By Debjyoti Samaddar, Nishtha Chopra and Shubhangi Verma*

It’s is a well known fact that policies and schemes are important parts of the election manifesto of the political parties. The party in power tries to woe the public or the voters by bringing schemes and policies with material benefits attached. These schemes are on a rise during  phase when the elections are near to create more  impact and impact voting behavior. In the present scenario where the elections take place at different times across various states the parties are on their toes to be in the good books of the public. In the newly proposed scheme the same status might not been maintained. Public friendly policies might not be considered for the entire duration of tenure. There is a high chance of same being ignored in the initial part of the tenure.

Secondly, the voters in India might mix the federal issues with the central one in such a setup. We need to keep this fact in mind considering the educational and literacy status of India and the citizens. There is a high chance of misinformation amongst the citizens in such a situation. This has been proved for a country like Belgium. The chances of the same happening in the Indian electorates are even higher.

Economic Impact of Simultaneous Election on the economy

Conducting elections at once would require a lot of trained human resources at once. The government employees who are assigned the task of conducting the elections and are trained in it would not suffice when elections will be conducted at once. Similarly the supervising authorities too are limited in number. There would be logistical issue that might come up. Similarly, many practical difficulties for the election commission might come up. Some believe that the costs of conducting simultaneous elections might be lesser than the present cost. But we cannot see this as the driving reason to hold simultaneous elections. Not all parties and independent candidates have enough funds to hold an election campaign for simultaneous elections.

The federal and democratic structure of the country is more important than the money we would save with simultaneous elections.

Regional and Geographical synchronization

India is a vast country with a lot of geographical variation. Synchronizing elections on a grand scale might be tough job for the Election Commission as well. The regional variations would creep in in such a scenario. Before hoping onto such a scheme we need to access the impact of simultaneous elections on the country with its geographical component in mind. Synchronous management of the elections across the lengths and breadth of country might be a tough task. The entire administrative machinery shall be invested in the electoral process in the proposed scheme creating unforeseen situations for the country and system.

Impact of simultaneous elections on voter behaviour

A multitude of studies have attempted to prove that voting behaviour is impacted in a manner in which the same political party wins across tiers, when simultaneous elections are conducted. Evidence has been shown to the effect that voters while voting for multiple elections on the same day, undergo sub-optimal information acquisition leading to conflation of voting decisions across these multiple elections.[1] IDFC Institute in a 2015 study[2] concluded that there is a 77% chance that the winning political party or alliance will win both the Lok Sabha and Assembly elections in that state when elected simultaneously. The study held that the willingness of the voter to vote differently is only decreasing with time. However, these studies have been criticised[3] because of not being able to link the cause with the effect. In other words, other factors like organizational strengths, voters’ perceptions of the key voters, political pacts between the parties, etc. have not been considered by these studies. Even in absence of these criticisms, it can be rightly said that there is an increasing tendency in the Indian voter to vote for the same party at both the tiers.

However, the culmination of all the factors of voting behaviour with the conduction of simultaneous elections, in itself is not an issue. It becomes problematic if it ends up undermining the regional issues and the local parties and leads to nationalisation of political life.[4] This depends on whom does the Indian voter interact with more. As it stands, an Indian voter holds the state more responsible than the centre. A study which analysed various elections between 2004 and 2009 and dealt with the said issue, argued that even electoral outcomes at the central level derive from electoral contests at the state level.[5] Thus, it was concluded that while the centre has legislative dominance, the states have political dominance.[6] This argument attempts to prove that even though simultaneous elections might reduce split ticket voting, it will be in the direction of regional political parties or state political parties rather than national political parties.

