CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF ONE NATION ONE ELECTION
The High-level Committee (HLC) on One Nation, One Election — headed by former President Ram Nath Kovind — submitted its report to President Draupadi Murmu on Thursday (March 14).
The 18,626-page report consists of 11 chapters plus Annexures. One of the chapters — Chapter VI — deals with the concerns raised by those who oppose simultaneous elections on various grounds.
The chapter provides clarifications regarding four such concerns.
IS IT UNCONSTITUTIONAL & AGAINST DOCTRINE OF BASIC STRUCTURE?
THE CONCERN: The report says the opponents of simultaneous elections argue that they are unconstitutional as they require for premature dissolution of state Legislative Assemblies which would be “against the will of the people”.
The opponents also claim that as the Constitution mandates fixed terms for Parliament and Assemblies, any changes made to the terms would be against the basic structure of the Constitution.
THE CLARIFICATION: According to the report, there have been instances of Legislative Assemblies or Parliament being dissolved sooner than five years due to a lack of stable majorities or political instability despite the numbers.
The report highlights that Articles 83 and 172 say the term shall be five years and no longer, but don’t fix the minimum number of years of the term at five years.
IS IT AGAINST DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES?
CONCERN: One Nation, One Election would hamper the electoral process. The scheme would also violate the rights of citizens.
CLARIFICATION: The report rejects the claim and says that simultaneous elections would rather ensure the best utilisation of time and resources of those involved in the electoral process. They would lead to a curtailment of “the role of financial resources, which is one of the biggest concerns when it comes to free and fair elections.”
One Nation, One Election would also result in better governance as governments “would not be driven by populist measures”. Simultaneous elections neither stop someone from voting or participating in elections nor dismantle the current system of free and fair elections.
DOES IT UNDERMINE FEDERALISM?
CONCERN: Simultaneous elections would violate the rights of the states.
CLARIFICATION: The report counters the concern by mentioning Articles 327 and 328, which talk about the powers of Parliament and states over making provisions with respect to elections.
- Article 327 allows Parliament to “make provision with respect to all matters relating to, or in connection with, elections to either House of Parliament or to the House or either House of the Legislature of a State including the preparation of electoral rolls, the delimitation of constituencies and all other matters necessary for securing the due constitution of such House or Houses.”
- Article 328 says that states can legislate in relation to elections to their Legislative Assembly but to the extent it is not covered by parliamentary legislation.
DOES IT FAIL TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF HUNG PARLIAMENT/ASSEMBLY?
CONCERN: Numerous political parties have said the scheme pertaining to One Nation, One Election doesn’t have any provisions to solve the problem of a hung Parliament/Assembly.
CLARIFICATION: The report talks about the Sarkaria Commission, which addressed the issue and gave suggestions to address the challenge. When there is no majority, the Governor can do the following things in the same order of preference: 1) A pre-election coalition should be invited to form the government; 2) Invite the largest party to stake the claim with the support of others, including independents; 3) A post-election coalition of parties can also be invited; 4) A post-election coalition in which some parties in the coalition form the government, and other support it from outside.
Note: Connect with Vajirao & Reddy Institute to keep yourself updated with latest UPSC Current Affairs in English.
Note: We upload Current Affairs Except Sunday.
