One Nation One Election: Former Chief Election Commissioners divided on expert panel report

An Expert Committee recently green-signalled the Central government's push for conducting simultaneous polls for Parliament and state assemblies, suggesting amendments to the Constitution to facilitate the same..While the panel was of the view that One Nation One Election would aid development and deepen democratic roots in the country, civil society and experts alike are divided on the move..Bar & Bench's Debayan Roy caught up with two former Chief Election Commissioners for their insights into the concept as well as what they feel about the report..[Watch the videos here].TS Krishnamurthy served as the 13th Chief Election Commissioner of India. His main assignment as CEC was to oversee the 2004 Lok Sabha elections. He had earlier served in the Election Commission of India as a commissioner since January 2000.SY Quraishi served as the 17th Chief Election Commissioner of India. He was appointed as the CEC as the successor to Navin Chawla on July 30, 2010. He had also served as a Secretary in the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports..Here is what they think of One Nation One Election. Edited excerpts follow..Debayan Roy (DR): Did you ever think One Nation One Election would become a reality some day?.TS Krishnamurthy (TSK): Even when I was part of the Election Commission, this debate was very much on. Though I did not have any inkling as to when it would come, there were discussions and arguments both for and against. I used to say that in principle, both on economic and administrative grounds, it is better to have simultaneous elections, but politically it was not acceptable to all because they had their own apprehensions. I did not know if it would happen immediately, but I knew it would materialise at some point..SY Quraishi (SYQ): This was first mooted in 2013-14, in fact when Mr Modi became the Prime Minister. He made a pitch for it, although it was not a new idea. He wanted a national debate and a national consensus, but there has been no consensus in the last 10 years. In the meanwhile, I have written several media articles, given both sides of the picture. There are certain good advantages to simultaneous elections, but there are many difficulties which I have always flagged.The Parliamentary Committee, Niti Aayog and the Law Commission have said it will not be easy or simple. Now it was given to a High Powered Committee with a mandate of how to do it. They have come up with a solution, but there are lots of questions..DR: Before getting into the report, what is your view on the composition of the expert panel members? Do you think it was fair?.TSK: I do not want to comment on that, because it involves the Election Commission, so whatever the government has done, we have to accept it. .SYQ: Personally, I was very upset and I feel it was not proper to get a former Rashtrapati involved in this. He is a perfect gentleman and a nice person. But he was an institution; and to make him a part of politics and such a Committee...Getting the President into this was not a good idea. I do not think it was the most brilliant possible committee. The Committee report now has to go to the Law Department, which will examine the pros and cons. If they have any honesty, they will do that..DR: The document notes that 15 political parties have opposed the move. Tamil Nadu Election Commissioner V Palanikumar told the panel that it would dilute the focus on region-specific challenges and diminish the efficacy of local governance. What is your take?.TSK: In principle, I do not agree with these types of views. Even when we held simultaneous elections in some states like Odisha, the voters have shown that they can vote properly and they do not vote for the same party. They have voted for different parties and exercised choice on their own. So to say it will affect federal spirit of the Constituion or that local government elections will not be voted for by the voters in a free and impartial manner, I am not in a position to accept that..SYQ: He is not the first one to make this point. In the last ten years, this is the main point that has been made, that it is a deliberate attack on federalism. The system of governance that we have is a Union of States, mind you. States have their politics, their own realities. So if the local politics dictates the fall of a government, there is some migration of MLAs here to there, what is to be done? Of course, they have attended to this problem, but what is the solution?.DR: Much has changed in the Indian polity since the sixties, when the synchronicity of the election calendar was first broken. We have seen the ascendance of regional parties in large parts of the country since then. How do you think One Nation One Election would pan out in this backdrop?.TSK: The regional parties which have increased in number have been taking a different view mainly on the ground that the federal feature of the Constitution will be affected if we have simultaneous elections for the Centre and the states. I am not sure if it is the correct stand, because there have been occasions where voters have voted differently for the Central and state governments.It is not that the voters are not aware of the differences. But to some extent, the criticism may be partially true, because when Lok Sabha elections take place, central