By Express News Service
Former Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) SY Quraishi spoke to Preetha Nair about the challenges before the high-level committee to make recommendations for holding simultaneous elections to Lok Sabha and state assemblies, besides the feasibility of the proposal. The ‘One Nation One Election’ idea will have to pass through wider consultations, he said.
The high-level panel will make recommendations for holding simultaneous elections. However, three panels have already looked into the matter before. How feasible is the idea?Earlier, the proposal for holding simultaneous polls was extensively examined by three committees — the Law Commission, NITI Aayog, and a Parliamentary Standing Committee. However, these committees failed to offer any concrete solution. Hopefully, the high-powered committee will come up with a convincing remedy. Let us give it a fair chance. Any new solution would need to be discussed across the political spectrum and I hope the committee will be able to achieve consensus. It should also have wider consultation with legal and constitutional experts among other stakeholders. I have neither supported nor opposed the idea of simultaneous polls.
The past committees have made suggestions such as extending or curtailing assembly terms or clubbing elections to achieve the goal of ‘One nation, one election’ gradually. The EC has also scanned these reports. What are the major challenges for such an idea?Suppose, we have achieved simultaneous elections in all states and Lok Sabha. Now, how will we prevent a state government from falling prematurely, keep it under President’s rule for the next four-and-a-half years? That scenario demands a foolproof solution, which should be acceptable to all stakeholders. Besides this, there are several crucial issues such as a hung House, adoption of a no-confidence motion, defection, or any other event that needs a thorough debate. However, we are going in circles and the debate is going nowhere. We have been discussing the challenges of the proposal for the last 10 years. When PM Modi mooted the idea of simultaneous elections in 2014, he said that there should be a national debate. We shouldn’t forget that the government enjoys a huge majority. It has taken a decision but allowed the debate to continue.
The composition of the new committee has also come under criticism that there was no representative of the ECI…I don’t think it is a big issue and it doesn’t make a difference to the committee. The committee has eminent members. I don’t wish to go into the composition of it. The larger the committee, the more difficult the decision-making would be. However, the question in everyone’s mind is what the new remedy it has to offer other than the ones proposed by the past committees.
Many experts have pointed out that the biggest challenge lies in bringing amendments in not less than five Articles 83, 85, 172, 174, and 356 of the Constitution and certain legislative changes to facilitate simultaneous polls. Your take.At least five amendments will be required in the Constitution to facilitate simultaneous polls and it is a huge challenge. Though the idea of synchronized polls has been examined before, the constitutional amendments were the biggest stumbling block so far. This was the main issue pointed out in the draft report submitted by the Law Commission in 2018. That is why it was always a non-starter.
One of the terms of reference of the high-level committee is to examine if constitutional amendments would have to be ratified by the state assemblies. The Law Commission report also suggested that at least 50% of the states should ratify the amendments.The states have to pass the amendments in their assemblies. Only then, a constitutional amendment can be made. Therefore, consulting all stakeholders is an important issue, which the committee will surely do. Even if 50% of states are required to ratify amendments, the question is whether they are willing to do that.
It is anticipated that the government will try to pass the legislation soon. The question in everyone’s mind is if the committee will be able to submit a report by September 18, when the Parliament convenes for a special session to initiate the process….It is highly unlikely that the committee will prepare a report in such a short period as it involves mammoth work. The notification for the committee was issued only on September 2. The committee will take some time to meet and begin its work. It is unrealistic to link it with the upcoming Parliament session. The Parliament session and the committee may have different agendas.
Though India did hold synchronized elections in the past, they were disrupted…We had simultaneous polls in 1952 and 1957 across the country. However, Kerala broke the cycle after the EMS government was dismissed by the Nehru government in 1959. Then separate Assembly elections were held in 1960. In 1962 and 1967, simultaneous polls to Lok Sabha and assemblies were again held. So the cycle was disrupted as early as 1959. We need concrete constitutional and legal solutions to avoid disruptions.
The committee will also examine the modalities of using a single electoral roll and electoral identity card for voters in elections in three tiers. It will also examine the logistics and manpower required, including EVMs, VVPATs, etc. How significant is this?A solution for the demand for a common electoral roll has been pending for long. Perhaps it will require a Constitutional amendment. I hope this committee will resolve the issue. This will address the issue of ‘missing voter names’ in the list.
Cutting huge costs of elections is cited as one of the major reasons behind the idea.Some of the reasons behind the idea are to save huge expenditures, avoid disruptions in governance due to frequent elections, and prolonged imposition of the model code. I’d say we can reduce the expenditure in some other areas. While there is a ceiling on the expenditure of candidates in the fray, the idea is defeated by not having a limit on expenditure by political parties. By putting a cap on expenses by political parties, the costs can be reduced to a large extent.
There are also logistical challenges and financial requirements in conducting simultaneous polls.We would require three times more electronic voting machines (EVMs) if three-tier elections are happening at the same time.