In spite of the above stated conclusion, apprehensions exist as to the over-shadowing of campaigns of the regional parties by the national parties. Majority of the voters make their choice during or after the campaign period, making this phase one of the most important ones to sway the election decision.[7] In the period of 2015-2020, national party BJP constituted 56.04% of the total election expenditure, with 54.87% of its expenditure spent on publicity and advertisement.[8] BJP and INC ended up having the highest and the second-highest publicity expenses in 2019-20, respectively. [9] Moreover, the political party which makes information about it more readily available to the general public gets a better chance at determining the voter’s decision.[10] National political parties over-shadowing the publicity of regional political parties can have just the same effect.

Legal Perspective

Holding of simultaneous elections of both the Lok Sabha and the State Legislative Assemblies requires meddling with various constitutional provisions. One of the major reasons why the ‘One Nation One Election’ is being criticized is the requirement of numerous constitutional amendments to make it work.[11] In order to understand why these amendments are needed, it is important to look at the origin of the disruption in conducting of simultaneous elections. India held its Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies elections simultaneously until 1967 after which the disruption occurred owing to premature dissolution of legislative assemblies and Lok Sabha and extension of terms of the mentioned legislatures.[12] Thus, a major issue in practically implementing the concept of simultaneous elections is the fact that the dissolution of houses and assemblies is completely unpredictable.

Recommended Constitutional Amendments

Firstly, Article 356[13] assumes importance as it relates to imposition of President’s rule in state leading to premature dissolution of State Legislative Assemblies. Supporters[14] of simultaneous elections advocate that the imposition of President’s rule has been reduced to a negligible level owing to the judgment in S.R. Bommai v. Union of India.[15] This is a faulty notion as even though the misuse of the provision may have been reduced, its implementation and imposition has not. A closer look at the data reveals that even after the judgment in 1994, there were atleast 21 instances of imposition of President’s Rule till 2016.[16] Thus, the issue of premature dissolution remains unpredictable even after the S.R Bommai judgment. In order to permanently nil the impact of the provision, the Law Commission of India had suggested that any premature dissolution of a State Legislative Assemblies should put in force a new provision providing for the Governor to carry out the administration of the State on the aid and advice of his Council of Ministers to be appointed by him till the expiry of the term.[17] This recommendation is alarming in nature because of its potential impact on the constitutional ideals as discussed further.

Secondly, in order to initiate the process of ONOE, the terms of certain state assemblies would have to be curtailed. This would require an amendment of Article 83[18] of the Constitution of India.

Thirdly, Article 75(3)[19] and Article 164(2)[20] makes the council of ministers collectively responsible to the House of People and the State Legislative Assembly respectively. Thus, in the India’s polity executive is answerable to the legislature. Passing of a no-confidence is another way in which the government can be prematurely dissolved. The Law Commission of India had suggested that it should be mandatory for the legislature to also move a ‘confidence motion’ in order to appoint an alternative government to the government dissolved.[21] Thus, it had recommended to give the power to the legislature to appoint the government till expiry of term of the house.

Assessing the Constitutional Validity

Any of the constitutional amendments as suggested above must pass the touchstones of democracy and federalism.

It had been held in Kesavananda Bharti v. Union of India[22] that the parts of the constitution which form a part of the basic structure are not amenable to change. In I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu[23], the court had laid down the two- step rights test to ascertain if a certain amendment or legislation has the potential to infringe the basic structure of the Constitution of India. The test has been further explained in Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Union of India[24] as under –

“Step One requires us to first ask if the impugned legislation affects a facet of the basic structure. If it does, then at Step Two we ask if the effect on the facet of basic structure is to such an extent that the facet’s original identity has been altered. Applying the Effect Test is another way of saying that the form of an amendment is irrelevant: it is the consequence thereof that matter.”

In State (NCT of Delhi) v. Union of India[25], the apex court had held that federalism is a part of the basic structure of the Constitution. The court observed “Thus, in any federal Constitution, at a minimum, there is a dual polity, that is, two sets of government operate: one at the level of the national Government and the second at the level of the regional federal units. These dual sets of Government, elected by ‘We the People’ in two separate electoral processes, is a dual manifestation of the public will.”

