THE IMPACT OF "ONE NATION, ONE ELECTION" ON POLITICAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND VOTER ENGAGEMENT IN INDIA: A COMPARATIVE STUDY BY - PRIYANSHI MANYURA
THE
IMPACT OF "ONE NATION, ONE ELECTION" ON POLITICAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND
VOTER ENGAGEMENT IN INDIA: A COMPARATIVE STUDY
AUTHORED BY - PRIYANSHI MANYURA
Abstract
India’s stated idea of holding “One
Nation, One Election” (ONOE) therefore seeks to align Indian elections to
General, or Lok Sabha polls for the lower house of the federal parliament and
all the State Legislative Assemblies, possibly the local bodies as well. It is
argued that ONOE can democratise governance, cut costs of elections, and
enhance administration. But the advancement of the technique is currently under
criticism due to its impact on political responsibility, voter participation
and federalism. This research paper evaluates the implications of ONOE on
political accountability and voter turnout in India and relates this to other
countries, which conduct synchronized elections, for instance, South Africa,
Sweden, and Germany. In this context, the paper analyses how ONOE may transform
democratic systems of India through this comparative lens[1].
Keywords: One Nation One Election, political
accountability, voter engagement, simultaneous elections, staggered elections,
federalism, regional interests, comparative analysis, voter turnout, electoral
reforms, political participation, democratic processes, governance stability, political
discourse, regional parties, election fatigue, administrative efficiency.
Introduction
The ONOE concept is back in the
political discussions of India and extended the concept by a committee headed
by the former President Ram Nath Kovind. The proposal has received many
commendations and criticism due to the argument that co-ordinate voting is
effective while other people have speculated some risky effects on the federal
framework, assorted culture, and voter apathy and motivation. This research paper
seeks to analyze ONOE's potential impact on two critical aspects of democracy:
political accountability and voters turnout.
Political accountability may
therefore be described as the processes by which people that are entrusted to
represent others in governance are answerable to the people for the actions and
policies they undertake. Voter mobilization relates to the extent and intensity
of the public participation in the voting business, which is typically
expressed in terms of voters’ turnout, political awareness as well as the
capability of the voters in making the right decisions. Hence, by comparing it
with countries carrying out synchronized elections this paper seeks to
understand how ONOE could impact these two facets of democracy in India.[2]
Recent
Developments
The One Nation, One Election or ONOE
idea was cleared by the Union Cabinet in September 2024 as per suggestions
given by the high-powered committee presided over by former president Ram Nath
Kovind. The committee’s document runs to 18, 626 pages and plumbs for holding
Lok Sabha and state assemblies’ elections together as part of the first step
The high level committee received over 20000 feedbacks out of which 81 per cent
have supported the above proposition. The 2019 elections reportedly cost
approximately Rs 60,000 crore, highlighting the financial implications of
staggered elections.
Recent political discourse reveals
significant concerns from opposition parties regarding:
·
Possible
elimination of regional parties as well as the federal system
·
Democratic
challenges that empower the constitution
·
Effects
on state sovereignty as well as local government
These changes would involve
ammendments to Articles 83, 85, 172, 174; and article 356 dealing with
President’s Rule. More importantly, the first phase that would cover the
implementation of the reform in the Lok Sabha and state assemblies does not
necessarily need state amendment of the Constitution.[3]
STATE
SUPPORT AND IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE
State Support Status
As of September 2024, the support for
ONOE among states and political parties includes:
·
Supporting
Parties: 32 parties having 271 members in the Lok Sabha (including 240 from
BJP), such as BJP, NPP, AJSU, JD(U), etc.
·
Opposing
Parties: Congress, AAP, DMK, TMC and fifteen other parties.
Implementation
Requirements
To implement ONOE:
·
Demands
approval of 362 vote in the Lok Sabha where 50 percent require support from
two-thirds majority.
·
Current
NDA strength: 293 Members of Parliament (52 votes short in Rajya Sabha and 72
in Lok Sabha).
