One Nation One Election: Former CJIs Support, Ex-HC Chiefs Oppose

Table of Contents

• Introduction
• One Nation, One Election: The Proposal
• Former CJIs Support One Nation One Election
• High Court Chief Justices Object
• Political Reactions to the Proposal
• Constitutional Amendments Required
• High-Level Committee on Simultaneous Elections
• Implications for Indian Democracy
• The Way Forward
• Conclusion
• Frequently Asked Questions

Introduction

The concept of “One Nation, One Election” has been a topic of heated debate in India’s political and legal circles. The proposal aims to synchronize the elections for the Lok Sabha (House of the People) and State Legislative Assemblies, holding them simultaneously rather than at different intervals. Recently, this issue has gained momentum with the Union Cabinet’s nod to form a committee to study the feasibility of implementing simultaneous elections.

While the idea has garnered support from several quarters, including former Chief Justices of India (CJIs), it has also faced opposition from some retired High Court Chief Justices. Let’s delve deeper into the various aspects of this contentious issue and explore the potential implications for India’s democracy.

One Nation, One Election: The Proposal

The “One Nation, One Election” proposal envisions a system where elections to the Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies are held simultaneously, once every five years. Proponents argue that this would lead to several benefits, such as:

• Reduced expenditure on conducting frequent elections
• Minimized disruption to governance and policy implementation
• Increased efficiency in the electoral process
• Curbing the influence of black money and corruption in elections

However, critics contend that implementing simultaneous elections would require significant constitutional amendments and could potentially undermine the federal structure of India’s polity.

Former CJIs Support One Nation One Election

Four former Chief Justices of India (CJIs) – Justice Dipak Misra, Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justice Sharad Arvind Bobde, and Justice UU Lalit – have backed the “One Nation, One Election” proposal. They argue that simultaneous elections would ensure stability in governance and allow governments to focus on development rather than being in constant election mode.

Justice Hemant Gupta, a former judge of the Supreme Court, also supported the idea, stating that it would reduce the burden on the exchequer and minimize the disruption caused by frequent elections.

High Court Chief Justices Object

In contrast, three former High Court Chief Justices – Justice AP Shah of the Delhi High Court, Justice Girish Chandra Gupta of the Calcutta High Court, and Justice Sanjib Banerjee of the Madras High Court – have expressed their reservations about the “One Nation, One Election” proposal.

They argue that the idea is “impractical” and could lead to a situation where regional issues and concerns are overshadowed by national politics. Furthermore, they contend that the proposal could undermine the autonomy of state governments and the federal structure of India’s Constitution.

Political Reactions to the Proposal

The “One Nation, One Election” proposal has elicited mixed reactions from political parties across the spectrum. The ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has been a vocal proponent of the idea, with Union Home Minister Amit Shah calling it a “landmark poll reform.”

However, opposition parties, including the Indian National Congress, have criticized the proposal, labeling it a “BJP stunt” aimed at gaining political advantage. They argue that the idea requires extensive deliberation and consensus among all stakeholders before implementation.

Constitutional Amendments Required

Implementing simultaneous elections would necessitate at least five constitutional amendments, according to experts. These include:

1. Amending Article 83 to extend the tenure of the Lok Sabha to a fixed term of five years
2. Amending Article 172 to fix the tenure of State Legislative Assemblies to five years
3. Amending Article 85 to allow the President to dissolve the Lok Sabha only on the advice of the Prime Minister
4. Amending Article 174 to empower the Governor to dissolve the State Legislative Assembly only on the advice of the Chief Minister
5. Amending the Representation of the People Act, 1951, to facilitate simultaneous elections

Critics argue that these amendments could alter the basic structure of the Constitution and require careful consideration.

High-Level Committee on Simultaneous Elections

In a significant move, the Union Cabinet, chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, has given its nod to form a high-level committee to explore the feasibility of holding simultaneous elections. The committee, headed by former President Ram Nath Kovind, will study the various aspects of the proposal and submit its recommendations.

The committee’s mandate includes examining the legal, constitutional, and logistical challenges in implementing simultaneous elections and suggesting a roadmap for the same. The committee is expected to consult with various stakeholders, including political parties, legal experts, and constitutional authorities, before submitting its report.

Implications for Indian Democracy

The “One Nation, One Election” proposal has far-reaching implications for India’s democracy. While proponents argue that it would lead to increased efficiency and stability in governance, critics fear that it could undermine the federal structure and the autonomy of state governments.

Moreover, there are concerns that simultaneous elections could lead to national issues overshadowing regional concerns, thus compromising the representation of diverse interests in the political discourse. The proposal also raises questions about the practicality of implementing such a system in a vast and diverse country like India.

The Way Forward

As the debate on “One Nation, One Election” continues, it is crucial to ensure that any decision is taken after thorough deliberation and consensus among all stakeholders. The high-level committee’s recommendations will play a pivotal role in shaping the future of this proposal.

Political parties, legal experts, and civil society must engage in constructive dialogue to address the concerns and challenges associated with simultaneous elections. Ultimately, any decision should prioritize the strengthening of India’s democracy, upholding the Constitution’s federal structure, and ensuring the representation of diverse interests.

Conclusion

The “One Nation, One Election” proposal has sparked a nationwide debate on the future of India’s electoral system. While the idea has its merits, such as reducing expenditure and minimizing disruption to governance, it also raises valid concerns about the federal structure and the autonomy of state governments.

As the high-level committee examines the feasibility of simultaneous elections, it is essential to approach the issue with an open mind and consider all perspectives. The decision should be guided by the principles of democracy, federalism, and the representation of diverse interests.

In the end, any electoral reform should aim to strengthen India’s democracy and ensure that the voice of every citizen is heard and valued. Only through constructive dialogue and consensus can a path forward be charted for this crucial issue.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What is the “One Nation, One Election” proposal?

   The “One Nation, One Election” proposal envisions holding simultaneous elections for the Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies once every five years, instead of the current system of separate elections at different intervals.

2. What are the arguments in favor of simultaneous elections?

   Proponents argue that simultaneous elections would reduce expenditure, minimize disruption to governance, increase efficiency, and curb the influence of black money and corruption in elections.

3. What are the concerns raised by critics of the proposal?

   Critics argue that implementing simultaneous elections would require significant constitutional amendments, could undermine the federal structure and the autonomy of state governments, and might lead to national issues overshadowing regional concerns.

4. Which former Chief Justices of India support the proposal?

   Former CJIs Justice Dipak Misra, Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justice Sharad Arvind Bobde, and Justice UU Lalit have expressed their support for the “One Nation, One Election” proposal.

5. Which former High Court Chief Justices have objected to the proposal?

   Former High Court Chief Justices – Justice AP Shah (Delhi), Justice Girish Chandra Gupta (Calcutta), and Justice Sanjib Banerjee (Madras) – have voiced their objections to the “One Nation, One Election” proposal.

6. What is the role of the high-level committee formed by the Union Cabinet?

   The high-level committee, headed by former President Ram Nath Kovind, will examine the feasibility of holding simultaneous elections, study the legal, constitutional, and logistical challenges, and suggest a roadmap for implementation.

Source link