Hindu Editorial Analysis : 20-September-2023

In a significant move, the Union government recently established a committee headed by former President of India, Ram Nath Kovind, to explore the feasibility of implementing simultaneous elections for State Assemblies and the Lok Sabha. This initiative, commonly known as the ‘One Nation One Election’ (ONOE) system, aims to synchronize elections at both the state and national levels to occur every five years. This essay delves into the ONOE concept, the criticisms surrounding it with respect to state autonomy, the need for state ratification in constitutional amendments, and the significance of limiting the role of states in such amendments.

The ‘One Nation One Election’ System

The ONOE system proposes holding simultaneous elections for all Indian states and the Lok Sabha every five years. This would entail restructuring the Indian electoral cycle to ensure that state and national elections align. Voters would cast their votes for both the Lok Sabha and state assemblies on a single day, creating a unified election process.

Position of States & ONOE

Critics argue that ONOE undermines India’s diverse political landscape, where each state has its distinct political culture and parties. Additionally, it challenges India’s federal structure by limiting the power of elected Chief Ministers to recommend the dissolution of their state legislatures and call for early elections. Under ONOE, only the Union government would have the authority to dictate election schedules, depriving state parties of this prerogative.

Need for Ratification by States

In 2018, the Law Commission of India released a draft report asserting that simultaneous elections were not feasible within the existing constitutional framework. The Commission highlighted that any constitutional amendment to facilitate ONOE must receive ratification from at least 50% of the states. The recently constituted committee’s objective is to examine whether these constitutional amendments would indeed require state ratification, raising concerns about the potential adverse impact on federalism.

Process of Amending the Indian Constitution

Article 368 of the Indian Constitution governs the process of amending the Constitution, which can occur through three different procedures:

  1. Simple Majority: Certain provisions can be amended through a simple majority in each house of Parliament, similar to the passing of ordinary legislation.
  2. Special Majority: Provisions not covered by the first category require a ‘special majority,’ meaning approval by at least two-thirds of the members present and voting in each house, as well as a majority of the total membership.
  3. Ratification of States: Some amendments demand both a ‘special majority’ and ratification by at least half of the State legislatures. While there’s no specific time limit for ratification, it should occur before the amending Bill is presented to the President for assent.
Constitutional Amendments Requiring Ratification by States

The Constitution designates certain provisions as ‘entrenched provisions’ that necessitate ratification for any amendment. These provisions pertain to the federal structure of the Constitution and include changes in:

  • Provisions regarding the election of the President of India (Article 54 and 55).
  • The extent of executive powers of Union or State governments (Article 73 and 162).
  • Provisions concerning the Union judiciary or High Courts (Articles 124–147 and 214–231).
  • Distribution of legislative and administrative powers between the Union and States (Article 245–255).
  • The Lists in the Seventh Schedule.
  • Representation of States in Parliament (Article 82).
  • Article 368 itself.
Significance of Limited State Role in Constitutional Amendments

Dr. B.R. Ambedkar cautioned against allowing all constitutional amendments to pass with a simple majority, as it could undermine the separation of powers among the three branches of government. Balancing state autonomy with the need for constitutional reforms is a complex challenge, and the ONOE proposal raises fundamental questions about the future of India’s federal structure.

Why In News

Recently, the Union government established a committee led by former President of India Ram Nath Kovind to rigorously assess the viability of conducting simultaneous elections for State Assemblies and the Lok Sabha, aiming to streamline the democratic process and enhance governance efficiency. This initiative reflects the government’s commitment to fostering a synchronized electoral system that promotes effective decision-making and resource allocation across the nation.

MCQs about One Nation One Election

  1. What is the main objective of the ‘One Nation One Election’ (ONOE) system?
    A. To hold elections every two years for better governance.
    B. To synchronize elections for State Assemblies and the Lok Sabha every five years.
    C. To eliminate state-level elections and have only national elections.
    D. To centralize election schedules under the Chief Minister’s authority.
    Correct Answer: B. To synchronize elections for State Assemblies and the Lok Sabha every five years.
    Explanation: The main objective of ONOE is to synchronize elections for State Assemblies and the Lok Sabha every five years to create a unified election process.
  2. Why do critics argue that ONOE challenges India’s federalism?
    A. It promotes state autonomy and decentralization of power.
    B. It allows Chief Ministers to dissolve state legislatures at will.
    C. It centralizes election scheduling power with the Union government.
    D. It encourages diverse political cultures in each state.
    Correct Answer: C. It centralizes election scheduling power with the Union government.
    Explanation: Critics argue that ONOE centralizes election scheduling power with the Union government, undermining the autonomy of states.
  3. What is the process required for constitutional amendments that affect the federal structure, according to the Indian Constitution?
    A. A simple majority in both houses of Parliament.
    B. Ratification by the President of India.
    C. ‘Special majority’ in both houses and ratification by at least half of the State legislatures.
    D. Approval from the Chief Ministers of all states.
    Correct Answer: C. ‘Special majority’ in both houses and ratification by at least half of the State legislatures.
    Explanation: Constitutional amendments affecting the federal structure require a ‘special majority’ in both houses of Parliament and ratification by at least half of the State legislatures.
  4. Which of the following is considered an ‘entrenched provision’ in the Indian Constitution?
    A. Amendments related to local municipal elections.
    B. Changes in the composition of the Rajya Sabha.
    C. Amendments affecting the distribution of legislative powers between Union and State.
    D. Changes to the working hours of Parliament.
    Correct Answer: C. Amendments affecting the distribution of legislative powers between Union and State.
    Explanation: Amendments affecting the distribution of legislative powers between the Union and States are considered ‘entrenched provisions’ in the Indian Constitution and require special procedures for amendment.

Boost up your confidence by appearing our Weekly Current Affairs Multiple Choice Questions

Loading