Law Commission Member Hitesh Jain backs the One Nation, One Election Bill, questioning federalism and stressing accountability, governance efficiency, reduced costs, and democratic stability through simultaneous polls.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: Hitesh Jain, Member of the Law Commission of India, strongly advocated for its adoption, calling it essential for governance, economic efficiency, and democratic accountability.
Jain emphasized that the issue is no longer academic but a pressing national question. He reminded that
“India is not a stranger to simultaneous polls. In fact, the country’s democratic journey began with unified elections in 1952, 1957, and 1962, when citizens cast their votes for both Parliament and State Assemblies together. This cycle was disrupted in 1959 when the elected Kerala government was dismissed, breaking the electoral harmony.”
The Election Commission of India (ECI) itself recognized the challenge early. As far back as 1962, the ECI flagged concerns over duplication of costs and efforts, and reiterated the same in 1983, underscoring that the idea has been under discussion for decades.
One of the strongest arguments for simultaneous elections is the impact of India’s current “permanent election mode.” With elections happening every few months across different states, the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) frequently comes into force, leading to governance paralysis. Policies are delayed, development work slows down, and administrative machinery is disrupted.
Economic Efficiency
Elections in India come with a massive financial burden, involving huge logistical costs and deployment of security forces. Jain argued that holding simultaneous elections would significantly cut these costs, reduce duplication of efforts, and ease the strain on national resources.
Jain also pointed out that simultaneous elections would create a fairer political environment. Smaller opposition parties, often constrained by limited financial and human resources, would no longer need to stretch themselves across multiple campaigns in a single year. A consolidated campaign cycle would provide equal opportunity and a level playing field for all parties.
Critics often argue that One Nation, One Election undermines federalism or threatens the Basic Structure of the Constitution. Jain dismissed these fears, reminding that when simultaneous elections were conducted in the early decades of Indian democracy, neither federalism nor constitutional values were compromised. Instead, he maintained, synchronised polls strengthen free and fair elections by ensuring predictability and accountability.
Addressing concerns about blurring national and state issues, Jain posed a vital question,
“Is federalism about fragmentation or about accountability?”
He stressed that simultaneous elections enhance cooperative federalism by encouraging citizens to hold both the Central and State governments accountable at the same time.
Concluding his address, Jain asserted that One Nation, One Election is not about one party or one leader, but about national interest, stability, and democratic integrity.
“One nation, one election is not about one party, this is not about one leader. This is about one nation, one national interest, and one destiny”
he said.
Click Here to Read Our Reports on One Nation, One Election