Impact on State
Assemblies
If implemented by 2029:
·
There
will be 17 states with assemblies for less than 3 years.
·
Ten
states with new governments in the next fiscal year, that is in 2028, will have
one year terms.
·
Only
half of the states can sustain full five-year terms.
Of course, this will mean a
challenging process of tapering between liberal-democratic principles in order
to avoid clashes of electoral cycles.[4]
Historical Context of
Elections in India
Democracy in India can be traced from
the time of India’s gaining of independence in 1947. For seventeen years
between 1951 and 1967, India had synchronized it’s general elections for the
Lok Sabha and for the State Assemblies. However, due to the political
instability leading to defections and the frequent premature dissolution of the
state assemblies in the 1960s, this practice started diluting and such current
form is with the staggered election cycles.
With regard to recent developments,
the periodicity of elections have been pinned as the cause of the interrim
government’s lack of focus on delivering on its term-long agenda in favor of
immediate electoral gain. The introduction of ONOE is intended for preventing
these disruptions by synchronizing electoral cycles, though the main subject of
discussion lies in the question of how this shift might affect political
responsibility and citizens’ voting behaviors.
Political
Accountability and ONOE
1.
Theoretical Framework of Political
Accountability
Political
accountability smoothes the dynamics of governance by ensuring that
representatives of the people keep close touch with their voters / principals.
It is supported by regular polls because people can change their
representatives based on work accomplishment or owe, fraud cases, etc. Other
scholars including Robert Dahl has noted that a key characteristic of democracy
is the holding of election from which citizens can be able to vote in, or vote
out representatives that will shape governments’ actions.
As the
system operative in the current context of India, staggered elections afford
multiple check points across the layers of governance so that voters can judge
their leaders consistently. The ONOE model though more efficient and effective
in enabling policy implementation by removing policy issues from the politics
of polarized elected representatives would decrease the frequency of such
check-points and therefore reduce the chances of voters holding their
representatives to account on these policies.
2.
Impact of Simultaneous Elections on Accountability
In case of ONOE system voting it is a
possibility that the people’s vote events for national and state level
representatives will shift together, possibly minimizing voters’ chance to
differentiate between national and state arenas. They suggest that national
parties can control the electoral conversation while side-lining local issues
that regional parties often champion adequately. Thus, state level of
accountability can get diminished for the simple reason that people are more
likely to care is national rather than state-oriented stories.
In the same way, it is possible that
synchronized elections might reduce the frequency with which representatives
should interact with their electorate through advertising and campaigns, which
might prompt lethargy. Frequent election currently makes politician to be
sensitive with their electorates because any signal of an early election,
politicians would have to deal with local hearts. ONOE could alleviate this
pressure resulting in minimization of accountability processes and structures.
3.
International Comparisons of
Accountability
South Africa, Germany and Sweden are some of the countries that
exercise synchronized election. These countries provide valuable insights into
how simultaneous elections can affect political accountability:
In South Africa, elections to
the National Assembly and the provincial legislatures take place concurrently
after every five years. On the one hand, this system guarantees stability;
however, others opine that it cuts the possibility of the provincial
governments’ responsibilities, as national concerns prevail on the electoral
list.
Germany holds its Bundestag and state
legislature at different intervals but the Chancellor in Germany is elected at
the same time as the Bundestag. Here legal responsibilities are retained at a
very high level owing to the distinct federalism and the coalition politics,
where every state has representation.
Elections in Sweden are
scheduled to be centralized and decentralized at the same time after every four
years. While the practice has enhanced efficiency in governance there are
several arguments than point to the fact that the monarchy diminishes local
representation since the voters mainly focus on the national results.
These developments indicate that
co-ordinated election periods can improve governance stability at the national
level although increases the tendencies of lowering local responsibility and
accountability to the people[5].
4.
ONOE and Accountability in India's
Federal Context
The governmental system of India is
highly centralized and emphasis a lot on the independence of individual states.
