paralysis:
The enforcement of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) during elections disrupts routine administrative work and developmental initiatives. This disruption hampers the progress of essential welfare schemes and creates governance uncertainty. Simultaneous elections would reduce the prolonged enforcement of the MCC, allowing for uninterrupted governance and policy continuity.

Mitigates Resource Diversion:
Election duties, such as the deployment of polling officials and civil servants, often lead to a significant diversion of resources from their core responsibilities. Conducting elections simultaneously would reduce the frequency of such deployments, enabling government officials and public institutions to focus more on their primary roles and less on election-related tasks.

Preserves Regional Party Relevance:
Simultaneous elections do not diminish the significance of regional parties. Instead, they encourage a more localized focus during elections, allowing regional parties to highlight specific local issues and concerns. This system ensures that regional voices are not overshadowed by national election campaigns, preserving the relevance of regional parties.

Enhances Political Opportunities:
Holding simultaneous elections offers more equitable political opportunities within parties. Currently, certain leaders often dominate elections at multiple levels, monopolizing key positions. Simultaneous elections would provide greater room for political diversification, allowing a wider range of leaders and party workers to emerge and contribute to the democratic process.

Focus on Governance:
The constant cycle of elections diverts attention away from good governance, as political parties focus heavily on securing electoral victories. Synchronised elections would allow parties to focus on addressing the electorate's needs and concerns, reducing aggressive campaigning and conflict, and prioritizing development and governance.

Reduced Financial Burden:
Simultaneous elections could significantly reduce the financial burden associated with conducting multiple election cycles. By consolidating resources like manpower, equipment, and security across all elections, this model ensures more efficient resource allocation and better fiscal management, fostering a favorable environment for economic growth and enhancing investor confidence.

The proposal for simultaneous polls could help the exchequer save 1.5% of the national income, President Ram Nath Kovind stated in a March 2024 report. Based on the financial figures for the year ending March 2024, this would amount to savings of Rs 4.5 lakh crore (approximately $52 billion).

Delhi SHOCKER! Man caught with wife of another person, tortured and beaten to death

Who is supporting and opposing the Bill?

Supporters:

The ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and several regional allies such as the Janata Dal (United), Biju Janata Dal (BJD), and AIADMK back the proposal. They view it as a step toward improving efficiency and reducing financial strain on the exchequer.

Opponents:

• Major opposition parties like the Congress, Trinamool Congress (TMC), and Samajwadi Party (SP) strongly oppose the bill.
• The Congress termed ONOE an "assault on parliamentary democracy" and India's federal structure.
• West Bengal CM Mamata Banerjee labelled it "unconstitutional and anti-federal".
• The SP raised concerns about the uneven playing field for state parties, claiming it would benefit national parties with larger resources and outreach.
• Some parties, like the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), expressed reservations over the feasibility of implementing ONOE in a vast, diverse country like India.