Will simultaneous elections work in India?

A key election pledge by India's ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) ahead of the country's 2024 election was to adopt the "One Nation One Election," or ONOE initiative.

It envisages holding elections to India's lower house of parliament (Lok Sabha) at the same time as votes for state assemblies, municipalities and village councils (panchayats) — once every five years.

ONOE would replace India's current electoral system, where parliamentary, assembly, and local body elections are held separately.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi further reiterated his government's commitment to ONOE in his Independence Day address last month, appealing to all political parties to make his pledge a reality.

Synchronizing India's electoral cycles

Last week, a voluminous report on ONOE was approved by Modi's cabinet after a high-level panel headed by former president Ram Nath Kovind submitted its recommendations to align the electoral cycles of the central and state governments.

In the first step, the panel recommended simultaneous elections to the Lok Sabha and state legislative assemblies.

The second step — which would take place within 100 days of the first — would include elections to all rural and urban local bodies.

The Kovind panel also called for the creation of an implementation group to ensure the smooth rollout of its recommendations.

According to the report, a comparative analysis of countries that hold simultaneous elections — such as Germany, Japan, Indonesia, the Philippines and Belgium — was conducted in order to adopt best practices for the ONOE system.

"We plan to implement one nation one poll within tenure of this government," said home minister Amit Shah, after the completion of 100 days in office.

The BJP, which firmly backs the proposal, argues that ONOE will result in higher economic growth, provide for better governance, reduce wasting public funds and will counter voter fatigue and increase voter turnout.

"One cannot always be in campaign and election mode. Having frequent elections distracts from governance, which is very important to electors," said Shazia Ilmi, a BJP spokesperson, who added that the ONOE system would allow legislators to focus on more local issues in their respective constituencies.

"We have to be open to this idea and let us look at the positives," Ilmi told DW.

Opponents warn of risk to federalism

Critics of the move, especially mainstream opposition parties, pointed out that this approach undermines federalism and risks shifting India toward a presidential election model.

Some believe the move also attempts to strengthen the central government and promote a pan-Indian Hindu-nationalist identity.

"We do not stand with this. ONOE cannot work in a democracy. Elections need be held as and when required if we want our democracy to survive," Congress party president Mallikarjun Kharge told local media.

Regional political parties, which also slammed the move, said ONOE is an attempt to centralize and homogenize a vast and diverse country which is impractical as it bypasses the federal structure, essentially a union of states.

"ONOE goes against the basic tenets of federalism enshrined in the Indian constitution. State elections are contested on regional issues and in case of ONOE, national issues will prevail over regional aspirations," R P Singh, a political advisor to the regional Samajwadi Party, told DW.

"Moreover, it is fraught with threatening consequences for India's democratic polity despite claims of supposed benefits," added Singh.

Asaduddin Owaisi, an lawmaker belonging to the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen, told DW that ONOE cannot be imposed on a diverse and pluralistic country like India.

"This grandiose proposal is just another cheap stunt by the anti-democratic BJP. They fail to realise that it is a threat to regional parties, federalism, and India's diversity," said Owaisi.

Supporters cite cost savings

Proponents of the ONOE system argue that expenditure is a central reason to support the idea. Currently, elections are held at different times across India, requiring massive expenditure. Holding all elections together could save both money and time.

However, former Chief Election Commissioner S Y Quraishi has flagged concerns about the costs incurred for ONOE and the extensive preparations needed.

"It is a logistical nightmare that they will require three times the number of electronic voting machines and voter verifiable paper audit trails. The money required is huge and the so-called idea behind ONOE is to ostensibly cut down expenses," Quraishi told DW.

He further pointed out that the problem of election costs could be better addressed through reforms in political financing.

"There are practical difficulties and needs to be debated in parliament. Also, holding simultaneous elections for the general election, state assemblies and local bodies can result in the dilution of democratic accountability," he added.

Hurdles ahead

The BJP-led ruling National Democratic Alliance (NDA) still faces significant hurdles as the implementation pivots on securing a two-thirds majority in parliament and necessitates amendments to India's Constitution.

Unlike its two previous terms, Modi's government will now have to bank on its allies and friendly parties to get the bills passed.

Though it has a simple majority in both Houses, the ruling alliance falls short of the required two-thirds mark by over 50 votes in the upper house or Rajya Sabha and 72 in Lok Sabha. Additionally, approval from all states and federal territories is compulsory.

The bill is expected to be introduced in the upcoming winter session of parliament. However, given the vociferous opposition and the lack of parliamentary numbers on its side, the ruling party will face hurdles.

"ONOE is intended to impose one narrative on a plural and diverse country," said former finance minister and Congress leader, P Chidambaram, who added that he hoped ONOE would "be dead on arrival."

Edited by: Keith Walker