Pros and cons of simultaneous elections
- In September last year, a High-Level Committee (HLC) led by Ramnath Kovind, former President of India, was formed.
- Objective: To explore the feasibility of holding simultaneous elections for the Lok Sabha, State Legislative Assemblies, and local bodies across all states.
- The HLC has sought responses from various stakeholders, including political parties and the Law Commission.
Background of Simultaneous Elections
- Historically, the Lok Sabha and State legislative assemblies had simultaneous elections during the initial four general election cycles (1952-1967).
- However, subsequent premature dissolutions of the Lok Sabha and legislative assemblies led to staggered elections.
- The concept of simultaneous elections was previously suggested by the Election Commission of India (1982) and the Law Commission (1999).
Case for Simultaneous Elections
- Cost Efficiency
- Estimated costs for general elections to the Lok Sabha and State assemblies are substantial.
- Simultaneous elections could significantly reduce government, party, and candidate expenditures.
- Governance
- Frequent State elections disrupt governance and policy-making, keeping political parties in a perpetual campaign mode.
- There are at least 5-6 State elections that happen every year.
- The Model Code of Conduct during elections limits the announcement of new projects or schemes.
- Frequent State elections disrupt governance and policy-making, keeping political parties in a perpetual campaign mode.
- Administrative Efficiency
- Administrative machinery slows down during elections, impacting the efficiency.
- Paramilitary forces are redeployed for election security, affecting regular duties.
- Social Cohesion: Frequent high-stakes elections contribute to polarizing campaigns, exacerbating societal divisions.
Challenges of Simultaneous Elections
- Federal and Democratic Concerns
- Simultaneous elections may overshadow regional issues, favouring national parties.
- It may have potential impact on the federal structure and feedback mechanism for governments.
- Constitutional Amendments Needed
- Having a fixed five-year term for Lok Sabha and State assemblies requires amendments to Articles 83, 85, 172, and 174.
- Constitutional changes are needed for the amendment of Article 356.
Recommendations from Law Commission and Parliamentary Committee
- Cycling Elections
- Proposal to conduct Lok Sabha and half of State assembly elections in one cycle, with the remaining State elections after two and a half years.
- Requires amendments to the Constitution and the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
- No-Confidence Motion
- Recommends mandatory pairing of a 'no-confidence motion' with a 'confidence motion' in the Lok Sabha or Legislative Assembly.
- In case of premature dissolution, the duration of the newly constituted House should be only for the remainder period of the original House.
- Aims to discourage premature dissolution and encourage exploration of forming an alternate government through realignments.
- Clubbing Bye-Elections: Recommends clubbing bye-elections caused by death, resignation, or disqualification once a year for efficiency.
- Comparison with Other Parliamentary Democracies
- South Africa, Sweden, and Germany have fixed tenures for their legislatures, conducting elections simultaneously.
Conclusion
- There is a lack of consensus among various political parties about the conduct of simultaneous elections.
- The ideal middle ground may be to conduct the Lok Sabha election in one cycle and all State assembly elections in another cycle after two and a half years.
- Other recommendations proposed may be adopted through suitable amendments to ensure the benefits of simultaneous polls without compromising democratic and federal principles.