India, one of the largest democratic countries, always looks forward to having a better electoral process, which enables citizens of India to enjoy better governance. One Nation One Election, commonly referred to as Simultaneous Elections, is a proposal under consideration by the Parliament, and needs elaboration. Simultaneous Elections means all elections (House of the people, State Legislative Assemblies and local bodies) to be conducted in phases within a specified period with the intention of reducing the cost spent on elections. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has been campaigning to adopt one nation one election for quite some time, proposing that a lot of public money can be saved, and smooth functioning of developmental work can be assured on part of the governments. Many countries like Sweden, Pakistan, Nepal are holding simultaneous elections. In India, the One Nation One Election Bill was introduced in the Lower House on December 24, 2024. Let’s discourse about One Nation One Election with reference to the High Level Committee Report which is identified by its Chairperson – the Ram Nath Kovind Committee Report on Simultaneous Elections in India.
Ram Nath Kovind Committee on ONOE- Composition
The composition of the High Level Committee included Chairman Ram Nath Kovind (former President of India), and members – Amit Shah (Minister of Home Affairs and Minister of Cooperation, Government of India), Ghulam Nabi Azad (Former Leader of Opposition in Rajya Sabha), NK Singh (Former Chairman, 15th Finance Commission), Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap (Former Secretary General of Lok Sabha), Senior Advocate Harish Salve, Sanjay Kothari (Former Chief Vigilance Commissioner), Special Invitee – Arjun Ram Meghwal (Minister of Law and Affairs) and HLC Secretary Dr. Niten Chandra. Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury was one of the members of Ram Nath Kovind Commitee, who happened to resign from the said Committee on September 2, 2023. The High Level Committee discussed the feasibility and challenges of One Nation One Election with several stakeholders including Political Parties, Law Commission of India, Judges, and citizens through public notice. Given below is a glimpse of several discussions and opinions on the same.
Is the concept of “One Nation One Election” new to Our Nation?
Since India’s independence, we have faced over 400 elections so far for the House of People and State Legislative Assemblies. The Election Commission of India has given a remarkable performance by holding fair and free elections in our country. Simultaneous Elections is not new to the world, since many countries have adopted Simultaneous Elections for social, political, economic stability and growth. In the initial years, after adoption of the Constitution of India, Simultaneous Elections were conducted from 1951 till 1960. In almost a decade, two successful elections happened, and the disruption took place in the second decade i.e. from 1961-1970 when five states (Bihar, Kerala, Punjab, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal) had three elections. After this, the frequency of elections increased and the situation became worse. That’s how the synchronism in elections was also lost.
ONOE – Pros and Cons by Political Parties
| Approved | Disapproved |
| The Bhartiya Janta Party emphasized that simultaneous elections worked well during 1951-1967. The major concern raised by the party is that up to 800 days are lost every 5 years due to frequent elections, which affects developmental work and governance efficiency. In addition, they also indicated at States facing the Model Code of Conduct 3-4 times in those five years, and the diversion of security forces from crucial internal security duties. The Party proposed a unified electoral system with one voter ID card for all three tiers of government. They underscored that one election for all bodies is in the national interest for economic, administrative, and democratic reasons. BJP highlighted the example of Maharashtra where 307 days were lost in a particular year due to Model Code Of Conduct. | The Aam Aadmi Party disapproved of the idea of One Nation One Election with the contention that it undermines democracy i.e. the basic structure of Constitution. They further stated that it will lead to a Presidential form of government which cannot be forced out of position by vote of no confidence. |
| The National People’s Party supported the concept of simultaneous elections. They further urged the High Level Committee to have personal interaction for regional parties in the North-East region. | The Indian National Congress also disapproved of the idea of One Nation One Election, arguing that it will go against federalism and result in “substantial changes to the basic structure of the Constitution”. They considered the otherwise slated extremely high cost of election as baseless. It was concluded that “there is no place for the concept of simultaneous elections in a country that has adopted a Parliamentary system of government”. |
| Some State Parties like All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam supports simultaneous elections, stating it will help smooth functioning as it won’t disrupt public normal life due to Model Code of Conduct (which leads to the developmental programmes and activities put on hold in entirety, and therefore, normal day-to-day governance also gets affected.) and administrative convenience. | Whereas some State Parties like the All India Trinamool Congress don’t approve of simultaneous elections, stating that it will go against basic electoral principles. They also stated that forcing State Legislative Assemblies to go for premature elections just for the sake of contemporaneity will be unconstitutional and ultimately lead to suppression of State issues. |
| The Shiv Sena Party showed full support for One Nation, One Election. They reasoned that frequent elections lead to financial burden, administrative paralysis, and deployment challenges during elections, stipulating that simultaneous elections would address these issues, leading to focused governance. However, they pointed out that elections to Local Bodies involved a rather complex procedure, and requested those elections not to be synchronized with Assembly Elections and those of House of People. | Some political parties like Naga People’s Front, Samajwadi Party also suggested that ONOE will affect voters’ behavior as voters would end up voting on national issues for state elections and this may lead to national parties winning both State and Lok Sabha elections. |
Is ONOE really against federalism? – Listen to Former Judges
Justice Sanjib Banerjee, the former Chief Justice of Madras High Court, opposed simultaneous elections, stating that it would undermine India’s federal structure and prove against religious issues. He also suggested State funding of elections as an effective reform for tackling corruption and inefficiency.
