One Nation, One Election: The Death Knell Of Indian Federalism? – OpEd

The Modi government’s push for “One Nation, One Election” — proposing simultaneous elections for the Lok Sabha, state assemblies, and local bodies —  marks a critical juncture in India’s democratic evolution.

While it promises cost-efficiency and streamlined governance, the move also poses profound political, economic, legal, and constitutional challenges. Critics fear that this policy might lead India down a path toward authoritarianism, centralizing power in a way that threatens its multi-party system, regional diversity, and federal structure.

Understanding Simultaneous Elections

The idea of simultaneous elections is not new to India. Between 1952 and 1967, Lok Sabha and state assembly elections were held concurrently. However, this practice was disrupted by the premature dissolutions of both the Lok Sabha and various state legislatures, leading to the staggered election schedules seen today. The Election Commission and Law Commission have previously studied the feasibility of restoring this system. In September 2023, the Modi government took a step further by appointing a high-level committee, led by former President Ramnath Kovind, to examine the logistical and constitutional challenges of implementing simultaneous elections once again.

The Modi government and its supporters argue that simultaneous elections will reduce election-related costs and prevent the disruption of governance caused by the frequent imposition of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC), which freezes government decisions in the run-up to elections. Additionally, proponents claim it will prevent the polarization that comes with frequent elections, allowing the government to focus on long-term policy-making rather than constant campaigning.

Challenges: Democratic, Constitutional, and Federal Concerns

While the benefits of “One Nation, One Election” are framed in terms of efficiency and cost-saving, the challenges it poses are manifold and far-reaching.

Democratic Deficit: India’s vast diversity, with its rich regional, cultural, and linguistic differences, presents a significant challenge to the idea of simultaneous elections. This move risks sidelining regional concerns in favor of national issues. National parties, particularly the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), would dominate the electoral narrative, leaving little space for state-specific issues to be addressed. As campaigns increasingly focus on broader topics like national security and economic policy, regional parties that emphasize local grievances may find it difficult to maintain their relevance and visibility in such a system. 

Erosion of Federalism: India’s federal structure, enshrined as a basic feature of the Constitution, is threatened by this proposal. Different states have unique political, economic, and social challenges, and staggered elections have allowed them to address these issues on their own terms. Simultaneous elections could undermine this federal diversity, fostering a more centralized political landscape. As national parties consolidate power, regional parties would find it increasingly difficult to compete, risking a gradual erasure of the federal equilibrium.

Constitutional Hurdles: Implementing “One Nation, One Election” requires overcoming several constitutional roadblocks. Amendments to Articles 83, 85, 172, and 174, which regulate the terms and dissolution of the Lok Sabha and state assemblies, would be required to align election schedules. Furthermore, Article 356, which allows for President’s Rule in states, would need revision, as premature dissolution of assemblies disrupts the concept of fixed-term elections. Achieving such amendments would require the approval of two-thirds of both Houses of Parliament and at least half of India’s state legislatures. Given the resistance from opposition parties and states ruled by non-BJP governments, this is no small feat.

The Real Intent of BJP and Modi

Critics argue that the push for simultaneous elections is less about efficiency and more about political dominance. Modi and the BJP stand to gain disproportionately from such a move. In the current electoral landscape, regional parties are formidable players in state elections, often keeping the BJP at bay in key states like West Bengal, Tamil Nadu, and Telangana. By merging these state elections with national ones, the BJP could capitalize on Modi’s popularity and its well-oiled national campaign machinery to sweep both national and regional contests. 

This consolidation of power could transform the multi-party democratic system into a de facto one-party rule. The BJP, with its strong central leadership and deep financial resources, could overshadow regional parties, diminishing the political pluralism that has characterized Indian democracy since independence. 

The fears of authoritarianism are not unfounded. Under Modi’s leadership, India has seen increasing centralization of power, a weakening of independent institutions, and a crackdown on dissent. Simultaneous elections could further entrench this trend, making it harder for opposition forces to mount credible challenges to the ruling party, both at the national and regional levels.

The Economic Impact: Regional vs. Monopoly Capital

Economically, the implications of simultaneous elections are similarly worrying. India’s regional parties often represent local business interests and regional capital. Their ability to influence policy ensures a degree of economic decentralization, with states pursuing policies that benefit local economies and industries. If regional parties are weakened by the dominance of national parties, particularly the BJP, there is a risk that regional capital will be subsumed by national and monopoly capital. 

In a system where a single party holds sway both nationally and across the states, there is little incentive to promote regional economic autonomy. Large corporate interests aligned with the central government may dominate economic policy, sidelining the concerns of local industries and workers. This could lead to increased economic disparity between regions, as national policy priorities overshadow regional needs.

End of Multi-Party Democracy?

At its core, “One Nation, One Election” represents a direct challenge to India’s multi-party democracy. While the BJP presents this move as a way to enhance governance, the reality is more complex. Simultaneous elections risk creating a political environment where smaller, regional parties find it impossible to compete with the resources and reach of national parties. Over time, this could erode the diversity of political voices in India, reducing electoral competition and weakening democratic accountability.

India’s democracy thrives on its pluralism, with regional parties playing a vital role in representing the country’s diverse interests. The simultaneous election proposal threatens to diminish this pluralism by centralizing power in the hands of a single, dominant party. 

Is This the Road to Authoritarianism?

In a multi-cultural, multi-religious country like India, the concentration of political power in the hands of a single party is deeply concerning. While Modi and the BJP have framed “One Nation, One Election” as a move toward greater efficiency, its real impact could be the creation of an authoritarian state where political opposition is marginalized, regional diversity is suppressed, and democratic checks and balances are weakened. 

As the Modi government continues to push this agenda, the future of India’s federal structure, multi-party democracy, and constitutional integrity hangs in the balance.