Former Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) SY Quraishi spoke to Preetha Nair about the challenges before the high-level committee to make recommendations for holding simultaneous elections to Lok Sabha and state assemblies, besides the feasibility of the proposal. The ‘One Nation One Election’ idea will have to pass through wider consultations, he said.
The high-level panel will make recommendations for holding simultaneous elections. However, three panels have already looked into the matter before. How feasible is the idea?
Earlier, the proposal for holding simultaneous polls was extensively examined by three committees — the Law Commission, NITI Aayog, and a Parliamentary Standing Committee. However, these committees failed to offer any concrete solution. Hopefully, the high-powered committee will come up with a convincing remedy. Let us give it a fair chance. Any new solution would need to be discussed across the political spectrum and I hope the committee will be able to achieve consensus. It should also have wider consultation with legal and constitutional experts among other stakeholders. I have neither supported nor opposed the idea of simultaneous polls.
The past committees have made suggestions such as extending or curtailing assembly terms or clubbing elections to achieve the goal of ‘One nation, one election’ gradually. The EC has also scanned these reports. What are the major challenges for such an idea?
Suppose, we have achieved simultaneous elections in all states and Lok Sabha. Now, how will we prevent a state government from falling prematurely, keep it under President’s rule for the next four-and-a-half years? That scenario demands a foolproof solution, which should be acceptable to all stakeholders. Besides this, there are several crucial issues such as a hung House, adoption of a no-confidence motion, defection, or any other event that needs a thorough debate. However, we are going in circles and the debate is going nowhere. We have been discussing the challenges of the proposal for the last 10 years. When PM Modi mooted the idea of simultaneous elections in 2014, he said that there should be a national debate. We shouldn’t forget that the government enjoys a huge majority. It has taken a decision but allowed the debate to continue.googletag.cmd.push(function() {googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-8052921-2’); });
The composition of the new committee has also come under criticism that there was no representative of the ECI…
I don’t think it is a big issue and it doesn’t make a difference to the committee. The committee has eminent members. I don’t wish to go into the composition of it. The larger the committee, the more difficult the decision-making would be. However, the question in everyone’s mind is what the new remedy it has to offer other than the ones proposed by the past committees.
Many experts have pointed out that the biggest challenge lies in bringing amendments in not less than five Articles 83, 85, 172, 174, and 356 of the Constitution and certain legislative changes to facilitate simultaneous polls. Your take.
At least five amendments will be required in the Constitution to facilitate simultaneous polls and it is a huge challenge. Though the idea of synchronized polls has been examined before, the constitutional amendments were the biggest stumbling block so far. This was the main issue pointed out in the draft report submitted by the Law Commission in 2018. That is why it was always a non-starter.
One of the terms of reference of the high-level committee is to examine if constitutional amendments would have to be ratified by the state assemblies. The Law Commission report also suggested that at least 50% of the states should ratify the amendments.
The states have to pass the amendments in their assemblies. Only then, a constitutional amendment can be made. Therefore, consulting all stakeholders is an important issue, which the committee will surely do. Even if 50% of states are required to ratify amendments, the question is
whether they are willing to do that.
It is anticipated that the government will try to pass the legislation soon. The question in everyone’s mind is if the committee will be able to submit a report by September 18, when the Parliament convenes for a special session to initiate the process….
It is highly unlikely that the committee will prepare a report in such a short period as it involves mammoth work. The notification for the committee was issued only on September 2. The committee will take some time to meet and begin its work. It is unrealistic to link it with the upcoming Parliament session. The Parliament session and the committee may have different agendas.
Though India did hold synchronized elections in the past, they were disrupted…
We had simultaneous polls in 1952 and 1957 across the country. However, Kerala broke the cycle after the EMS government was dismissed by the Nehru government in 1959. Then separate Assembly elections were held in 1960. In 1962 and 1967, simultaneous polls to Lok Sabha and assemblies were again held. So the cycle was disrupted as early as 1959. We need concrete constitutional and legal solutions to avoid disruptions.
The committee will also examine the modalities of using a single electoral roll and electoral identity card for voters in elections in three tiers. It will also examine the logistics and manpower required, including EVMs, VVPATs, etc. How significant is this?
A solution for the demand for a common electoral roll has been pending for long. Perhaps it will require a Constitutional amendment. I hope this committee will resolve the issue. This will address the issue of ‘missing voter names’ in the list.
Cutting huge costs of elections is cited as one of the major reasons behind the idea.
Some of the reasons behind the idea are to save huge expenditures, avoid disruptions in governance due to frequent elections, and prolonged imposition of the model code. I’d say we can reduce the expenditure in some other areas. While there is a ceiling on the expenditure of candidates in the fray, the idea is defeated by not having a limit on expenditure by political parties. By putting a cap on expenses by political parties, the costs can be reduced to a large extent.
There are also logistical challenges and financial requirements in conducting simultaneous polls.
We would require three times more electronic voting machines (EVMs) if three-tier elections are happening at the same time.
