 |
| The electronic voting machine and the Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail |
In India, the talk of having simultaneous elections to both the Lok Sabha (Lower House of Parliament) and Assemblies in all 28 states and 8 Union Territories is back.
Not a new idea. India did have simultaneous elections in 1951, 1957, 1962 and 1967. After that, it has never worked out.
The issue is back on the centre stage now because the Union government yesterday appointed a committee headed by former President Ram Nath Kovind to look into the feasibility of what is called "One Nation One Election".
The members of the committee were announced today:
- Home Minister Amit Shah
- Congress leader in Lok Sabha Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury (but he declined to join the panel)
- Former Leader of the Opposition in the Rajya Sabha Ghulam Nabi Azad
- Former Finance Commission chairperson N.K. Singh
- Senior advocate Harish Salve
- Former Lok Sabha Secretary General Subhash C. Kashyap
- Former Chief Vigilance Commissioner Sanjay Kothari
Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal will attend the meetings as a special invitee
Legal Affairs Secretary Niten Chandra will serve as Secretary to the panel
PROS
- Simultaneous elections can cut expenditures. So many processes are repeated for each election, and it costs crores of rupees, affecting the nation's economy on the whole.
- Less disruption. Elections are like a festival in India, with so much excitement, disrupting the normal pace of work in various sectors. Besides that, during the election season, governance pretty much comes to a standstill. No important policy decisions are taken.
- The idea that people have to vote only once in, say, five years might boost the number of people who will turn up to vote.
CONS
- National and State Assembly elections are fought on totally different issues. Holding both elections together will result in a mixing up of both issues during the election campaigning, leading to confusion among voters. The final verdict might not be representative.
- The predictability of elections will bring in a sense of complacency among the elected representatives.
- Presently, individual States have the autonomy to decide when to hold elections. That will cease to be the case. The diversity of different dynamics each State brings to the Union of India will be significantly diminished.
CHALLENGES
- What if the incumbent government loses the majority or is voted out by a no-confidence vote, and no one is able to form a stable government? Who will then rule the country or the State? If it happens close to the end of the tenure of the incumbent government, it might not be a big issue. But if it happens within a year or two of the elections, then it will be a full-blown crisis.
- The One Nation One Election will require a major constitutional amendment that will require ratification by a majority of States of the country. It might not be that easy.
- Considering the vastness of India and the complicated nature and issues each region has, it might not be possible to hold elections on one single day or even a single month. It might have to be spread over at least two or three months to take care of logistic challenges like moving security forces and ensuring the presence of election officials. Whether we have enough resources is a moot point.
HAS IT WORKED ELSEWHERE?
- Only three nations in the world have simultaneous elections - Belgium, Sweden and South Africa.
WILL IT WORK IN INDIA?
It's not going to be easy, though the advantages are very clear and significant. It can work if there is an across-the-board consensus and all the challenges are addressed.
Will Article 356 (President’s rule suspending the state government) be abandoned? Let us work on One Nation One Election later. First, there should be a law for One Person One Electoral Constituency to contest. Some candidates (including Mr. Modi) in all political parties contest from more than one constituency. This must be stopped to save some money.
ReplyDeleteI doubt Art 356 will be scrapped. The point about "one candidate in one constituency" is an interesting one. Yes, holding a byelection costs a lot of money. But again I doubt if it will removed. Because it comes in handy for candidates of all parties.
DeleteBy your points, I think the 'cons' outweigh the argument. Your first con point is reason enough for me.
ReplyDeleteHi Andrew - That's a significant point. Since India has so many parties and so many local issues, very often a national consensus is not very easy at all.
DeleteHari OM
ReplyDeleteI agree with Andrew; apart from the cost-saving (the only real benefit I can see), the key thing for changing this would be the reduced dynamics you mention on point three of your cons. Part of the modus operandi of the current ruler.
I also agree there should only be one MP per constituency... politics really is mad - and maddening! YAM xx
Hi Yamini - You are right. For such a large and diverse nation like India, it's difficult to have One Nation One Everything. It's going to be quite a complicated and contentious path ahead for sure.
DeleteIt sounds like a huge undertaking to put together and pull off successfully. Sometimes things have been instituted in a certain way because that way works - changing it can bring chaos. Interesting to see how it all plays out.
ReplyDeleteHi Leanne - O, yes. The change can be chaotic. Mainly because the diversity of the social fabric as well as political viewpoints. A consensus might not be easy.
DeleteI feel this will be very difficult to implement.
ReplyDeleteHi Rajesh - Even I think so. A lot of issues will have to be sorted out before that.
DeletePolitics sure can be frustrating. I wish the best for you and yours.
ReplyDeleteHi Darla - True. Politics is frustrating because it's very often more confrontation rather than cooperation. But at the same time, politics is such an inalienable component of democracy.
DeleteWhatever happens, in a decade it'll feel like that was the only right answer. I hope it gets sorted.
ReplyDeleteHi Liz - Yes!
DeleteHi Pradeep - I hope it can be resolved to everyone's satisfaction - 'the cons' aren't encouraging for balance and democracy as a whole. With thoughts - politics is having a rough ride at the moment. Cheers Hilary
ReplyDeleteHi Hilary - I think everyone recognises the huge waste of money during the electoral process. But a solution won't be a one-size-fits-all solution. But there is going to be some intense debate on this in the coming days.
DeleteGosh, that sounds complicated, Pradeep. I can’t imagine how can be coordinated effectively. India is so vast and has such a huge population. I’m not even sure it works well in South Africa to be honest.
ReplyDeleteYes, Vallypee ... It's going to be quite a complicated and contentious path ahead ... There is going to be lots of debates centred around it for sure in the days and months ahead.
DeleteThat does sound challenging, especially for a nation as big as India. I have no idea how it could work, but of course it's for the people of India to decide on.
ReplyDeleteVoilà qui semble bien compliqué à mettre en place, mais peut-être que ça vaut la peine d'essayer. But it still seems quite complex!
ReplyDeleteMay not happen in the next few elections
ReplyDeleteThere are very many practical problems like security measures, logistics, officials... What if a state govt doesn't last its term?
ReplyDeleteThis move has certain sinister goals, I think. Moving towards dictatorship.
Hi Tomi - Yes, it's not at all easy as it sounds.
DeleteJust thought of one more. There should be one job one title. The administrative head of a District, usually an IAS officer, is called Collector in South and called District Magistrate in the North.
ReplyDeleteGood one. Here in Karnataka, they are called District Magistrates, though in Kerala they are Collectors.
ReplyDeleteIt sounds very complex. Whatever is decided it is certain that not everyone will be happy. Politics is a mess worldwide.
ReplyDeleteYes! It's going to be an extremely complex process, considering the parliamentary system of government we have and also the huge diversity of our country.
Delete