[This Note was submitted to the Cabinet Secretary by E-Mail on 30-10-2024]
The goal placed before the Kovind Committee was to find ways and means to conduct simultaneous elections in the country to avoid holding frequent elections, to reduce massive expenditure in elections, to reduce deployment of security forces and other electoral officers for significantly prolonged periods for conducting elections, and to minimize disruption in developmental work on account of prolonged application of Model Code of Conduct (MCC) during elections.
What do we mean by “simultaneous elections”. The dictionary meaning of the word “simultaneous” is – happening or being done at exactly the same time or existing or occurring at the same time or exactly coincident. In the present context, the word “simultaneous” can be interpreted in two ways, namely, conducting all elections in the country (Loka Sabha, State Legislatures and Local Bodies) at a time on a specified date or conducting all elections in a given Parliamentary constituency at a time on a specified date.
The first interpretation is ruled out, as the elections to Lok Sabha could not held so far even in the present dispensation on any single day. The Lok Sabha general elections were spread over different phases. The 2019 general elections for Lok Sabha were held in 7 phases (each phase indicating a set of States / UTs going for polls on the same day) starting from 11th April 2019 and ending with 19th May 2019. The 2024 general elections for Lok Sabha were also held in 7 phases starting from 19th April 2024 and ending with 1st June 2024. Accordingly, the duration of Model Code of Conduct (MCC) was also different in each phase in both the cases. When nothing was preventing them from holding simultaneous elections, the ECI was able to conduct elections with the available resources even to the Lok Sabha not on a single day but during a period of over two months. When this is the case for only Lok Sabha elections, if the target is to conduct elections to State Legislatures and Local Bodies or only to State Legislatures, along with those of Lok Sabha, it cannot be met on a single day, unless a duration, say, over two to three months is chosen. This cannot be strictly called “simultaneous elections” as per its literal interpretation, unless it is specifically defined to be so. The Committee has not recommended the inclusion of any definition for this purpose.
If we go by the second interpretation, the target could be to conduct all elections in any given Parliamentary Constituency (Loka Sabha, State Legislative Assembly constituencies and Local Bodies) at a time on a specified date. This is possible with the available resources. Subject to this condition, if different dates are chosen over a period of two to three months (say, seven phases) to conduct all the elections in all the Parliamentary Constituencies in the country, and if the period is so chosen as to cause minimal disturbance to the public, our purpose would be served. But the Committee seems to have recommended conducting such elections only to the Lok Sabha and State Legislatures. They have recommended conducting elections to local bodies within 100 days thereafter. This will defeat the very purpose of conducting simultaneous elections. It will also result in undue hardships to the public because the MCC would come into play again within 100 days and all activities relating to elections would have to be enacted again. Thus, the Committee’s recommendations are neither totally in favour of simultaneous elections nor wholly against it.
One of the purposes of conducting simultaneous elections is to reduce the costs. If everything goes in the normal course, i.e., every House / Assembly constituted works for its full term, undoubtedly conducting simultaneous elections to Lok Sabha and State Legislatures will reduce costs. But, in case of premature dissolutions of State Legislative Assemblies, the Kovind Committee recommended for conducting elections for such Assemblies only for their left-over or unexpired terms, so that they will catch up with simultaneous general elections after expiration of those terms. Although, this method is convenient to hold simultaneous general elections in the country, the Committee seems to have not examined as to what extent conducting elections for left-over or unexpired terms would be cost-effective. With the increase in the number of premature dissolutions, the cost would definitely go up. At times, situations may arise to conduct Assembly elections for a left-over term of less than one year. Such cases could be seen as a mockery of democracy. The Kovind Committee seems to have not considered such eventualities and trivialities.
The Committee recommended dichotomizing the implementation process of its recommendations on the basis of ease conceived in getting constitutional amendments passed as per due process. Recognizing that the solutions suggested by them require constitutional amendments, the Committee recommended that those that do not require ratification by States may be taken up first and those that require may be taken up thereafter. The Committee recommended implementing the recommendations on simultaneous elections to House of the People and State Legislative Assemblies (which does not necessitate ratification by the States) in the first step.