The recommendations as to the amendment giving power to the governor or an alternative government appointed by the legislature to run the administration of the state, thus, goes against the very spirit of federalism, as it takes the power from the ‘People’ to the ‘legislature’ to appoint the government. In other words, the ‘consequence’ of this amendment is to go against the public will in entirety even if it is for a brief period of time until the expiry of the term, as it is the people who will be governed by this new ‘appointed’ government. Thus, these amendments pass the rights test, leading to a violation of the basic structure of the Constitution of India.

Other amendments recommended by the Law Commission include amendment to Sections 14[26] and 15[27] of the Representation of People’s Act so that the notification for an early poll can be put forward before the time period of six months, as barred by the said sections.

Comparative analysis of other jurisdictions and what Indian can do

Other jurisdictions’ experiences^[28]

The UK

It is a unitary form of government but in the past decades has seen devolved “nations” come up in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. In all these geographies, elections for their respective assemblies are held under their own laws and at different times but basically, while there is a maximum term of five years for the House of Commons and assemblies, it is up to the respective government to call early elections.In 2011, the UK enacted The Fixed Term Parliaments Act creating fixed five-year terms and severely restricting the calling of early elections. But in its very second cycle, the House of Commons overrode this law and elections were held in 2017. The Fixed Term Parliaments Act was repealed in 2022 and the Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Act 2022 revived the power of the Prime Minister to request the monarch to dissolve Parliament.

Canada

It is a federation and has a parliamentary form of Government. In 2006, Canada, at both federal and provincial levels, enacted legislation to fix four-year terms for their parliaments with elections to be held on the third Monday in October. However, there being no restriction on the dissolution of legislatures prior to the fixed date, the situation today is that all the provinces have their own calendar, and the federal parliament has its own. Indeed, while federal elections are due in October 2025, British Columbia is to go to the polls in October 2024, Ontario in June 2026 and so on.

Germany

It is the largest federal country in Europe. To overcome its pre-WW II history of parliamentary instability, its Basic Law does not allow votes of no-confidence without naming a successor and its parliamentary system has evolved into one where coalitions are an accepted feature; all this leads to a certain stability. However, voting for state (Laender) legislatures is as per the laws of the concerned state, and they follow their own election cycle. For the present, federal elections are due in Germany only in 2025. Baden Wuerttemberg will elect its assembly in 2026, Brandenburg in 2024, and so forth.

Nepal

It promulgated a new constitution in 2015 and, for the first time in its history, created provinces and adopted a federal structure with five-year terms for the Federal House of Representatives and Provincial Assemblies. Its Constitution also only allows a positive vote of confidence and includes several clauses suggesting ways to elect a leader of the House and keep the House going for the full term of five years. But it does recognise the inevitability of mid-term elections in case all such efforts fail.

Nepal’s simultaneous election of 2017

On August 21, 2017, the Nepal government ordered the holding of national and state elections across the country simultaneously. This was to be Nepal’s first election after the country adopted a new Constitution in 2015. However, the Election Commission of Nepal raised concerns about the difficulty of organising such concurrent elections nationwide. The government then went for a two-phase election with a gap period. As a result, the election in Nepal was divided into two phases. The first phase occurred on November 26, 2017, followed by the second on December 7 that year.

In 2021, the Nepali Supreme Court, on two occasions, annulled the dissolution of the House of Representatives, which was recommended by the Prime Minister following Prime Ministerial privilege traditions of the UK. The Court’s demand for looking at alternatives within the House succeeded the second time, and the then house sat its full five-year term. The constitution, however, does have a proviso for “Federal Rule” in provinces for a maximum of six months in certain circumstances when a provincial assembly is dissolved prematurely.