There is no doubt that regional parties serve a vital purpose of speaking for
regional concerns especially where there is regional ethnic, linguistic, and/or
economic endowment. According to ONOE, it can be predicted that potential
national parties can dominate regional calls and reduce the state’s power in
politics and responsibilities.
Additionally, the potential of having
long term presidential rule in states when governments collapse mid term under
ONOE opens a dangerous can of governance deficit. Such periods could still
weaken accountability slightly, as appointed officials might sit in for elected
members during such periods as administrators.
VOTER
ENGAGEMENT AND ONOE
1.
Understanding Voter Engagement
This is a system of features
characterising the citizens’ activity in a voting process, including voter
turnout, political consciousness and participation in electoral campaigns. Voter
turnout is another test to the population’s democracy since it shows the level
of encouragement voters have towards leadership choices.
The usefulness is situated in the
fact that working with different Election Commission and political parties
voter engagement is influenced by frequency of election, the importance of
electoral issues and political competition. Staggered elections at the moment
present the people with several chances to vote in different degree of
government, which should increase overall turnout.
2.
Possible Impacts of ONOE on the Voting
Public
Supporters of ONOE postulated that
the proposed system has the potentiality of eliminating what may be termed
election exhaustion which might un-favourably affect the voters’ turnout. ONOE could
bring electoral campaigns which are normally held at different times into one
period and hence increase public awareness of the electoral process and also
work to bring down electoral costs for the aspiring politicians.
On the other hand, opponents have
argued that simultaneous elections could indeed have the worst impact. Voters
in context of synchronous election can end up being overawed by a plethora of
candidates or issues that may be up for a poll, and therefore end up not voting
or voting inappropriately, especially the less informed or lower order voters. The
simple apprehension that one is being confronted with the task of having to
vote for representatives for multiple levels of government in a go means that
the possibility of having a higher percentage of invalid votes and less
informed votes is very high.
3.
Comparative Analysis of Voter Engagement
in Countries with Simultaneous Elections
This is a system of features
characterising the citizens’ activity in a voting process, including voter turnout,
political consciousness and participation in electoral campaigns. Higher voter
turnout is a sign of a mature democracy because it people will participate in
the processes affecting them.
The usefulness is situated in the
fact that working with different Election Commission and political parties
voter engagement is influenced by frequency of election, the importance of
electoral issues and political competition. Staggered elections at the moment
present the people with several chances to vote in different degree of
government, which should increase overall turnout.
4.
Possible Impacts of ONOE on the Voting
Public
Supporters of ONOE postulated that
the proposed system has the potentiality of eliminating what may be termed
election exhaustion which might un-favourably affect the voters’ turnout. ONOE
could bring electoral campaigns which are normally held at different times into
one period and hence increase public awareness of the electoral process and
also work to bring down electoral costs for the aspiring politicians.
On the other hand, opponents have
argued that simultaneous elections could indeed have the worst impact. In a
synchronized election, the voters might be besee by several candidates in
addition to issues making it complicated to cast an informed vote and therefore
less informed or first time voters may disengage.. The simple apprehension that
one is being confronted with the task of having to vote for representatives for
multiple levels of government in a go means that the possibility of having a
higher percentage of invalid votes and less informed votes is very high.
Financial
Implications of Elections
Financial Burden of
Staggered Elections
The financial burden of conducting
elections in India is significant, with estimates suggesting that the country
spends thousands of crores on electoral processes every few years. The frequent
need for electoral management and campaigning can strain governmental
resources, diverting funds from essential services and development programs.
Table 1: Financial
Implications of Staggered vs. Simultaneous Elections in India
Financial
Benefits of ONOE
It is believed that holding elections
at the same time would cut down election expenses, and help save a lot of
money. The primary benefits of adopting ONOE include:
1.
Reduced Election Management Costs: Since elections occur after a long period, most of the basic
expenses like recruitment and training of polling officers, logistics among
would be greatly reduced. There could be some synergies which could be realized
through the consolidation of the electoral process in terms of administrative
structures.