In the second step recommended by the Committee, introduction of Article 324A (for enabling simultaneous elections in Panchayats and Municipalities with the General elections of the House of the People and the State Legislative Assemblies) and amendment in Article 325 (for enabling Single Electoral Roll and Single Elector’s Photo Identity Card, to be prepared by the Election Commission of India in consultation with the State Election Commission(s) to replace the electoral roll prepared under Article 325 or under Articles 243K and 243ZA) are to be taken up. Since these amendments touch upon State subjects (Entry 5 of Schedule VII, Part IX, and Part IX A of the Constitution of India), ratification by the States will be required under Article 368 (2).
Postponing the applicability of single electoral rolls for all the elections and conducting elections to local bodies separately but within 100 days will defeat the very purpose and spirit of going for simultaneous elections. Discrepancies, if any, noticed within 100 days after conducting general elections (Lok Sabha and State Legislatures) for the purpose of rectification before conducting elections to local bodies will point a finger at the ECI and its impartiality. When we say, “one Nation and one election”, it implies “one electoral roll” also and one election to not only Lok Sabha and State Legislatures but also to local bodies. Will the exercise of preparing an electoral roll and conducting simultaneous elections to Lok Sabha and State Legislatures, thereafter updating the electoral rolls and conducting elections to local bodies within 100 days, and conducting separate elections to State Legislatures as and when required (in cases of premature dissolutions), which undoubtedly involves revision of electoral rolls again, be cost effective and is it worth it? How much are we going to save by doing all this? Are we going to reduce prolonged deployment of security forces and other electoral officers for conducting elections and if so, to what extent? Are we going to minimize disruption to developmental work on account of the application of MCC?
Some of the other incidental questions, such as lower voter turnout and glaring discrepancies in electoral rolls, have not been looked into by the Committee or the ECI. These questions have a heavy bearing on the working of the democracy.
Although India is the largest democracy in the world, in terms of voter turnout in elections, its position (around 89) among other countries is not very encouraging. The ECI seem to have not studied the reasons for apathy among the voters immediately after any election. It has also not examined the ways and means of improving services at polling booths especially from the voters’ point of view, except laying emphasis on security arrangements. Providing services to literates and illiterates in the same way at polling booths resulting in lengthy queues at the booths and heavy waiting times may be the reason for lower voter turnout. If the environment at the polling booths is highly discouraging, the voter turnout is likely to be very poor. Perhaps, increasing the number of polling booths and arranging at least four self-operable kiosks for exercising franchise by educated voters along with the traditional arrangement for other voters in each polling booth will enhance voter turnout and make the election process more meaningful.
Other issues are commissions and omissions in electoral rolls. The electoral rolls have to be validated with other sources for assessing their veracity. For example, in a given ward in urban area or in a village, the number of voters as per electoral rolls must be consistent with the Census population of the age group 18+. If the deviation is very high, then the ECI has to get the Electoral roll examined at ground level in great detail. Such studies bring more respect to the independence of the ECI and earn public trust in its working.
Unless the fundamental questions are conclusively and convincingly answered, it would not be wise to hastily move ahead to implement the recommendations of the Committee.
Ranganadham 
very objective assessment.
LikeLike
One Nation One Election is indeed a noble idea that needs to be adopted as there shall be multiple benefits of immense magnitude, already mentioned in the Commission’s Report and the Comments above. There are however administrative constraints that necessitate dilution of its implementation, making it a farce as pointed out in the comments above.
Hence, there is a need to look at the issue denovo. All the administrative and security concerns are related to conduct of voting through EVMs or ballot papers. In today’s digital era both these archaic methods of conducting polling need to be dumped sooner than later. It is surprising that the Commission has neither recommended nor mentioned or even considered adopting ‘Online Voting’ that has the potential to resolve all our concerns related to elections viz expenditure, security, low voter turnout, rigging and frequent interruptions in the government functioning.
In case adhar cards are linked to Voter ID or we adopt Biometric Voter ID, the voters can vote online on their mobile applications from the comfort of their houses. This application can have double or triple levels of verification to include biometric recognition, OTP, security question etc, etc.
Some online polling booths (say ten percent of the existing numbers) may still be required during the transition phase for the voters, who may not have the facility to vote online at home. The whole issue can be deliberated upon by a committee of experts headed by people like Bharat.
A number of skeleton and dry runs including mock elections should be conducted to identify and resolve the glitches before its final implementation. Otherwise, it has the potential of converting into a flop idea like many other good initiatives of the government during the past decade.
In case online voting is implemented successfully, One Nation One Election shall be one of its multiple other bye products.
LikeLike