Ramesh Arora
India is the largest democracy of the world and most vibrant electoral democracy. Our constitution has adopted democracy and we have full faith that unity in diversity is basic spirit of India. we can make progress only when democracy works properly. We are experiencing elections in different states and various issues are involved including local issues, and issues of national importance. Huge expenditure is involved , security arrangements required, model code of conduct stops every new initiative , political leaders use to formulate policies keeping in view the interest of public, especially the agenda is manifested in such a manner, which can bring them in power.
Statesmanship and decision about general development do not find space, because winning election is of paramount consideration of each party and leader. Frequent election are in the interest of the state in federal set up or not, is a big question searching for its answer.
In an address on National Law Day 2017, Prime Minister Narendra Modi ones again raised issue of simultaneous election to Parliament and all State Assemblies and said there is need ( One Nation One Election).
PM of India Narendra Modi
Modi cited 4 reasons
* Massive Expenditure
* Diversion of Security and other staff from primary duties
* Impact of Governance due to Model Code of Conduct and
* Disruption to normal public life .
It is not a new concept. In fact, after independence the country was holding elections simultaneously in states and for Central Govt, till 1967. Now its time to analyse whether “one Nation One Election” will be beneficial for the country or not.
The Election Commission put forth this idea as early as 1983 and thereafter “the Law Commission headed by Justice BP Jeevan Reddy in May 1999 Report said (we must go back to the situation where the election to Lok Sabha and all the Legislative Assemblies are held at once )
Let us see other factors also in 1977. Kerala went for polls with rest of the country and turn out of voters increased by 20 percent as compared to elections which were held separately in Kerala from rest of the country .
In 1999 when other states like Karnataka, Maharashtra and Andhar Pradesh went to polls with rest of the country voter turnout increased by 11.5 percent as compared to election held separately.
Nikolnayi’s calculation shows that even in Northeastern states between 1971 and 2004 voter turnout in Arunachal Pradesh and Assam were 21 percent and 17 percent higher when the states election were held with the National elections and likewise in Manipur and Meghalaya voter turnout during the same period increased almost 20 percent. It reflects a healthy trend and more participation which is as per basic spirit of democracy.
The NITI Aayog Report authored by Bibek Debroy and Kishore Desai advocated simultaneous elections on two premises among other things- disruption in governance due to imposition of model code of conduct due to frequent elections, curtailing exorbitant expenses borne in conducting repeated elections.
The Election Commission incurs approx a total cost approx 8000 crore to conduct all state and federal election in a span of 5 years and 600 million Indian voters voted in the election and in case of all the states and Center combined incurred an expenditure of nearly 30 lakh crore in financial year 2014. So this is to counter the plea raised by persons this favoring simultaneous election .They say this expenditure is very low to maintain system of world largest democracy. But to my opinion huge expenditure of political parties leads to corruption nepotism and favoritism.
So far as model code of conduct is concerned for elections, it was agreed to by all political parties in 1979 and prohibits the ruling parties from incurring capital expenditure for certain projects after election was announced. It is time when we need to build up consensus among all political parties. Although one can advance logic that model code of conduct is confined to a particular state.
Governance paralyses due to elections because not only local parties of a particular state but national parties have to involve and most of the leaders are left with no other option expect to devote full time to a particular state holding elections in order to win the same.
Local parties will have a fear in their mind that there issues will not be registered properly like other issues faced by the country . It is also not acceptable because local issues do have a power to penetrate in the minds of voters and it is also seen that the impact of local issues is sometimes more than general issues and voter is vigilant about his rights.
The most important question that requires answer is that if any elected State Government chooses to dissolve its assembly and call for fresh elections. If elections are to be held simultaneously , states will have to give up this power and wait for a national election schedule.
Some other voices including former Chief Election Commissioner SY Quarishi says in an interview “from the Election Commission point of view this is the easiest thing to happen. The voter is the same , polling station are the same, and the security needed is the same. once the voters enter the polling stations whether he votes for one election or two or three …….it is the same thing”
It is clear that political parties and ministers are always in election mode and statesmanship is covered and over powered by short term achievements for political gains. Holding simultaneous election will give them complete 4 years to work in their constituencies.
From 1951-1967 India followed this scheme but due to premature dissolution of some states, the system got disturbed. In case of hung assemblies and due to dissolution of an assembly due to vote of no confidence, the system may find some problems.
We are successful in implementing one nation one tax and former President Pranab Mukherjee also supported this initiative . It will be time saving and criticism in elections will also be not for the sake of criticism but will be done with logic and having foundation.
PM Narendra Modi’s call “One Nation One Election”is supported by Uttar Pradesh through its CM Yogi Aditya Nath indicating that his state is ready in spite of the fact that 4 years are remaining and under his leadership a team of experts under leadership of Health Minister Sidharth Nath Singh has been constituted to see the possibility of one election with one voter list linked with Aadhar Card so that everyone who turns 18 automatically gets added.
Samajwadi party’s leader and former CM Akhilesh Yadav had supported this idea and said it must be linked with Aadhar.
Although in 2014 Lok Sabah Elections highest voter turnout was there but election commissioner of India figures show that it is just marginally higher than the levels witnessed in 1967. Last time when all elections of State and Parliament were held at the same time the voter turnout was 5 percent higher. It means that almost 600 million additional voters were added over the years, just about 30 million turned up to cast their vote, require more awareness among the voters. To my mind, we have to build consensus for One Nation One Election. It is the responsibility of all the parties to join deliberation and give there positive suggestion so that reforms can make progress and ultimately, it should not spoil our federal system and at the same time it will also strengthen state and central relationship and further both be able to understand the issues of local and national importance and will further get a time of 4 years minimum to give good governance . Although we have to bring some changes in laws to get it fully implemented.
(The author is Member Legislative Council J&K)
feedbackexcelsior@gmail.com
Follow our WhatsApp channel