In a recent statement delivered during the monsoon session of Parliament, Minister for Law

and Justice, Arjun Ram Meghwal, expounded upon the potential benefits of implementing
simultaneous Parliament and Assembly elections. The minister suggested that such a
synchronised electoral process would yield substantial savings for both the public exchequer
and political entities. The aforementioned statement alludes to the speech delivered by Prime
Minister Narendra Modi during the occasion of the 73rd Independence Day celebrations
in Delhi. In his address, the Prime Minister advocated for the concept of ‘One Nation, One
Election’. In light of the forthcoming general election in 2024 and the concurrent state
assemblies election, the notion of synchronised elections is resurfacing and engendering
renewed discourse.
ARGUMENT 1: ‘One Nation, One Election’
“The implementation of simultaneous elections for Lok Sabha and state assemblies would
lead to several benefits”
In 2018, the Law Commission presented a comprehensive report in support of the concept of
simultaneous elections. The report proposed that such an approach would yield several
benefits, including cost savings for the public, alleviation of strain on administrative
structures and security forces, enhanced efficacy in the implementation of governmental
policies, and the ability for the administrative machinery of the nation to remain consistently
focused on developmental efforts, rather than being consumed by electoral campaigns.
Nevertheless, it is important to note that the feasibility of conducting simultaneous elections
is hindered by the current constitutional framework. This necessitates the requirement for
amendments in no fewer than five Articles of the Constitution, namely Articles 83, 85, 172,
174, and 356.
According to the draft report of the 21st Law Commission, they have expressed their
conviction regarding the feasibility of conducting simultaneous elections for both the House
of the People and the State Legislatures. Simultaneous elections are often considered a
potential solution to address the issue of the country being in a perpetual state of election
mode.
Also Read | The 360° UPSC Debate | Does India really need state Governors?’

According to Rajiv Mehrishi, a former civil servant, the implementation of simultaneous

elections would lead to significant cost savings for the government and prevent the
duplication of efforts by administrative and law enforcement agencies in conducting multiple
elections. The implementation of this measure has the potential to generate significant cost
reductions for political parties and candidates during their election campaigns. In holding two
separate elections, expenses, including those borne by political parties, nearly double. The
economic costs associated with the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) should also be taken into
consideration. Time overruns have a direct impact on cost overruns. However, it is important
to note that significant expenses are still being accrued due to salaries and other
administrative costs. In addition to the visible costs, it is important to consider the intangible
costs associated with a lack of leadership. Ministers, being politicians, are required to engage
in various activities such as campaigning, candidate selection, and strategic planning for their
respective parties. Despite working 16-18 hours a day, the ministers experience a significant
decrease in the time available for their ministerial duties. The financial and economic costs
are incurred on a recurring basis.
Former Law Minister Kiren Rijiju stated that the department-related Parliamentary standing
committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice, in its 79th report, emphasised
that South Africa holds elections for national and provincial legislatures simultaneously for a
duration of five years, while municipal elections are conducted two years later. In Sweden,
elections for the national legislature (Riksdag), provincial legislature/county council
(landsting), and local bodies/municipal assemblies (Kommunfullmaktige) are scheduled to
take place on a specific date, which is the second Sunday in September, every four years. The
term of Parliament in the UK is regulated by the Fixed-term Parliament Act of 2011.
The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice’s
report from 2015 titled ‘Feasibility of Holding Simultaneous Elections to House of People
(Lok Sabha) and State Legislative Assemblies was compiled under the leadership of E M
Sudarsana Natchiappan. According to the report, the implementation of simultaneous
elections for Lok Sabha and state assemblies would lead to several benefits. These include a
reduction in the significant costs associated with conducting separate elections, the avoidance
of policy paralysis caused by the Model Code of Conduct during election periods, minimised
disruption to the delivery of essential services, and a decrease in the strain on manpower
resources during election time.
Also Read | The 360° UPSC Debate: Is Uniform Civil Code ‘unnecessary and
undesirable’ or ‘justice for all communities’

N.M. Ghatate, the former vice-chairman of the Law Commission wrote in the article ‘Why
simultaneous elections make sense’, “We have a parliamentary democracy with a federal set
up. This system worked fairly well with the Congress dominating the political scenario for
the first two decades since Independence. But with the collapse of the Congress’ dominance,
there emerged strong national and regional parties, each ruling some states with substantial
strength in Parliament. How can stable and efficient governance be brought about in a multi-
party parliamentary system like the one that exists in India? Fortunately, the normal duration
of elected bodies is five years. Article 83 (2), which speaks about the duration, states that the
Lok Sabha “unless sooner dissolved, shall continue for five years…” Same phraseology is
applied for state assemblies vide Article 172. The rider “unless sooner dissolved “ is an
exception.
It is pertinent to note that a no-confidence motion is not mentioned in the Constitution or any
law, for that matter. It finds place in Rule 198 of the Rules and Conduct of Business of the
Lok Sabha, which states that 50 or more members can move a no- confidence motion. If it
succeeds, the government has to resign and if no other party or parties can form the
government, premature elections follow.
The Law Commission of India in its report of 1999 has dealt with the problem of premature
and frequent elections. It had recommended an amendment of this rule on the lines of the
German Constitution, which provides that the leader of the party who wants to replace the
chancellor has to move the no-confidence motion along with the confidence motion. If the
motions succeed, the president appoints him as the chancellor. If such an amendment to Rule
198 is made, the Lok Sabha would avoid premature dissolution without diluting the cardinal
principle of democracy, that is a government with the consent of the peoples’ representatives
with periodical elections.
Also Read | The 360° UPSC Debate: Project Cheetah — Is it problematic, or is it too
early to judge?

