Former CJI seeks level-playing field in simultaneous poll plan

Hindustan Times

3 days ago

NEW DELHI: Former Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud has raised some concerns about simultaneous state and parliamentary elections in his submissions to a joint parliamentary committee and called for a level-playing field between smaller and national parties, people aware of the matter said on Thursday. The proposal to align elections – known colloquially as one nation, one election (ONOE) – was a part of the BJP's 2024 poll manifesto. (PTI)
Ex-CJI Chandrachud and another former CJI, JS Khehar, are set to attend on July 11 a meeting of the JPC examining the Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill and the Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill, which are intended to roll out simultaneous polls in the country, the people cited above said. The 39-member JPC — headed by Bharatiya Janata Party leader PP Chaudhary — was set up in December 2024. Although there is no time frame for the submission of the report, the term of the JPC has been extended till the first day of last week of the upcoming Monsoon Session.
The proposal to align elections – known colloquially as one nation, one election (ONOE) – was a part of the BJP's 2024 poll manifesto and is backed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who argues that it will trim election costs and shift focus to governance. But the proposal is fiercely opposed by a raft of political parties and activists who allege that it will hurt democratic accountability and federalism. The bills propose the alignment process to begin in 2029 and the first simultaneous elections in 2034.
'Justice Chandrachud has also given his opinion about the proposed ONOE. In his submission to JPC in April, he has pointed out that concerns about simultaneous elections possibly marginalising smaller or regional parties because of the dominance of better resourced national parties is a significant policy aspect which warrants legislative attention,' said the person quoted above.
A clutch of regional parties such as the Rastriya Janata Dal (RJD) have alleged that the proposed legislation can dent federalism.
'The former CJI has noted that to ensure a level playing field among political parties, the rules governing electoral campaigning, particularly those relating to campaign finance, must be strengthened. Referring to the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 that impose ceilings on the amount a candidate can spend for campaign, there are no corresponding limits on the expenditure incurred by political parties themselves he said. This gap in regulation weighs the electoral process towards parties with greater financial resources he said,' the person quoted above said.
On the fear that simultaneous elections may infringe upon the right of voters to choose their elected representatives, the former CJI pointed out that even in instances where the duration of either the Lok Sabha or the assembly expires before the full term, the legislation provide for conducting mid-term elections, ensuring that the Indian electorate remains continuously represented by their duly elected representatives.
'He is of the view that the proposal would be violative of the basic structure doctrine only if the facet of non-simultaneous elections to every tier of the government is a basic feature of the Constitution,' the person quoted above said.
Chandrachud is also learnt to have weighed in on the provisions for no-confidence motion. 'He has pointed out that the cardinal principle of parliamentary democracy is that the council of ministers, headed by the Prime Minister, must always have the support of the House. This principle will be diluted if there is a time bar on introducing the no-confidence motion. Similarly, one of the common features of a multi-party democracy such as India is the inability of any party or coalition of parties to secure the majority in the House. If the issuance of a notice of no-confidence is contingent on the motion of confidence, there is a real possibility of the minority government continuing in power. This is contrary to democratic tenets,' said the person quoted above.
The bill now being examined by JPC suggests adding Article 82(A) (simultaneous elections to the House of the People and all legislative assemblies) and amending Articles 83 (duration of Houses of Parliament), 172, and 327 (power of Parliament to make provisions with respect to elections to Legislatures).
It also states that the provisions of the amendment will come into effect on an 'appointed date,' which the President will notify on the first sitting of the Lok Sabha after a general election. As per the bill, the 'appointed date' will be after the next Lok Sabha elections in 2029, with simultaneous elections slated to begin in 2034.
According to a person aware of the details, the meeting on July 11 will see JPC also interact with former Union minister and Congress leader M Veerappa Moily and former Congress lawmaker EMS Natchippan.
From the first elections in Independent India in 1952 until 1967, polls were held simultaneously across the country. But since the Lok Sabha and state assemblies can be dissolved before their tenures end, the state and national elections came to be held at different times after that.
Several committees, including a parliamentary panel, the Niti Aayog and the Election Commission of India, have studied simultaneous polls in the past, backing the idea but flagging logistical concerns.