One Nation One Election India: A Game-Changer or Threat to Federalism?

India, the world’s largest democracy, is debating a revolutionary electoral reform: One Nation One Election (ONOE). Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s BJP government introduced a bill to synchronize state and federal elections, reigniting a decades-old debate. Here’s a deep dive into the proposal, its implications, and why it’s polarizing politicians.

---

What Is One Nation One Election in India?

India’s multi-tiered democracy currently holds:

• General elections (Lok Sabha) every 5 years.
• State assembly elections at different cycles.
• Local body polls (municipalities, panchayats).

The One Nation One Election plan aims to align all elections into a single cycle every five years. If passed, India would revert to a system last seen between 1951–1967, before political instability fragmented schedules.

---

Key Recommendations from the Kovind Committee

A 9-member panel led by former President Ram Nath Kovind proposed:

1. Hold Lok Sabha and state elections simultaneously.
2. Local body polls within 100 days of national/state votes.
3. If a government collapses, fresh elections would only last until the next synchronized cycle.

---

Will One Nation One Election Boost India’s GDP by 1.5%?

Proponents argue ONOE could:
✅ Save ₹600 billion+ spent on 2019 general elections (Centre for Media Studies).
✅ Reduce policy paralysis caused by frequent Model Code of Conduct periods (800+ governance days lost in 5 years).
✅ Streamline resources (security forces, EVM logistics, administrative costs).

Economists suggest synchronized polls could boost India’s GDP by 1.5% by minimizing disruptions.

---

Challenges & Criticisms: Why Opponents Call It “Undemocratic”

1. Cost vs. Implementation

• Initial setup: ₹92.84 billion needed for new EVMs/VVPATs (2015 parliamentary report).
• Critics like ex-CEC SY Quraishi argue recurring savings are overstated.

2. Federalism at Risk?

Opposition parties (Congress, regional groups) claim ONOE would:
❌ Centralize power, weakening states’ autonomy.
❌ Favor national parties (BJP, Congress) over regional players.

3. Constitutional Hurdles

• Requires amending Articles 83, 172, 356, and the Representation of the People Act.
• Needs ratification by 50% of state assemblies—a steep climb without BJP’s dominance in states.

---

Political Consensus or Conflict?

• Supporters: 32 parties, including BJP allies (Shiv Sena, Akali Dal), cite efficiency and governance benefits.
• Opponents: 15 parties, led by Congress, label it a “threat to parliamentary democracy.”

PM Modi insists, “Frequent elections derail development,” while opposition leader Rahul Gandhi warns “ONOE undermines India’s diversity.”

---

Global Examples & Lessons

The Kovind committee studied:

• Sweden: Holds elections every 4 years (local, regional, national).
• South Africa: Synchronized national/provincial polls.
• Indonesia: Simultaneous presidential/legislative votes.

---

What’s Next for India?

The bill is likely headed to a parliamentary committee for review. With the BJP lacking a two-thirds majority, building cross-party consensus is critical.

---

Key Takeaways

1. ONOE could save costs but requires massive upfront investment.
2. Federal vs. Central power debate intensifies.
3. Constitutional amendments pose legal challenges.

For more on India’s electoral history, read our analysis of BJP’s 2019 Victory.

---

Internal Links:

• How EVMs Work in India
• Indian Federalism: A Complete Guide

External Links:

• Election Commission of India
• NITI Aayog Report on Simultaneous Elections