ARGUMENT 2: Simultaneous Elections Will Compromise Democracy And Federalism

“The impending demise of federalism is inevitable if simultaneous elections comes in”
As per the analysis of many constitutional scholars, the principle of ‘one nation one election’
undermines the fundamental tenet of federalism, which constitutes an integral component of
our Constitutional framework. India has embraced a federal system of governance. It is
indeed plausible, and frequently observed, for a singular political party to govern the central
government while a distinct party assumes control over the state government.
The present system of elections in India has effectively offered a malleable alternative for
individuals to exercise their agency in selecting state governments that align with the unique
requirements of various regions. The aforementioned attribute endowed India with the
requisite elasticity and adaptability, thereby withstanding the trials of time. The impending
demise of federalism is inevitable if simultaneous elections comes in. The desired outcome
entails the conduction of elections within a unified and comprehensive framework, thereby
superseding any localised concerns or ambitions. The proposal of simultaneous elections
stands in stark opposition to the fundamental principles enshrined within the federal
framework of our Constitution, as well as the inherent flexibility it affords in the realm of
governance selection.
S.Y. Quraishi, the former Chief Election Commissioner, argues that the concept of
simultaneous elections is contradictory to the principles of the Constitution and federalism.
Additionally, it is important to consider the practical challenges that may arise. If
simultaneous elections are conducted and the government loses its majority in the Lok Sabha,
similar to the situation faced by Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s government within 13 days of taking
power, it raises the question of whether new elections would be required in all 29 states, even
if the ruling party holds an absolute majority in those states. What are the potential
consequences for the States when they are affected by electoral decisions made at the Centre?
Simultaneous elections have the potential to blur judgement due to the distinct nature of
national and local issues.
Also Read | The 360° UPSC Debate: Will Digital Personal Data Protection Bill violate
privacy of citizens?

According to Suhas Palshikar, a social and political scientist, the reception of grand proposals
may not always be positive. The nature of democratic politics often leads to chaos, although
there are limitations to how effectively formal legal provisions can address and rectify these
issues. From a practical standpoint, it appears to be a favourable proposition to streamline the
staggered electoral cycle, particularly in cases where there are more than five State elections
occurring annually. The argument is made that the electoral cycle places a heavy burden on
parties and the electoral machinery, but this argument may be misleading or deceptive.
Suhas Palshikar further adds that, if elections were held simultaneously, it is likely that
parties contesting in only one state would still face similar challenges and difficulties. The
complaint appears to prioritise the concerns of national parties over other parties. This
questions the reasons behind the lengthy schedule of the electoral machinery. The need to
move the necessary security forces is driven by logistical requirements. The constraint would
persist even in the scenario of holding simultaneous elections. So, what are the advantages of
conducting all elections simultaneously?
Ashish Khetan, a prominent lawyer, raises the question of what occurs in a scenario where no
single party or coalition of parties holds a majority. Does this imply that states that fail to
provide a clear mandate will be subjected to five years of President’s Rule? What measures
can be taken to ensure that simultaneous polls provide equal opportunities for regional parties
in comparison to national parties? When the assembly polls are separate from the
parliamentary polls, regional parties rely on more direct and personal methods of
communication, such as door-to-door outreach, local meetings, small rallies, and phone call
campaigns, to make up for the limited funds they have compared to larger political parties.
During the Lok Sabha polls, regional parties may face challenges in persuading voters about
their assembly election agenda. This is because the public’s attention is primarily focused on
national issues such as terrorism, national security, and the selection of the next prime
minister. If polls are conducted simultaneously, it is likely that the electoral landscape will
continue to be dominated by significant financial resources and influential individuals. The
level of resourcefulness possessed by a party directly correlates with its ability to exert
control over the public narrative.

What’s the ongoing story- Simultaneous elections are expected to aid growth besides reducing
uncertainty in the minds of investors and other societal stakeholders, according to a paper co-
authored by NK Singh, former Chairperson, Fifteenth Finance Commission, and Prachi Mishra, Chief
of Systemic Division Issues, International Monetary Fund