The proposal for “One Nation, One Election” (ONOE), while backed by the ruling NDA government, has stirred much debate, particularly from opposition parties who view the plan as impractical and detrimental to India’s democratic fabric. While the idea of simultaneous elections might appear efficient on the surface—potentially saving time, resources, and reducing the constant cycle of electioneering—it raises crucial concerns about its long-term impact on India’s federal structure and democratic processes.
One of the primary arguments against ONOE is its potential threat to federalism. Synchronizing Lok Sabha and state assembly elections may lead to a dilution of state-specific issues in favor of broader national agendas. This is particularly problematic in a diverse country like India, where regional concerns often vary significantly from the national discourse. As AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi pointed out, frequent elections enhance democratic accountability by allowing citizens to hold both state and central governments responsible for their actions independently. Collapsing these cycles could blur the distinction between local and national governance.
Moreover, the argument that ONOE undermines democracy is a valid concern. The possibility of a government being forced to hold elections for an “unexpired term” under the proposed model risks creating instability and complicating governance. It could also erode the people’s right to freely elect their representatives in case of a premature dissolution of state assemblies.
From a constitutional perspective, opposition parties, including the Congress and CPI(M), rightly argue that ONOE presents significant hurdles. Amending the Constitution to implement this model would require a two-thirds majority in Parliament, which the NDA does not currently hold. Furthermore, such an amendment could alter the balance of power between the central and state governments, a move that many fear would concentrate more power in the hands of the central government, diminishing the voice of states.
While ONOE might offer administrative benefits, the concerns raised by opposition parties regarding its impact on federalism, democracy, and constitutional integrity are compelling. It is crucial to weigh these factors before pushing through a reform of this magnitude.
The Union government must also demonstrate that its push for “One Nation, One Election” is not a step toward laying the foundation for transforming India into a unitary state.