2.
Streamlined Campaigning: Politicians and the participating political parties would
also be in a better position to manage their available resources better. Thus,
having multiple campaigns within a short time, opportunities for a focused
campaign on a single election cycle are likely to decrease the costs of
campaigns.
3.
Economic Stability: The electoral systems, especially the frequent ones will stagnate
governance and policy execution thus causing an upset in the macroeconomic situation.
Through on-going Non party elections, which means holding less often than the
present parliamentary elections, ONOE could result in a stable political
climate financially suitable for economic development.
4.
Savings on Security Arrangements: Security costs that are used during several elections are
likely to be high. The aggregation point here is that during multiple
elections, the security personnel and the security facilities needed are fewer
in number hence less expensive.
5.
Administrative Efficiency: The bureaucracy associated with holding elections in
several phases, as often done during this crisis period, may be reduced as
could the administrative bottlenecks. This efficiency may help to releases
government funds for other social and welfare spending and for development
projects.[6]
Table 2: Comparative Costs of
Elections in Selected Countries with Simultaneous Elections[7]
Key challenges of the "One Nation, One
Election" proposal, along with some official data:
This of course, brings the challenges
of One Nation, One Election into perspective and as such should not be seen as
indispensable goals of press freedom.
1. Violation of Constitutional
Structure: Co-terminus elections may also call for infringement of the federal
nature of the Constitution of India which envisages different electoral terms
for the Union and the State.
2. Infringement on Election Commission's
Authority: The proposal may virtually put the Election Commission of India as
the organisation tasked with the duty of overseeing free and fair elections in
India in peril.
3. Basic Structure Doctrine: Free and
fair elections is also guarded by the Supreme Court through its Basic Structure
Doctrine, which is obviously vulnerable to simultaneous elections.
4. Logistical Challenges: The
coordination of running another general election across a big chunk of the
country also come with many challenges such as mobilization of resources and
security matters.
5. Impact on Federalism: Synchronization
of state electoral cycles with national ones may decrease the state’s
independence and allow the federal structure itself to contradict federalism.
6. Dissolution Complications:
Interference with mid-term dissolution of assemblies could in a way cause
synchronization with the election cycle, thereby leading to governance
problems.
7. Voter Confusion: In some cases, it
may complicate for voters to distinguish national from state matters, and this
can lead to the making of wrong voting decision.
8. Potential Legal Challenges: A major
public law issue that may arise as a challenge to ONOE is with reference to its
legal fossibility in most courts as pertains federalism and representative
democracy.
9. Risk of Single-Party Dominance: The
problems of co-ordination and of putting forward candidates may be more easily
solved by large national parties than by smaller parties or regional parties
and this could lead to a reduction in the political pluralism of the country.
Official
Data
1. Economic Impact: The Kovind Committee
has recommended the implementation of the policy of holding simultaneous
elections and predicted that the measure would increase the country’s Gross
Domestic Product by 1.5 percent in the year of the implementation, which is
equal to ?4.5 lakh crore in financial year 2024.
2. Election Costs: The expenditure
incurred in Lok Sabha elections has risen to possibly as high as ?60,000 crore
in 2019. If ONOE were to be adopted, these costs could be minimized because
resources utilized in the various processes of an election may be obtained and
reused.
3. Public Spending Increase: According
to the report, there are likelihoods of higher increase in public spending of
17.67% subsequent to simultaneous election episodes underlined by higher growth
rates tied to electoral synchronizations.
4. Fiscal Deficit: There is expectation
that the fiscal deficit could rise by 1.28 percent in the two years surrounding
concurrent elections owing to growing public spending.
5. The following challenges as well as
data points show the difficulties in application of the “One Nation, One
Election” idea and show some possible advantages with several major concerns.
