'Centralisation of politics, distortion of people's opinion': ADR flags concerns over One Nation, One Election

New Delhi: Simultaneous elections to Lok Sabha and Assemblies could eliminate the probability of voters giving a reality check to ruling parties as one saw in Karnataka and Telangana where Congress' guarantee-driven campaign threw different results in two polls, the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) has said.

The private election watchdog has mentioned a series of issues, including potential horse-trading, shrinking public participation, centralisation of politics, distortion of people's opinion and logistical issues besides Constitutional issues to oppose the two 'One Nation, One Election' (ONOE) Bills in note submitted to the Joint Parliamentary Committee examining it.

The ADR said separate elections provide space for course correction, as it "gives voters an opportunity to reflect on the policies in a state and signal their displeasure in the next elections".

"In case of Karnataka, Telangana state elections, while voters voted decisively for short term welfare guarantees by a party but the same party could not win support in the Lok Sabha elections," it said.

In both the states, Congress stormed to power with a thumping victory riding on a campaign that guaranteed monthly allowance for women and other sops, but months later, they could not repeat the same performance in the Lok Sabha elections.

"Similar feedback was given by voters in Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Rajasthan elections. Thus, such a system provides space for voter feedback that informs better economic policies in the long run," the ADR said.

In its ten-page note, it also said there is a strong tendency for voters to vote for the same party if elections to Parliament and Assembly are held at the same time. "This is also a big reason why the ruling party has been keen to promote simultaneous elections as it would align votes in their favor at all tiers," it said.

Citing Justice PB Sawant, it said, "simultaneous elections may steamroll them into voting for the same party for both the Houses, although they do not desire to do so. This may distort the true opinion of the people."

It also found fault with ONOE Bills, claiming that it meddles with the autonomy of elected state governments and is an attempt at changing the character of the Constitution.

It rebutted claims of frequent invocation of Model Code of Conduct interfering in governance while highlighting logistical challenges in conducting simultaneous elections to Parliament and Assemblies.

Emphasising that states are “not subservient” to the union and simultaneous elections that encroach into state autonomy will not stand judicial scrutiny, it objected to dissolving the tenure of Assemblies before stipulated time to align polls with those of Lok Sabha and said the attempt to change the character of the Constitution will violate the basic structure doctrine.

It opposed the provisions in The Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill, 2024 that gives powers to the Election Commission to decide when to hold election in a state and fix its tenure to align with the life of Lok Sabha, saying it gives “unchecked, unrestricted and unregulated” powers to the poll body.

Truncating the tenure of a government that was elected in a mid-term poll was also opposed by the ADR, as it felt that it indirectly interfered with the ‘federal character’ of the Constitution, by changing it into a ‘unitary structure’.