Countries with simultaneous elections

The other three countries that hold simultaneous elections are Belgium, Sweden and South Africa.^[29]

Sweden holds elections for county and municipal councils concurrently with general elections (Riksdag elections) every four years. General elections for the Riksdag, regional or county council assemblies, and municipal councils are held in Sweden every four years. The polls are usually held in September. All these elections in Sweden occur on the same day. Sweden, unlike India, which has the First Past The Post (FPTP) system due to its population, has a proportional electoral system, which means that political parties are assigned a number of seats in the elected assembly based on their share of the vote.

In Belgium, Federal Parliament elections are held every five years, in sync with European elections, which impact regional elections.

South Africa

Area-wise, Belgium, Nepal and Sweden are smaller countries, and holding simultaneous polls there isn’t a big logistical challenge. A better example, though not exactly proportionate to the Indian scale, therefore, would be South Africa. The world’s largest democracy, India is the seventh biggest in terms of area, whereas South Africa is the 24th. Provincial and national elections are held simultaneously every five years in South Africa. The African country has nine provinces. Separate voting papers are provided to voters to cast ballots for the national and provincial legislatures.

South Africa’s electoral system is based on a proportional representation (PR) framework for choosing members of parliament and provincial legislatures. The national Parliament has 400 MPs, but the makeup of the nine provincial legislatures varies, ranging from 30 to 90 seats depending on the population of the province.

The execution of these elections is entrusted to the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC), a body responsible for the overall administration of the electoral process, in order to maintain its integrity and impartiality. The role of the IEC is very similar to that of the Election Commission of India (ECI). South Africa’s electoral process, however, is very different from India’s.

Before the elections, political parties draw up a list of candidates for each of the legislatures they wish to contest. For the national assembly, parties can submit half their candidates on a national list and half on provincial lists, according to a South African government website. When the poll results are announced, the IEC determines how many people from each party list should take up legislative seats.

India’s tryst with One Nation One Election and analysis

There are multiple logistical challenges in conducting polls simultaneously for the Lok Sabha and the state assemblies. Though they might be conducted in multiple phases, simultaneous elections would need human resources to be deployed around the same time at a stretch. It would also require more electronic voting machines (EVMs) and voter-verifiable paper audit trail (VVPAT) machines. Also, complexities could arise if any state government collapses or gets dissolved before their scheduled five-year term. Then there’s the constitutional challenges – requiring several amendments that would necessitate consensus among states and political parties, a complex and tedious process.

Another issue pointed out vis-à-vis simultaneous elections to the federal and state assemblies is the possibility of one contest influencing the other in the voters’ minds, the “contamination” of the local and national interests of voters is increased unless there are strong regional contending parties or that the understanding of the separation between federal and provincial competencies is very well understood by the voters. The Indian case in the first two decades after independence and the two provincial and federal elections in Nepal (2017 and 2022) appear to influence the poll results. This would also affect the federal structure, wherein regional narratives would be overshadowed by national ones. Finally, National Parties, with significantly more resources and investment would naturally be favoured, further marginalising regional parties and issues.

The standing committee report mentions the precedent of simultaneous elections in countries like South Africa.^[30] In Sweden, elections are held on a fixed date (similar to the US). Interestingly, the practice of simultaneous elections is complimented by the electoral system of proportional representation, i.e.  South Africa has party-list proportional representation, and Sweden too has proportional representation where the parties are given a number of representatives based on their share of votes. Proportional representation is an alternative to FPTP and other majoritarian voting systems that tend to produce disproportionate outcomes and have a bias in favour of large political groups. Moreover, through the FPTP system, a candidate can win with a wafer-thin majority, and therefore, the dissent voiced by the minority, which is a significantly larger group, is silenced. Several political parties would oppose incorporating a PR system as election campaigns in India aim to persuade swing voters, and caste dynamics play an important role.

Alternative suggestions instead of One Nation One Election which might help improve the election system in India

1. Decentralization: Keeping elections decentralized to empower local communities and ensure more focused representation is the key to a fair and just elections.

