The ‘One Nation, One Election’ Bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha, utilizing electronic voting for the first time, with 269 votes for and 198 against. This sparked debate over federalism and democracy, as critics argue it undermines state autonomy and could centralize power. Proponents cite cost savings and logistical efficiency, with the bill referred to a Joint Parliamentary Committee for review.
New Delhi: The Lok Sabha witnessed a heated debate on Tuesday with the introduction of the ‘One Nation, One Election’ (ONOE) Bill, a legislative proposal that seeks to align elections for the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies.
While the government defended the move as a step toward efficiency and modernization, the Opposition vehemently criticized it as an attack on India’s federal principles and democratic ethos. The bill, presented by Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal, was referred to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for detailed examination after receiving 269 votes in favor and 198 against during a historic session that introduced electronic voting in the Lok Sabha.
The ONOE Bill: Government’s Defense
Introducing the bill, Meghwal claimed it was framed “in accordance with the Constitution” and aimed to streamline the electoral process. He cited Parliament’s authority under Article 327 to legislate on matters related to elections and argued that the bill respects the Basic Structure doctrine, including principles like federalism and judicial review.
Home Minister Amit Shah sought to ease tensions by announcing the JPC review.
“When ONOE bills came up in Cabinet, PM Modi said this should be referred to the Joint Committee of Parliament,”
Shah stated, emphasizing the government’s commitment to transparency and consultation.
Proponents of the bill, like Telugu Desam Party (TDP) leader Chandra Shekhar Pemmasani, hailed it as a measure to reduce election costs, streamline governance, and minimize disruptions caused by frequent polls. Meghwal assured the House that key principles such as federalism and separation of powers would remain intact, quoting Dr. B.R. Ambedkar:
“The division of legislative and executive powers between the Centre and States is not defined by any law but by the Constitution itself.”
Opposition Raises Alarms
The Opposition strongly opposed the ONOE Bill, terming it a direct assault on India’s federal structure and democratic values.
- Congress MP Manish Tewari described the bill as “a direct assault on the Basic Structure” of the Constitution, arguing that linking the tenure of State Legislatures to the Lok Sabha would promote excessive centralization. “States are equal and independent constituents,” he said, cautioning that this alignment would weaken their autonomy.
- Samajwadi Party MP Dharmendra Yadav accused the government of moving toward centralization, stating, “This Bill is nothing but an attempt to bring in dictatorship.”
- Trinamool Congress MP Kalyan Banerjee criticized the bill as a “fulfillment of one gentleman’s desire and dream,” in a pointed reference to Prime Minister Narendra Modi. He argued that the proposal prioritizes personal ambition over meaningful electoral reform.
- AIMIM Chief Asaduddin Owaisi called the bill “draconian” and a threat to regional parties. He warned of a shift toward a “Presidential style of democracy” and asserted that “administrative convenience should never take precedence over the fundamental principles enshrined in our Constitution.”
The Federalism Debate
The most contentious issue surrounding the ONOE Bill is its perceived threat to India’s federal structure. Critics argue that simultaneous elections could compromise the autonomy of state governments by subordinating their terms to the Lok Sabha.
- DMK leader T.R. Baalu raised concerns about the financial burden and feasibility of conducting simultaneous elections, questioning whether the proposed benefits justify the logistical challenges.
- NCP leader Supriya Sule stressed that “the Centre and States have separate terms and tenures, and mixing the two would undermine the balance of power.” She also criticized the enhanced powers proposed for the Election Commission under Article 82(5), warning that it could harm the federal structure.
- Owaisi reiterated the importance of federalism, stating, “Federalism is the cornerstone of India’s democratic structure.” He cautioned against reducing states to mere appendices of the Centre, emphasizing that Parliament is not competent to pass laws that alter the essence of India’s democratic framework.
Supporters Highlight Efficiency
Despite the criticism, the bill has its supporters. The TDP and other proponents argue that aligning elections could significantly reduce costs and improve governance by eliminating the frequent disruptions caused by staggered elections.
Law Minister Meghwal highlighted the potential for logistical efficiency and assured that the bill would not infringe on states’ rights. He maintained that
“key principles such as judicial review, federalism, and separation of powers remain intact.”
Electronic Voting: A First in Lok Sabha
The ONOE debate also marked a technological milestone with the introduction of electronic voting in the Lok Sabha. Speaker Om Birla facilitated the process, allowing amendments via slips to address the novelty of the system. The initial count of 220 Ayes and 149 Noes was later updated to 269 Ayes and 198 Noes, reflecting the government’s majority in pushing the bill forward.
Constitutional Challenges and Questions
The Opposition raised several constitutional challenges to the ONOE Bill. Tewari and Banerjee argued that it undermines the Basic Structure doctrine, particularly the principles of federalism and the separation of powers. They questioned whether Parliament has the legislative competence to enact laws that could potentially alter the independent functioning of state legislatures.
Tewari also pointed to the inconsistency between proposed Article 83(5) and Article 83(2), describing it as a contradiction that violates the Constitution.
Call for Detailed Review
Acknowledging the intensity of the debate, Shah and Meghwal agreed to refer the bill to a Joint Parliamentary Committee. The move aims to ensure a comprehensive review of the legislation and address concerns raised by the Opposition.
A Balancing Act: Reform vs. Federal Autonomy
The ONOE Bill represents a significant reform with far-reaching implications for India’s electoral process and democratic framework. Supporters argue that it will bring efficiency, reduce costs, and streamline governance, while critics warn of centralization and a potential erosion of India’s federal character.
What Lies Ahead?
As the bill moves to the Joint Parliamentary Committee, the real battle will unfold in the detailed scrutiny of its provisions. The debate has already exposed deep divisions in Parliament, reflecting broader concerns about the balance between reform and federal autonomy.
The question remains: Will ‘One Nation, One Election’ unite India’s electoral processes, or will it deepen existing fractures in its federal system? With strong voices on both sides, the road ahead for this historic legislation promises to be turbulent.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