issues are more dominant than state issues. But that should not necessarily lead to the conclusion that simultaneous polls must be rejected. If the voters are well-educated and have understood the difference between the Central and state governments, I do not think it is a big issue..SYQ: The way things have been going on all these years, there were staggered elections, but that was fine. There were hardly any problems; the ones mentioned have been exaggerated. What problems? That it costs a lot of money, stops development: all of these are wrong. The Model Code of Conduct and Election Commission is blamed? Pull it from Google and see what does it say. Only new schemes cannot be announced and new postings cannot be done. If you have posted someone a month or even a week before the election, that is fine. They appointed two election commissioners yesterday and tomorrow, the polls will be announced that is fine. So why to say development comes to a standstill? Entire developmental works must and can go on.We had to summon the Cabinet Secretary when we heard that ministries have stopped signing files citing the Model Code. We then pulled them up and said only new schemes cannot be implemented. Why do ideas for new schemes come to the government’s mind only weeks before voting? Why do they not occur to them earlier? They are not able to implement them to seduce the voter, so in the name of Model Code of Conduct…It is totally incorrect. Now, on repeated elections, if you are sitting in Delhi and there are polls in Ghaziabad, Noida does it affect your health? Whole nation comes to a standstill? Well the rest of the country does not even know. Only the parties getting affected and the Election Commission get to know and are concerned. Because we have to go and conduct polls there, and the parties have to win the elections so they send their leaders there. So nobody else is affected, not even the media, who get a lot of activity and jobs because of polls..DR: One of the strands of criticism has been that One Nation One Election would strike a blow to federalism. What is your take on this in terms of settled law?.TSK: Regional parties seem to think that when they vote or exercise their vote for Parliament, voters will be led by considerations relating to the Parliament election and they may exercise they votes not differently for the state legislatures. Second, the report talks about shortening the tenure of assemblies to have simultaneous elections in 2029. This again will be a thing that state governments will not like because they may think they have spent money for a five-year tenure which is being cut short to two or three, as the case may be. So these are the issues that they may raise, and even constitutionally, as the report says, it need not have the consent of the states. I do not know the Constitutional accuracy of this view, but there are genuine apprehensions of political parties. But to my experience, I do not consider the diversity or federal spirit of the Constitution being affected..SYQ: Suppose we have simultaneous elections. Do you remember Mr Vajpayee’s government fell in 13 days? If we had simultaneous polls, we would have to have another polls for Lok Sabha along with 28 states? Why? Just because one party left the government in the Lok Sabha, and it fell, so why should 28 state governments that have come with absolute majority be affected and vice versa? If state governments fall, will you have simultaneous elections with Lok Sabha also? So the solutions they have come up are totally wrong. It was all done in the name of reducing the number of elections, but their suggestion to reduce elections is by saying it will only be for the remainder of the terms of governments.The Constitution has provided for a five-year term, so why just two-and-a-half years or one year (for such remainder terms)? So much money and effort go into an election. So for a government coming in for one year, efforts would be spent to prove what point? The system that was working was fine. The point of view of the government has been to have a Presidential form of government, and we have a charismatic Prime Minister. Surely, when he is contesting, there is no chance for anybody and the possibility is that the voter will also vote for the same party. What about a situation where the leader is not charismatic? In this case, the result will be just the opposite..DR: The Committee has proposed the introduction of a new Article in the Constitution to help it align the tenures of various assemblies. It says some of the enabling amendments do not need ratification by states? Do you agree?.TSK: Although I am a law degree holder, I cannot claim myself to be an expert on the Constitution. I am sure there is going to be tremendous difference of opinion between the Centre and the states and this will be challenged in the courts. Whether constitutionally it will be upheld or not I cannot say, but it will be challenged..SYQ: Obviously, there were top lawyers on the Committee. Maybe constitutionally what they say is correct. That some amendments can be done without ratification, I am not very sure, I will have to see. Unilaterally sitting in Delhi, can you curtail the tenures of states? It creates doubts and will surely be a subject of litigation..DR: Are you in favour of a wider debate on this issue?.TSK: I would say yes, there should be a wider debate. It is always welcome and better to see if reconciliation is possible. Administratively, and on economic grounds, simultaneous elections are desirable but politically, it is not an acceptable point of view. But now that they have given five years, I think there should be a good debate, discussion. For example, one of the suggestions made by Subash Kashyap is that there should be a confidence vote only if a new leader is elected. That is a better proposition than having (more elections). I am not very much in favour (of another election). If you are in favour of simultaneous elections, there should be as few as possible. Here you are suggesting based on the Westminster model..SYQ: Wider debate has been happening. They should have debated it in Parliament maybe. 