2. Voter Education: Enhance efforts to educate voters about the electoral process, candidates, and the importance of informed voting. An educate voter is more capable of accessing the work of the present day government and the political party. They would be able to make an educated judgement this way.

3. Transparency: Ensure transparency in campaign financing and expenditures to reduce the influence of money in elections. The transparency might in turn help us to save money that would have been done by simultaneous elections.

4. Electronic Voting: Explore and implement secure electronic voting systems to streamline the voting process and reduce errors. This might not be possible while having simultaneous elections because the resources are limited.

5. Ethical Campaigning: Promote ethical campaigning by discouraging hate speech, false information, and divisive tactics. Ethical campaigning is yet another prime measure with which we may attain democracy in the electoral process.

6. Technological Innovation: Embrace more efficient and sustainable technology for secure and efficient voter registration, election monitoring, and result tabulation.

7. Post-Election Feedback: Establish channels for gathering feedback from voters post-election to identify areas for improvement and address concerns. This would be an additional tool which would produce healthy governance.

8. Electoral Reforms: Continuously evaluate and implement necessary electoral reforms to address challenges specific to the Indian political landscape. These reforms can be area specific or state specific as well when needed.

9. Caste and Religion Neutrality: Emphasize and enforce strict regulations against the use of caste, religion, or communal sentiments during campaigns to promote a more inclusive electoral process. These variables disturb the natural processes of the elections.

10. Language Accessibility: Ensure that election-related information is accessible in various regional languages to cater to the linguistic diversity in India.

11. Online Voting Registration: Simplify and promote online voter registration to increase participation, especially among the youth and urban population.

12. Enhanced Polling Infrastructure: Invest in better infrastructure for polling booths, including facilities for differently-abled individuals, to make the voting experience more accessible and comfortable.

13. Security Measures: Strengthen security measures during elections to prevent malpractices and ensure a safe environment for voters.

14. Independent Election Commission: Reinforce the independence and autonomy of the Election Commission of India to maintain a fair and impartial electoral process.

15. Campaign Finance Regulations: Enforce stricter regulations on campaign finances, ensuring a level playing field for all candidates and parties.

16. Voter Verification: Implement robust mechanisms for voter identity verification to maintain the integrity of the electoral process.

17. Public Awareness Campaigns: Conduct regular and extensive public awareness campaigns to educate citizens about their rights, responsibilities, and the significance of participating in the electoral process.

---

[1] Vimal Balasubramaniam and others, ‘Behavioural Voters in Synchronized Elections: Evidence from India’ (SSRN, 22 July 2020) < https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3636183 > accessed 12 January 2023.

[2] Praveen Chakravarty, ‘Nudging the Voter in One Direction?’ (The Hindu, 6 April 2016) < https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/state-assembly-elections-nudging-the-voter-in-one-direction/article8438114.ece > accessed 10 January 2023.

[3] Bibek Debroy and Kishore Desai, ‘Analysis of Simultaneous Elections: The “What”, “Why” And “How”’ (Department of Legal Affairs, 2015) < https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Flegalaffairs.gov.in%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fsimultaneous_elections%2FNITI_AYOG_REPORT_2017.pdf&psig=AOvVaw3edbYWzDUCH6ak7ouLBNWN&ust=1705385051294000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CAkQr5oMahcKEwjIyt_D3N6DAxUAAAAAHQAAAAAQBA > accessed 10 January 2023.

[4] Louise Tillin, ‘Simultaneous Elections: What are the Implications for India Federalism?’ (Scroll, 17 September 2023) < https://scroll.in/article/1055859/simultaneous-elections-what-are-the-implications-for-indian-federalism > accessed 12 January 2023.

[5] Yogendra Yadav & Suhas Palshikar, ‘Principal State Level Contests and Derivative National Choices: Electoral Trends in 2004-09’ 6 ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL WEEKLY 44 55-62 (2009).

