Ex-chief justices back simultaneous polls, flag poll body's broad powers in bill

India Today

5 hours ago

Former Chief Justices of India have supported the constitutionality of the 'one nation, one election' concept but raised concerns about the provisions of the proposed bill, particularly the wide powers granted to the Election Commission of India (ECI). Their views were conveyed to a parliamentary committee examining the bill on simultaneous elections.In a written opinion submitted to the Joint Committee of Parliament, former Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud dismissed the opposition's contention that synchronising Lok Sabha and state assembly elections violates the Constitution's basic structure.advertisement'The argument that staggered elections are a part of the Constitution's basic structure (or form part of the principles of federalism or democracy) does not hold. Staggered timing of elections cannot be considered as a feature of the original Constitution, let alone an immutable feature,' he said.
Chandrachud, however, expressed reservations over the 'sweeping powers' the bill seeks to grant the Election Commission. He warned that such 'unbounded authority' could allow the poll body to extend or curtail the tenure of a state assembly beyond the constitutionally mandated five years under the pretext of aligning elections with the Lok Sabha. 'The Constitution must define, delineate and structure the circumstances under which the ECI may invoke this power,' he added.Former Chief Justices Ranjan Gogoi and J S Kehar are scheduled to appear before the committee on July 11 for discussions with members over the bill's provisions. Gogoi had earlier appeared before the committee in March and shared concerns about excessive powers being given to the EC.Former Chief Justice U U Lalit had appeared in February and advised that simultaneous polls be introduced in a phased manner. He warned that cutting short the terms of state assemblies with significant tenure left for synchronisation could invite legal challenges.Despite their concerns, all three former Chief Justices agreed that the idea of simultaneous elections does not breach the Constitution. Chandrachud said, 'Simultaneous elections will not infringe upon the voters' right to elect their representatives and that the bill ensures that electors remain continuously represented by their duly elected MPs or MLAs.' He further criticised arguments against the bill as being based on the belief that 'the Indian electorate is naive and can be easily manipulated.'Chandrachud also cautioned that simultaneous elections could marginalise regional and smaller parties due to the influence of better-funded national parties. 'To ensure a level playing field among political parties, the rules governing electoral campaigning, particularly those relating to campaign finance, must be strengthened,' he said.He pointed out that while individual candidates face spending limits under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, there are no caps on party expenditure.On the bill's proposal that houses elected through midterm polls will only serve the remainder of the original five-year term, Chandrachud flagged concerns about the effectiveness of such short-term governments. He said their ability to implement meaningful projects would be constrained, as the Model Code of Conduct would apply six months before the next elections.Several members of the parliamentary panel have echoed this concern, questioning the capacity of short-tenure governments to deliver on policy and governance.- EndsMust Watch
IN THIS STORY#One Nation One Election