Amidst deliberations conducted by a distinguished committee led by the esteemed former president Ram Nath Kovind, a notable group including three erstwhile Chief Justices of High Courts and a former State Election Commissioner voiced opposition to the proposition of implementing ‘one nation, one election’.
The committee, culminating its proceedings, tendered its findings to President Droupadi Murmu on Thursday, advocating for synchronized electoral processes encompassing both the Lok Sabha and state assemblies initially, followed promptly by aligned local body elections within a span of 100 days. As per the committee’s dossier, all four former Chief Justices of the Supreme Court, namely Justice Dipak Misra, Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justice Sharad Arvind Bobde, and Justice UU Lalit, who were engaged for consultation, submitted affirmations in favor of synchronized elections.
Of the former Chief Justices representing prominent High Courts, nine voiced support for synchronized elections, underscoring their potential advantages, while three raised reservations or dissent. Former Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court, Ajit Prakash Shah, expressed opposition to the notion of synchronized elections, citing concerns over potential limitations on democratic expression, alongside apprehensions regarding skewed voting trends and alterations in state-level political dynamics.
“Furthermore,” the report iterated, “he posited that synchronized elections pose a threat to political accountability, positing that fixed tenures furnish representatives with undue stability devoid of performance scrutiny, thereby challenging democratic ethos.” Former Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court, Girish Chandra Gupta, also contested the idea of synchronized polls, asserting its incongruity with democratic principles.
“Justice Sanjib Banerjee, Former Chief Justice of the Madras High Court, opposed synchronized elections due to apprehensions regarding their adverse impact on India’s federal structure and potential prejudice towards regional issues,” the report expounded. “Citing empirical evidence illustrating frequent midterm state elections, he underscored the significance of enabling constituents to exercise their preferences. He advocated for state-sponsored election funding as a more efficacious reform measure to combat corruption and inefficiency.”
All four former Chief Election Commissioners consulted by the committee endorsed the concept of synchronized elections. Among the current and former State Election Commissioners engaged in consultations, seven voiced support for the idea, while Tamil Nadu Election Commissioner V Palanikumar expressed reservations. “A pivotal concern raised pertained to the overarching dominance of national issues vis-a-vis local considerations during elections,” the report elucidated. “The Commissioner expressed apprehensions that this trend could potentially dilute the focus on region-specific challenges and diminish the efficacy of local governance. Furthermore, the Commissioner underscored the pressing issue of a dearth in electoral personnel, accentuating the necessity of augmenting staff to ensure the seamless and efficient conduct of elections.”