One nation, one election: why federalism is at risk

The idea of ‘one nation, one election’ being pushed by the BJP is a threat to regional parties, federalism, and India's diversity, argue several Opposition leaders who have raised an alarm about the move.

Critics, including Congress general-secretary (organisation) K.C. Venugopal, have also called the decision impractical. “When making significant choices about elections, the government should consult all political parties. In our democracy, consensus is essential,” Venugopal said, questioning whether consensus should come before or after a decision is made, emphasising that constitutional amendments require prior agreement.

He warned, “This decision will impact our country’s future,” and argued that Prime Minister Narendra Modi should have engaged all political parties in genuine consultation.

On the impracticality of implementing 'one nation, one election' in a country with many regional parties, Venugopal pointed out that it would require dissolving multiple state assemblies — a consideration the government has not fully addressed. “Our Constitution emphasises that India is a Union of states, making concepts like 'one nation, one language' part of a discourse that promotes authoritarianism,” he said.

A CSDS (Centre for the Study of Developing Societies) study found that in 24 of the 31 assembly elections held alongside Lok Sabha elections from 1989 to 2014, major parties received a similar proportion of votes in both contests. Another analysis of 2,600 assembly segments across 16 elections revealed that in 77 per cent of cases, voters tended to choose the same party in both elections when held simultaneously.

Announcing the cabinet's approval of the policy, Union minister Ashwini Vaishnaw had stated that elections would be held in two phases: the first covering Lok Sabha and Assembly elections, and the second focusing on local body elections, to be held within 100 days of the first phase. The Kovind committee tasked with formulating the plan had suggested a “one-time transitory measure” to align the electoral cycles of the Central and state governments.

CPI (M-L) general-secretary Dipankar Bhattacharya echoed Venugopal's concerns, arguing that the proposal undermines the unique contexts of state elections. He warned that combining state and Lok Sabha elections would allow national issues to overshadow local ones, diminishing state election autonomy and leading to centralised politics.

Bhattacharya also pointed out the policy's position on mid-term polls, which it recommends only be held for the remainder of the term, and said there would be more elections, creating an “artificial simultaneity”. “This is an assault on democracy and the Constitution,” he said.

Venugopal added that this approach undermines federalism and risks shifting India toward a presidential election model. He explained that parliamentary and state elections address different voter concerns, and this push prioritises Central issues over local ones.

Samajwadi Party MP Javed Ali stated that each region has unique issues during Assembly elections. “If simultaneous elections occur, national issues will dominate, sidelining local concerns,” he cautioned. He noted that the dominance of national parties, with greater resources than regional ones, creates an uneven playing field. “The BJP’s push for 'one nation, one election' seems aimed at establishing a single-party system,” Ali argued.

Former Trinamool Congress MP Jawhar Sircar also highlighted the constitutional impracticality of the proposal, noting that it would require amendments and agreement from state assemblies. “Even if it is pushed through, it is impossible to implement,” he said, expressing concern that if a state government were to fall, it could undermine democracy, suggesting that the BJP's motives might be about consolidating power.

He claimed that Modi views himself as the party's only viable candidate, believing his popularity, though declining, still surpasses that of other leaders. Sircar noted that Modi aims to replicate the BJP's electoral dynamics in Odisha and Andhra Pradesh across the nation, hoping that state assemblies will support him, allowing him to influence who becomes chief minister.

In a statement on X, DMK head and Tamil Nadu chief minister M.K. Stalin described the proposal as an “impractical proposition that ignores the complexities of India's diverse electoral system and undermines federalism”. He noted that it is logistically unfeasible given the vast differences in election cycles, regional issues, and governance priorities.

Ali further argued that while simultaneous elections were once seen as necessary in the years immediately after Independence, the context has changed significantly, with each state developing its own electoral trajectory. He dismissed the BJP's claims regarding the costs of multiple elections, stating, “Uniformity is unnecessary in a diverse country. The costs of conducting state and national elections will likely be similar.”

He compared this to cultural diversity: “We celebrate festivals like Eid, Diwali, Holi, and Christmas on different days. Would it make sense to celebrate them all on one day just to cut costs? Similarly, elections should reflect our country’s diversity and the unique needs of each state.”

Sircar insisted, “Regional parties may seem small, but they represent the will of the people. You should not disregard their voices.” He dismissed claims of cost saving from simultaneous elections, arguing that the expenses incurred by the Election Commission for separate elections are minor compared to the amount spent on elections by major parties.

“The ruling party benefits from crony capitalism, allowing them to spend freely, while Opposition parties lack such resources,” he said. Sircar also warned that the ruling party has previously backtracked on key issues, suggesting this could happen again: “This move could be the biggest blunder since demonetisation,” he said.

In July 2023, Union law and justice minister Arjun Ram Meghwal had responded to BJP MP Kirodi Lal Meena, stating that significant obstacles exist to implementing simultaneous elections, primarily requiring amendments to five constitutional articles. He noted that this process would necessitate additional EVMs and VVPATs, which could cost thousands of crores. “Considering the machines' lifespan is only 15 years, they would need to be replaced after three or four uses, leading to substantial ongoing costs,” Meghwal explained.

This is not the first time the idea of ‘one nation, one election’ has been proposed. In 1999, the Law Commission, led by B.P. Jeevan Reddy, recommended simultaneous elections. A parliamentary standing committee revisited these recommendations in 2015, and on 30 August 2018, a Law Commission chaired by justice B.S. Chauhan released a draft report advocating for the same.