ONOE, a recipe for authoritarianism

The High-level committee headed by former President Ramnath Kovind, to look at the issue of 'One Nation, One Election' has favoured the proposal of simultaneous election for the Lok Sabha and the State Assemblies. While endorsing the proposal to restructure the election cycle in India, it considers this to be useful in significantly bringing down the expenditure incurred on the huge machinery, mobilisation of security forces and arrangements for holding the polls in a vast country like India. The committee has noted that the 2014 election cost the nation Rs. 3,870 crore. It found the idea favourable also because it would be less disruptive of government functioning which in case of the Lok Sabha and Assembly polls being held separately, gets impacted due to the model code of conduct disrupting the business of the government.

The other positive reasons cited by it include reducing the strain on the administrative apparatus, boosting turnout at the polling booth and ensuring timely implementation of government policies and development goals. While favouring the proposal, it has taken due note of the di f f iculties it poses. Several members of the august committee have disapproved of the idea as it will strike at the federal structure of the nation. Simultaneous polls will cloud the judgement by voters due to mixing of issues as people exercise their franchise in keeping with the performance of the governments at the Centre and the State. Some members argued against such an alignment saying it was unconstitutional as elections at the two levels were being conducted simultaneously till 1967. It was the entry of the regional political parties, splits and defections within the parties, change of alliances and dissolution of state legislatures midway through their tenures due to loss of the trust vote or the impossibility of an alternative government. which led to dissolution of houses prior to their full tenure. While there is no gainsaying that the ‘One Nation, One Election’ concept is high on the agenda of the Bharatiya Janata Party which envisages centralisation of governance and power structure, the nation’s diversity must receive due weightage in a country so bewilderingly diverse as India.

In the past, imposition of Hindi, inequitable allocation of funds to states visà- vis their contribution to the Central exchequer by way of taxes, introduction of NEET for admission to medical colleges, Centre’s unilateral decision to arrogate to itself the power to levy cesses and surcharges on GST and refusal to share them with the states, sharing of river waters, an abortive attempt to expand the cooperative portfolio to the Centre and several other such issues have proved to be contentious and have led to divergence of perceptions between the Centre and states and bedevilled their ties. The frequent dismissal of state governments even led to prolonged litigation till the apex court laid down firm terms and conditions for such a step by the Central government. But the current debate should be essentially seen in context of the BJP's characteristic obsession to concentrate power in the hands of the central government in Delhi. Creeping shadows of autocracy over the central administration make it more than obvious that the BJP dispensation is not comfortable with the dyarchy of power-sharing. Viewed from this perspective, the argument of increasing efficiency of the government is merely a sugar-coated prescription for its authoritarian designs and desires.

The doctrine of separation of powers of the Centre and states was enshrined in the Constitution to preclude the exercise of arbitrary power. The ethnic and linguistic diversity of nation demands opportunity for people to elect representatives who could articulate their aspirations through the ballot box more independently and identifiably. Any attempt to merge the election at the two levels would only encourage authoritarian tendencies and provide a boost to the arbitrary proclivities.