Why is BJP shadowboxing over simultaneous elections?

Simultaneous elections are likely to remain a pipedream in the diverse federal polity of India

It would be safe to presume that the Narendra Modi government is well aware of the shortcomings of the Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill, better known as the ‘one nation, one election’ Bill.

It also knows that the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) does not have a simple majority in the Lok Sabha, let alone a two-thirds majority to enact the law.

Simultaneous elections are then likely to remain a pipedream in the diverse federal polity of India.

Yet the notion of simultaneous elections appeals to a certain section of middle-class voters, especially those who think of democratic processes as bothersome. The same section of the chatterati likes to declare over cocktails that India needs to emulate China for rapid economic growth — meaning no elections, curtailment of workers’ rights, and a strong leader. Stop democracy and its mess for economic growth is their argument.

Up to the mid-1960s, the Congress was the dominant party both at the Centre and in the states. The BJP perhaps thinks that it has arrived at the same position as the Congress was in after Independence. It fantasises presiding over a one-party dominant system.

However, the rise of intermediate caste politics in the mid-1960s changed the Congress dominated polity forever. Fractures in what remained of the monolithic polity were deepened with the acceptance of the Mandal Commission recommendations.

The democratic processes that unfolded in India because of the growth of regional-, caste-, and community-based parties led to increased entropy in the political system. This bothers the middle classes. Yet it is this fracturing of interests that drives Indian democracy.

The Hindutva ideologues, however, prefer a bipolar polity, and may think this an ideal moment to achieve it with the Congress weakening and the BJP gaining ground.

The BJP too thinks that while the existence regional parties cannot be wished away, they can be assimilated into the of bipolar model as supporters of either one of the two national parties/coalitions. This would leave the ideological contest to just two formations — one led by the BJP and the other by the Congress.

Simultaneous elections will drown out the regional narratives and concerns. In simultaneous elections, the incumbent party at the Centre could well dominate the narrative as was demonstrated in the recent state elections held along with or following soon after the general elections.

The control over the election commission and its commissioners, handpicked by the ruling party, will be total and the access to resources for elections will weigh in favour of the incumbent government.

However, such a model is unlikely to be sustained. After the first simultaneity, elections eventually will go the way of the polity — the edifice will fracture over time reflecting the competition between regional and community and caste interest groups.

If a state government falls — the BJP itself has been responsible for destabilising elected governments in several states — there will a fresh election for the curtailed term. There is a provision for President’s Rule but only if the state government falls, say, one year to six months before the simultaneous elections are due.

What happens if the Union government falls before its five-year term is over? If the Lok Sabha must be dissolved in a period of three years or less, then there can be elections for a new Lok Sabha for the remaining period. 

But what happens if the Lok Sabha is dissolved one year or nine months before its term? There is no provision for President’s Rule at the Centre. Will a caretaker government be able to take major policy decisions? Or, will voters be asked to elect a new parliament for a year or less?

It is also clear that simultaneous polls may not be cheaper to hold nor bring down the expenditure on the election commission. The actual organisation of elections, it has been pointed out, will require the purchase at least twice as many electronic voting machines (EVMs) than currently in use, every 15 years. The cost of the EVMs has been estimated to be Rs 10,000 crore every 15 years.

The argument of economic efficiency is also fake as it is restricted to the limited period in which the model of code of conduct comes into force. There is no need for all crucial economic decisions to be taken only in the last month before the election.

Most important of all is the anomaly that the BJP is aware it does not have the numbers to pass the Bill. The BJP and its allies have 293 MPs in the 545-seat Lok Sabha and the Opposition I.N.D.I.A. bloc has 234. So even the total strength of the treasury benches is not enough to reach the two-thirds mark of 364 MPs in favour to pass the Bill, assuming that all the MPs are present and voting.

So, what does the Modi government hope to achieve by creating a national narrative on simultaneous elections? It wants to send a signal to its constituency, especially to the middle classes, that the Opposition is obstructing the BJP from making the democratic system efficient and stable. The Opposition will be synonymous with instability and economic inefficiency.

Lest this seems far-fetched, consider the so-called implementation of the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) in Uttarakhand. The BJP knows that it cannot force the UCC nationally — not only because it lacks adequate strength in Parliament but because the mass reaction to it may be unpredictable. So now the UCC will be introduced in BJP-ruled states. But a law implemented in only a few states will not be universal.

Here too the BJP’s political objective is to play up to its constituency while smearing those who oppose the UCC as minority appeasers and opponents of the directive principles of the Constitution. The minorities, of course, get painted as backward and resistant to modernity.

Once again, the BJP’s image will be of a modernist, transformative party while the Opposition will be dubbed status quoist.

In this shadow boxing there are only gains for the BJP. Its core constituency is appeased, and it gets to shroud its communal and obscurantist self with a modernist veil.

(Bharat Bhushan is a New Delhi-based journalist.)

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.