CNN Central News & Network–ITDC India Epress/ITDC News Bhopal: The approval of the ‘One Nation, One Election’ proposal by the Modi government is a significant and historic step for Indian democracy. Under this plan, elections for the Lok Sabha and state assemblies will be held simultaneously, which will help limit the repetitive election process. This will not only reduce electoral expenses but also provide stability to the administrative structure. However, several significant challenges will need to be addressed to implement this initiative, with the coordination of states’ election terms being a major concern.
Importance of this step: Holding Lok Sabha and assembly elections together will eliminate the disruptions caused by frequent election codes of conduct and electoral processes across the country. This will assist the government in maintaining continuity in policy-making and implementation. Currently, elections in different states occur at various times, impacting the government’s decision-making ability, as development work halts when the election code of conduct comes into effect.
Benefits:
Reduction in electoral expenses: Election costs are increasing every year. Holding simultaneous elections could significantly reduce these expenses.
Saving time and resources: Security forces, administrative bodies, and political parties will save time and resources by conducting elections in one go rather than repeatedly.
Political stability: Governments often get caught up in preparing for elections due to the electoral cycle, creating governance disruptions. ‘One Nation, One Election’ offers a solution to this issue.
Challenges:
Need for constitutional amendments: Implementing this proposal will require several constitutional amendments. The Indian Constitution grants states autonomy over their terms, and changing this will require widespread political consensus.
States’ consent: India operates on a federal structure, and respecting states’ rights is a constitutional priority. Each state has a different electoral cycle, and synchronizing these cycles will not be easy.
Constitutional disputes: Many opposition parties view this as interference in states’ rights and see it as a challenge to the federal structure. Constitutional experts believe it will require a lengthy legal process and extensive political discussions to implement.
Opposition’s stance: Opposition parties believe this move is an expansion of central government powers and will impact states’ autonomy. Some experts see it as a threat to federalism and democratic values. Opposition parties also argue that staggered elections give voters better choices and allow them to make more independent decisions.
Conclusion: The ‘One Nation, One Election’ proposal is a significant step towards reforming Indian democracy, but it will require broad political and social consensus before implementation. While this initiative could streamline electoral processes and accelerate the country’s progress, a thorough and constitutional review of its challenges is essential.
It will be interesting to see how political and constitutional dynamics shape up in the coming times and how the implementation of this proposal is realized.
