Looming Threat of One Nation, One Election

Former Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court Ajit Prakash Shah believes the One Nation, One Election (ONOE) proposal could alter the manner in which democracy and elections were understood in India because it would reduce the bargaining power of voters, weaken the representative character of elections, and collapse distinct political mandates into one electoral cycle. He raised the practical and Constitutional objections to the ONOE proposal. A government elected in a mid-term poll, he said, might be perceived as insecure or weak, and a chief minister serving only a truncated term might lack the political authority required for effective governance. This, in his view, could lead either to policy paralysis or to short-term and reckless governmental behaviour. He also noted that short tenures would reduce the time available for public debate on policies. Further, Justice Shah disputed the claim that mid-term elections involve a materially different or avoidable financial cost, suggesting that such elections carry much the same basic expenditure as any other election. He also noted that the Bill to bring about simultaneous elections stood to expand the discretionary powers of the Election Commission of India, since it could defer elections to any state assembly if it was of the opinion that it could not be held. His view was that there were no norms guiding the exercise of such powers – a particularly dangerous proposition given the proclivities of the present ECI. In his assessment, the proposal appeared designed less to improve governance than to reshape electoral outcomes.