Former CJI Dipak Mishra supported One Nation One Election. He quoted that simultaneous elections being against federalism or anti-democratic is incorrectly positioned. The Parliament is empowered to make pertinent amendment to the constitution to enable simultaneous elections in our country. He spoke about “doctrine of expansion” and “doctrine of reduction” in relation to extension and dissolution of the house before expiry of its term. He also drew attention to India being a quasi-federal, simultaneous elections are not anti-federal. He further stated that simultaneous elections go well with good governance and more focused working of the elected representatives as it will help them to productively utilize their time for better developmental work rather than campaigning for elections which involves lots of wastage of people’s money.
Also, former CJI Ranjan Gogoi also extended his support for ONOE. He proposed certain amendments to the Constitution and implementation strategies like consensus-building, establishment of an appropriate legislative framework, and enhanced voter awareness campaigns.
Hung Assembly – Is it a Major Concern for Simultaneous Elections?
Initially, after adoption of the Constitution when simultaneous elections were conducted for a decade, synchronization of elections was lost due to disruption. Thus, we went with frequent elections. If One Nation One Election is implemented, then if Lok Sabha or a State Assembly is dissolved sooner than its full term of five years, fresh elections will be held for a term equal to the remainder of the five-year term. This will synchronize elections for Lok Sabha and all Assemblies every five years. That’s how the Ram Nath Kovind Committee Report proposes to solve the concern of Hung Assembly.
Member Suggestions on Constitutional Amendments
Subhash C Kashyap (member of High Level Committee) discussed the Constitutional Foundations of ONOE and encouraged the idea of simultaneous elections without amendment to the Constitution. He pointed at constructive vote of no-confidence in Article 67 which implies that if motion expresses lack of confidence in the then government, it should also name the alternative leader of the new government, suggesting that it will solve the problem of any gap between two governments. This could be done by changing the rules of Houses on admissibility of No-Confidence motions rather than doing any amendment in the Constitution. These suggestions are useful where no party or pre-election alliance of parties secures a clear majority of seats in the House of People or in any of the State Assemblies and largest single party is unable to promise stable government, the President, or Governor should ask the house to elect its leader just as it elects Speaker of the House under the existing Article 82(2)/175(2). It would not be necessary to seek a vote of confidence as it would have been obtained in advance of appointment through the process of election by the House itself, neither requiring an Constitutional amendment nor any law.
Sarkaria Commission
The Sarkaria Commission referred to the issue of a Hung Assembly and recommended consistency for the Governor while selecting a Chief Minister when nobody claims absolute majority in the Legislative Assembly. The suggested order of preference was:
(i) A pre-election alliance of parties;
(ii) The largest single party claiming to form the government with the support of others, including independents;
(iii) A post-election coalition where all parties in the coalition participate in the government;
(iv) A post-election alliance where some parties in the alliance form the government, and others support it from outside.
This recommendation was broadly supported by the Punchhi Commission in 2007.
Former Judge
Justice Dilip Bhosale (former Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court) supported the One Nation One Election theme, but also cautioned about the bumps for its implementation. Justice Bhosale showed optimism that simultaneous elections would control spending on freebies, and suggested not to conduct local body elections along party lines.
Constitutional framework required for Simultaneous Elections
- Elections to be held in two phases:
1. First phase: Election to be held for Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assembly simultaneously.
2. Second phase: Within 100 days election to be conducted for Local Bodies. - The High Level Committee proposed amendment to 3 Articles and addition of 12 sub-clauses to existing Articles and alteration in three laws related to Union Territories having Legislative Assemblies.
- The proposed amendment seeks insertion of Article 82A; duration of Lok Sabha under Articles 83(2), 83(3) and 83(4); duration of State Legislative Assemblies under Articles 172(3), 172(4), 172(5) and 327.
- It further proposed amendments to Constitutional provisions pertaining to preparation of electoral roll by the Election Commission for the local bodies in consultation with State Election Commission; simultaneous elections for Municipalities, Panchayat and general elections for House of People and State Legislature.
- Amendments in particular UT and States for duration of Legislative Assemblies.
- The five-year term is termed as “full-term”; For early dissolution of Lok Sabha, the period between date of appointment and 5 years is termed as “unexpired term”
- Elections after a full term of five years are called “General Elections” and elections for unexpired term is termed as “mid-term election”.
- The idea is to start with simultaneous elections. Then if there is a case of hung assembly leading to dissolution of State Legislative Assembly for a State, elections may be conducted again for the period remaining in the 5 year term, and again simultaneous elections will take place for the House of People and State Assemblies.
Personal Evaluation of Simultaneous Elections
One Nation One Election is necessary for making our country from a “Developing” to a “Developed” country, since other countries are also following a single electoral process and working smoothly. Though being the second largest country in the world, achieving the end result may be challenging, but nothing is impossible if the proper implementation process is followed. That is because having a single electoral process for our nation will help in Social, Political and Economic Growth. More productivity and developmental work can be enhanced by working and adopting Simultaneous Elections .