15-16 parties which have opposed are all from the Opposition, and the ones who have supported it are all part of the government. So that is more on political lines. But the merits should be discussed by jurists, political scientists and the media. Serious, organised debate. After all, Parliamentary Committee, Niti Aayog and Law Commission studied it, why did they not recommend that it be implemented? A friend of mine, a BJP leader said that ask the people what they want, it is our convenience that we are looking at. People love frequent elections, because otherwise they are powerless, but for their votes. At least because of that, the neta comes to them repeatedly. How many times have we seen MPs and MLAs going missing? They have to put up wanted posters. Saying gumshuda ki talaash. They never come back otherwise. So people love elections.In a youth parliament in Pune, a girl from Chhattisgarh made a very interesting remark on the money aspect. I have said that ₹60,000 crore is spent on every election, I think it getting spent is a great thing for India. It is getting transferred from politicians' coffers to the poor man. They will employ labourers, carpenters, help the economy so why do you want to cut it down? If you do want to cut it down, there is a very easy way for the government. There is a cap on spending in elections for candidates, but none for a political party. As an MP candidate, you cannot spend more than 95 lakh, but your party can spend as much as it wants. What kind of ceiling is this? It is a joke. So put a cap on this, the 60,000 crore will come down..DR: Do you think simultaneous elections would undermine democracy and the basic structure of the Constitution?.TSK: In my opinion, no. I do not think it is such a revolutionary change that it changes the structure of the Constitution. Election is only a step in democracy. We have suggested various electoral reforms over time. I do not think it can be questioned on these grounds, but my knowledge is limited and it is for constitutional experts to decide..SYQ: Basic structure in the sense that federalism is part of the basic structure and India is a Union of States. Every region has its own politics, so why should their fates be tied with that of Lok Sabha? In the first 11 years, there were simultaneous elections, yes that is very true. But what follows is also history.Elections got separated because the Kerala government and later on several governments got dismissed. And that may still happen arbitrarily, not always by the Central government. It may even happen internally if some party leaves the coalition. So why should those dynamics be controlled by the convenience of the leaders in Delhi and the Election Commission? For the Election Commission it is a wonderful thing, we conduct elections once in five years and then play golf? Our comfort, convenience cannot be the consideration..DR: The Committee says that the Election Commission had the power to control Lok Sabha and assembly elections and that Article 327 gave Parliament the power to make provisions for the same. If it was always this simple, then why was this not implemented earlier?.TSK: I do not think the Election Commission has control over the entire elections, only over the conduct of the elections. It cannot take a decision on its own on the rest but through proper constitutional amendments.Quraishi - I do not understand the word control. Of course superintendence and control is the power of the Election Commission, but that means management of all elections, not to tinker with the Constitution. Of course we manage all elections, from house to President. Not at all to say from tomorrow we will do simultaneous elections..DR: What are some of the key areas where the panel report is lacking?.TSK: I have read the report only cursorily, but the one thing that strikes me is the provision for the government to synchronise the date of simultaneous elections. Which means that if a government falls with a one-and-a-half-year tenure left, they are suggesting another election. I would agree with the suggestion of Subash Kashyap to reduce the number of elections practically. It would be a good idea to insist on an accountable no-confidence motion rather than a non-accountable one..SYQ: The idea was introduced so that voters do not have to go to the booth three times, but they have said panchayat elections can be done three months later. Even three years later means the same thing. The security and bandobast will have to be repeated. Who came up with this suggestion? I am surprised and shocked. If panchayat elections happen three months later, how is it simultaneous elections?