Analysis
Of Voters Turnout And Engagement
However, the use of ONOE brings
concerns of voters’ turnout/ participation into more examination by the
governing body. It is hereby anomalous to observe that election frequency
shares an interesting correlation with the participation of voters. Scientific
studies indicate that more frequent holding of elections tips the scale towards
more populace turn out. If the care taken by ONOE is to eliminate as many
general elections as possible, there is likelihood that citizens’ participation
will be greatly reduced due to likely disassociation from local affairs.
Moreover, opinion givers opined that
it is inconvenient to hold the elections at the same time because some
categories of voters, like first-time and voters from the outcast groups, might
be wiped out. If issues that would affect their own LECs are drowned by
nationalistic feel, then voters might not engage themselves in electoral
processes.
Table 3: Voter Turnout Trends in
Staggered vs. Simultaneous Elections
Conclusion
The idea of India says that “One
Nation, One Election” is also beneficial as well as risky for the India’s
democratic system. Pros being; eliminating chances of wastage, expense
reduction, the simplification of the governmental structure, improved and
efficient administrative services, the cons are; political responsibility, and
voter turnout.
Looking at the case of other
countries that tried having synchronized elections, what can be deduced is that
while, having ONOE can help foster stability in Governance, it may also water
down local accountability and decrease voter turnout if not well done. The
historical factor shows that Indian elections need to have a proper mixture of
national and state interests in order to sustain a healthy democratic
structure.
To ensure that ONOE does not
adversely impact political accountability or voter engagement, it is essential
to implement complementary measures, such as:
·
Strengthening
Local Governance: Disseminating voter awareness aimed at keeping local matters
as important within electoral agenda.
·
Enhancing
Voter Education: Empowering voters with comprehensive political education to
support them in participating in multiple elections at once, and making an
informed choice.
·
Maintaining
Federal Balance: Protecting the regional-self and concerns so that the unity in
Indian democracy is harmony accompanied by respecting the uniqueness.
References
1. Lok Sabha Secretariat.
(2020). Report on Simultaneous Elections. Retrieved
from http://164.100.47.193/loksabha/Committee/Report/Report_on_Simultaneous_Elections.pdf
2. Election Commission of India.
(2019). Expenditure Management in Elections: A Comprehensive Review.
Retrieved
from https://eci.gov.in/files/file/4295-expenditure-management-in-elections/
3. Law Commission of India.
(2018). One Nation, One Election: Draft Report. Retrieved
from http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/Election_in_India.pdf
4. India Today. (2024). “One Nation, One
Election Savings: Half of Our Health Expense.” Retrieved
from https://www.indiatoday.in/diu/story/one-nation-one-election-cost-gdp-economic-advantages-2603612-2024-09-20
5. Raghavan, S. (2022). “One
Nation, One Election: Implications for Indian Democracy.” International
Journal of Law and Politics.
6. Iyer, K. (2020). “One Nation,
One Election: Pros and Cons.” Economic and Political Weekly.
7. Drishti IAS. (2024). “Exploring the
Prospects of One Nation One Election.” Retrieved
from https://www.drishtiias.com/daily-updates/daily-news-editorials/exploring-the-prospects-of-one-nation-one-election
8. Kumar, A. (2021). “The Viability
of One Nation, One Election: A Comparative Study.” Journal of South Asian
Studies.
9. Business Today. (2024). “One Nation,
One Election: Benefits, Challenges, Way Forward.”
10. SPM IAS Academy. (n.d.). “One Nation
One Election: A Constitutional Aspect.” Retrieved from https://spmiasacademy.com/one-nation-one-election-a-constitutional-aspect/
11. Kovind, R.N. (2024).
“Simultaneous elections were the norm: Ram Nath Kovind defends 'One Nation, One
Election'.” Retrieved
from https://ddnews.gov.in/en/simultaneous-elections-were-the-norm-ram-nath-kovind-defends-one-nation-one-election
12. New Indian Express. (2024). “One
Nation, One Election: Yet another Jumla.” Retrieved
from https://www.newindianexpress.com/opinions/2024/Sep/29/one-nation-one-election-yet-another-jumla
13. Centre for Media Studies. (2024).
"Cost of Elections in India." Retrieved
from https://cmsindia.org/publications/cost-of-elections-in-india
14. Kumar, R., & Singh,
P. (2023). "The Economic Implications of Simultaneous Elections in
India." Journal of Political Economy.
