According to Article 87 of the Constitution, the President of India addresses a joint session of Parliament after each Lok Sabha election. It is a customary method through which the government of the day highlights and showcases its policies and programmes. One can sense the priorities and overall approach of the government for its new term in office. This year, President Ram Kovind, while addressing the joint session of Parliament on 20 June, said: “One nation – simultaneous elections is the need of the hour, which would facilitate accelerated development, thereby benefitting our countrymen. With such a system in place, all political parties, according to their respective ideologies, will be able to better utilise their energy towards development and public welfare.”
The Prime Minister, speaking in the Rajya Sabha during the “Motion of Thanks on President’s Address”, averred: “The Centre had decided to proceed with the idea of “One Nation One Election.” The average voter is capable of distinguishing between Vidhan Sabha and Lok Sabha elections. The model worked beautifully in Odisha. People who voted the Biju Janata Dal (BJD) to power in the Vidhan Sabha are the same people who voted the BJP to power in the Lok Sabha. So, the Opposition should not think that people are incapable of making that distinction.”
SAVING TAXPAYERS’ MONEY
But why did this announcement of bringing about a simple change in conducting elections in India raise a storm in the media and a boycott by many in the Opposition to the Prime Minister’s call for discussing the proposal of simultaneous state and central elections. The government sees this change as saving the taxpayers’ money as the huge manpower and resources required for conducting frequent elections will be avoided.
The government argues that the entire government apparatus is engaged in managing the electoral exercise including government office staff, teachers and the law and order machinery, it puts a severe strain on their day to day functioning which delays their regular work thus creating bottlenecks in the administrative and organisational workflow. By carrying out simultaneous elections, there will be saving of resources and governments shall no longer be tempted to resort to populist measures for short term electoral gains, enabling them to focus on long term strategic reforms for boosting the economy and building infrastructure.
Further, this will in no way impair the federal polity of our nation as the electorate will have the option and may vote for different political parties at the state and the centre, depending on their performance and election promises as can be seen in Odisha in the recent polls.
AGREEING WITH A CAVEAT
There are many who agree with the concept of simultaneous elections, saying that one election throughout the country was in fact the norm till 1967. Simultaneous elections for the Vidhan Sabha and Lok Sabha were conducted in 1952, 1957, 1962 and 1967. This practice was discontinued since 1968-69 as some state assemblies were dissolved before their term ended due to various reasons. However, there are some obstacles to and demerits of the “one nation, one election” idea namely: (1) certain constitutional provisions will require amendment such as Article 174 related to dissolution of the assemblies, Article 172 related to duration of state legislatures, Article 83 dealing with duration of the Houses of Parliament and Article 356 regarding imposition of President’s rule in the state (2) national issues will supersede the local and regional issues as national parties will ensure the dominance of their “national” agenda as preeminent and hence the routine and day to day ground issues might recede in the background (3) the problem of misutilisation of government and law-enforcement machinery will remain and simultaneous polls will require their deployment on an even larger scale (4) in the long run, regional parties will turn weaker and the political party at the Centre will get an unfair advantage for dominating the political agenda.
BLAME OF ATTACK ON FEDERALISM
There are also many who totally disagree with the concept of simultaneous elections and see this proposal for election reform by the NDA government as a surreptitious way of bringing about a “Presidential” form of government and a frontal attack on the federal nature of our style of governance as envisaged by the architects of our Constitution. Part VI of the Constitution deals with the States. It is argued by constitutional experts that the State assemblies are separate constitutional entities governed by their own requirement of elections. Enforcing and interfering in a constitutional entity’s original design and existence is unconstitutional.
Further there is a famous “Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala” judgment by a 13-judge Constitutional bench of the Supreme Court which deliberated on the limitations, if any, of the powers of the elected representatives of the people and the nature of fundamental rights of an individual. In a sharply divided verdict, by a margin of 7-6, the court held that while the Parliament has “wide” powers, it did not have the power to destroy or emasculate the basic elements or fundamental features of the Constitution. So according to these opponents of “one nation, one election” style of polling, the proposed change will not stand the test of judicial scrutiny even it is approved and passed by Parliament as the “basic structure” of our constitution is sacrosanct and inviolable.
COST CUTTING ARGUMENT RINGS HOLLOW
If we compare the cost of conducting elections with the money spent by political parties on their election campaigns then it can be understood as to how the noble thought of saving taxpayers’ money rings hollow. According to New Delhi based Centre for Media Studies, the money to be spent in the 2019 Lok Sabha elections was predicted to be Rs 50,000 crores ($ 7 billion). That is a 40% hike compared to the expense over polls in 2014. The amount spent by the Election Commission for conducting elections was estimated to be around Rs 6,500 crores. So, the actual “spend” over conducting elections is very small compared to the money spent by political parties and their candidates who flood the election scene with media campaigns, political rallies, freebies and even illegal monetary enticements in lieu of votes. Then their travel expenses and use of muscle power and blatant misuse of state machinery – all jack up the poll expense per voter.
There is an urgent need for drastic electoral reforms in this domain as the manner in which our election mechanism has crystallised – it is almost impossible for anybody without enormous money and muscle power to even dream of winning elections. The “winnability” of candidates becoming directly proportional to money and muscle power has resulted in the criminalisation of politics and the steep fall in the overall standard (both moral and intellectual) of our lawmakers. It may be noted that of the 539 newly elected MPs to the 17th Lok Sabha 233 MPs (43%) have declared criminal cases against them. According to Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) which analysed the affidavits on assets and liabilities of the 539 MPs in lower house of Parliament – 475 members are “crorepatis” with 88% of all newly elected BJP MPs falling in the “crorepati” category. The numbers speak for themselves – money grows and men decay!
UNDERSTANDING THE CORE PROBLEM
Free and fair elections are a sine qua non for a healthy and vibrant democracy. When there is no concept of accountability towards your Creator and no belief in a life after death where you will be punished or rewarded based on your deeds in this world, there is bound to be a mad scramble for “power at all costs” and “might is right”. The urge to dominate and cherishing the desire to rule till eternity can be tempered only by the concept of the ruler being the vicegerent of God and hence a “sevak / khadim” (servant) of the people who has been entrusted the responsibility of delivering the rights of people. The world must seriously ponder over this approach espoused by Islam. Only then can money and muscle power be replaced by righteousness and the power of piety.