[6] Id.

[7] Sanjay Kumar and Pranav Gupta, ‘Why Last Leg of Campaigning is Crucial in Indian Elections’ (Mint , 26 November 2018) < https://www.livemint.com/Politics/p21NVDGJ15BcSknBnzpPLP/Why-last-leg-of-campaigning-is-crucial-in-Indian-elections.html > accessed 13 January 2023.

[8] Nidhi Jacob and others, ‘In Charts: India’s Political Parties Spent Thousands of Crores on Publicity in the Last Five Years’ (Scroll, 4 October 2021) < https://scroll.in/article/1006842/in-charts-indias-political-parties-spent-thousands-of-crores-on-publicity-in-the-last-five-years > accessed 10 January 2023.

[9] Id.

[10] David J. Anderson, ‘Concurrent Elections and Voter Attention: How voters search for political information in crowded campaign environments’ < http://www.eagleton.rutgers.edu/research/documents/Andersen_ConcurrentElections2011.pdf > accessed 10 January 2023.

[11] Sakshat Chandok, ‘Logistics, Legality, Amendments: Why ‘One Nation One Election’ is a Tedious Task’ (The Quint, 4 September 2023) < https://www.thequint.com/explainers/one-nation-one-election-daunting-task-logistics-amendments-legality> accessed 12 January 2023.

[12] Shri B Phani Kumar and Smt Bela Routh, Simultaneous Elections to Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies (Reference Note No 45, 2016) < https://loksabhadocs.nic.in/Refinput/New_Reference_Notes/English/Simultaneous_election_to_Lok_Sabha_and_State_Legislative_Assemblies.pdf > accessed 12 January 2023.

[13] Constitution of India 1950, Art 356.

[14] Department-Related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice, Feasibility of Holding Simultaneous Elections to the House of People (Lok Sabha) and State Legislative Assemblies (Report No 79, 2015).

[15] SR Bommai v Union of India 1994 AIR 1918.

[16] Venkat Ananth, ‘How President’s Rule in India has been Imposed Over the Years’ (Mint, 27 January 2016) < https://www.livemint.com/Politics/SJ3mETZ7H1cjKNlodkcM8O/How-Presidents-Rule-in-India-has-been-imposed-over-the-year.html > accessed 10 January 2023.

[17] Law Commission of India, Reform of the Electoral Laws (Report No 170, 1999).

[18] Constitution of India 1950, Art 83.

[19] Constitution of India 1950, Art 75(3).

[20] Constitution of India 1950, Art 164(2).

[21] (n 7).

[22] Kesavananda Bharati v State of Kerala (1973) 4 SCC 225.

[23] I R Coelho v State of Tamil Nadu (1999) 7 SCC 580.

[24] Ashok Kumar Thakur v Union of India 1972 (1) SCC 660.

[25] State (NCT of Delhi) v Union of India (2018) 8 SCC 501.

[26] Representation of People’s Act, s 14.

[27] Representation of People’s Act, s 15.

^[28] Manjeev Singh Puri, ‘One Nation, One Election: How Other Democracies Have Dealt with the Issue’ (Indianexpress.com16 September 2023) <https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/one-nation-one-election-international-practices-8942476/> accessed 12 January 2024.

^[29] Yudhajit Shankar Das, ‘One Nation, One Election? India Will Enter a 3-Country Club’ (India TodaySeptember 2023) <https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/one-nation-one-election-india-will-be-among-countries-that-hold-simultaneous-polls-2429716-2023-09-01> accessed 14 January 2024.

^[30] ‘Simultaneous Elections Mere Greed, Not a Necessity’ (orfonline.org2018) <https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/44208-simultaneous-elections-mere-greed-not-a-necessity> accessed 15 January 2024.

* Debjyoti Samaddar, Nishtha Chopra and Shubhangi Verma are members of the Kautilya Society at Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University, Lucknow.