15. Sharma, A., & Gupta,
R. (2023). "Governance and Electoral Reforms in
India." Indian Journal of Public Administration
16. Drishti Judiciary. (2024, September
20). "Challenges of One Nation, One Election" The Indian Express.
Retrieved from
https://www.drishtijudiciary.com/editorial/challenges-of-one-nation-one-election
[1] The concept of "One Nation,
One Election" (ONOE) aims to synchronize elections across India to enhance
governance efficiency and reduce electoral costs. This proposal has been widely
discussed in political forums and is analyzed in various studies, including
Kumar, A. (2021). “The Viability of One Nation, One Election: A Comparative
Study.” Journal of South Asian Studies.
[2] The impact of ONOE on federalism
raises concerns about the potential marginalization of regional parties and
local issues in favor of national narratives Raghavan, S. (2022). “One Nation,
One Election: Implications for Indian Democracy.” International Journal
of Law and Politics discusses these implications in detail.
[3] Recent Developments
The Union Cabinet approved the One Nation, One
Election (ONOE) proposal in September 2024, following recommendations from a
high-level committee headed by former President Ram Nath Kovind. The
committee's report outlines the potential benefits and challenges of
implementing ONOE. For further details, see the Lok Sabha Secretariat
(2024). Report on One Nation, One Election.
The financial implications of staggered elections
have been significant, with estimates suggesting that conducting elections in
India costs approximately Rs 60,000 crore. This figure highlights the need for
electoral reforms aimed at reducing costs. See Election Commission of India
(2019). Expenditure Management in Elections: A Comprehensive Review.
[4] Implementation Timeline
If implemented by 2029, ONOE would significantly
affect the terms of state assemblies, with many states facing truncated terms.
This transition poses challenges for maintaining democratic principles at the
state level. For insights into these implications, see Kumar, A. (2021). “The
Viability of One Nation, One Election: A Comparative Study.” Journal of
South Asian Studies.
The implementation of ONOE requires constitutional
amendments to several articles related to elections and governance in India.
For more information on these amendments, refer to the Law Commission of India
(2018). One Nation, One Election: Draft Report.
[5] The comparison of electoral
accountability in Germany, Sweden, and South Africa reveals diverse impacts of
synchronized elections. Germany's federal system allows for separate elections
for the Bundestag and state legislatures, enhancing local accountability (Lok Sabha
Secretariat, 2020). Sweden conducts simultaneous elections every four years,
which can overshadow local issues despite promoting transparency (Raghavan,
2022). In South Africa, concurrent elections for the National Assembly and
provincial legislatures raise concerns about the accountability of provincial
governments (Iyer, 2020). These cases illustrate that while synchronized
elections may improve governance stability, they can also diminish local
representation.
[6] The implementation of "One
Nation, One Election" (ONOE) is projected to save approximately ?20,000
crore annually by reducing the frequency of elections and associated
administrative costs. This financial efficiency could significantly alleviate
the burden on government resources and political parties. See Lok Sabha
Secretariat (2024). Report on One Nation, One Election.
[7] Comparative studies on election
costs reveal significant variations among countries with simultaneous
elections. While precise data for all countries is not uniformly available,
estimates suggest that India's election expenses are considerably higher due to
its large scale. The 2019 Indian general elections cost approximately ?55,000
crore ($7.2 billion), whereas South Africa's 2019 elections cost about $180
million. Sweden and Germany, with their smaller populations, have relatively
lower costs. Australia, despite compulsory voting, spends less per capita on
elections compared to India. These differences highlight the unique challenges
and scale of Indian elections. For detailed analysis, see Lok Sabha Secretariat
(2020), "Report on Simultaneous Elections" and International IDEA's
"Cost of Registration and Elections" (CORE) Project