Cabinet Approved the proposal of the The "One Nation, One Election" (ONOE) which aims to align national, state, and local elections across India, has generated a lot of debate. Supporters believe it could lower election costs, make governance smoother, and reduce disruptions to public life. On the other hand, critics are concerned about its potential impact on federalism, regional representation, and the massive logistical challenges of such a large-scale reform.

One of the biggest obstacles to this proposal is the issue of defections. When legislators switch parties frequently, it can destabilize state governments, which might lead to mid-term elections in some states. This would defeat the purpose of synchronized elections and make the ONOE plan harder to implement.

India had successfully held simultaneous elections from 1950 to 1967, but this process was disrupted by none other than the problem of political defections. Interestingly, a high-powered committee led by former President Ram Nath Kovind, which advocated for the One Nation, One Election proposal, also highlighted this fact.

“That ONOE is unconstitutional is factually incorrect. There is enough evidence to show that the Constitution-makers envisaged only simultaneous elections for the House of the People and State Legislative Assemblies. Also, they provided for their terms to be the same (5 years) so that they could be co-terminus (vide article 83 and 172). They could not be held as being unconstitutional. Mid-term elections were largely forced only after 1967 as a by-product of large-scale defections and frequent toppling of governments.”

The committee led by Ramnath Kovind was tasked with addressing this challenge of the Defections. According to the Terms of Reference (TOR), it aims to:

“Analyze and recommend possible solutions in a scenario of simultaneous elections emerging out of a hung House, adoption of a no-confidence motion, or defection or any such other event.”

Interestingly, In recommendation the committee avoided directly using the word "defection" in its recommendations, instead referring to “or any such event.” The report states:

“The Committee recommends that in the event of a hung House, no-confidence motion, or any such event, fresh elections may be held to constitute the new House.”

The Terms of Reference (TOR) of the committee mention a hung assembly, no-confidence motions, and defections in the same context, but these issues are fundamentally different. Comparing a hung assembly or a no-confidence motion to defections is like comparing apples to oranges. A no-confidence motion can only be introduced once every six months, and if a hung assembly occurs, re-elections can be held within that period. In contrast, defections can happen multiple times within the same six months, creating ongoing instability that can't be easily resolved through a single election or motion.

The phrase "Aaya Ram Gaya Ram" originated in Haryana's political landscape of the 1960s, referring to rampant defections by legislators. Gaya Lal, an independent candidate who won the Hassanpur seat in 1967 and initially joined the Congress party. However, in a turbulent turn of events, he switched allegiances thrice in just one day, moving from Congress to the Sanyukt Vidhayak Dal (SVD), back to Congress, and then once again to the SVD. The drama culminated when Rao Birender Singh, leader of the SVD, presented Gaya Lal at a press conference, declaring, "Gaya Ram is now Aaya Ram."

To address this issue, the Anti-Defection Law was introduced in 1985 through the 52nd Constitutional Amendment Bill. Its statement of purpose articulates the national concern over political defections, stating: “The evil of political defections has been a matter of national concern. If it is not combated, it is likely to undermine the very foundations of our democracy and the principles which sustain it. With this object, an assurance was given in the Address by the President to Parliament that the Government intended to introduce in the current session of Parliament an anti-defection Bill.” Ironically, even 40 years later, we continue to grapple with the menace of defections. 

Anti-defection laws contain several significant loopholes, the most notable of which allows MLAs to resign to evade the consequences of defection. This has led to a troubling pattern: MLAs resign before switching parties, and the new party then grants them a ticket to contest under its symbol. Whether they resign or defect, the Election Commission must conduct a by-election, which undermines the spirit of the One Nation, One Election initiative.

The Kovind committee supported the idea of One Nation, One Election (ONOE), pointing out that India typically holds around five assembly elections each year. Committee prefers the ONOE because This frequent cycle of elections across various states consumes the time and resources of political parties, leaders, legislators, and both state and central governments, shifting their focus from governance to campaigning. By implementing simultaneous elections, the government could better prioritize developmental activities and policy implementation to improve people's welfare, rather than being distracted by the constant need to prepare for elections.

While this is a valid concern, it won't be properly addressed as long as defections continue. When defections occur and by-elections are called, the election process remains unchanged. The election machinery still needs to issue notifications, enforce the Model Code of Conduct, and allow political parties to campaign, which disrupts ongoing development work just like regular elections do. The report does not clarify how ONOE will resolve this issue.

The Kovind Committee report addresses the frequency of multiple assembly elections in a single year but doesn’t specifically discuss the number of by-elections. According to the Election Commission’s website, there were by-elections for 124 assembly seats in Year 2019 alone ! From 2019 to 2024, a total of 274 by-elections have been held for assembly seats. While many of these by-elections occurred due to the death or court-ordered disqualification of sitting MLAs, a significant number resulted from MLAs switching parties. Organizing an assembly election for a single seat costs approximately ₹2.5 crore. This means that these by-elections are likely to cost around ₹700 crore from public exchequer. 

2023 - 16
2022 - 28
2021 - 46
2020 - 60
2019 - 124

In 2020, the Kamal Nath government in Madhya Pradesh fell when 22 MLAs from the Scindia camp of Congress resigned. Subsequently, by-elections were held for 28 seats, including 25 where the MLAs had resigned. The BJP nominated all 22 of these former Congress MLAs, and 15 of them won, allowing the BJP to form the government.

The MLAs who resigned participated in the by-elections and returned to their positions. However, this process takes up valuable time and resources of the public. Political parties, leaders, and both state and central governments, causing them to focus more on campaigning than on governance. The Kovind committee does not provide a solution to this issue.

This is not an isolated incident. In 2019, 16 disqualified MLAs from Congress and JDS joined the BJP, which then awarded tickets to 13 of them. After the by-elections, the BJP formed the government, with many of those who switched parties returning as MLAs. This process wastes significant public resources and time. As long as this trend of party-switching continues, achieving effective One Nation, One Election will remain impossible.

These two cases show how the government lost its majority when MLAs switched parties. However, Gujarat has had a BJP majority government for the last two decades. Despite this, there have been many defections to the BJP from Congress.

Recently, a by-election was held for six seats in Gujarat, where five Congress MLAs and one independent MLA resigned. All six candidates were given tickets by the BJP, and all six won the by-election. In 2020, by-polls were held in eight constituencies: Abdasa, Karjan, Morbi, Gadhada, Dhari, Limbdi, Kaprada, and Dangs. The elections were needed because Congress lawmakers from these seats had resigned earlier that year, with five of them joining the BJP. The five who joined the BJP were given tickets and won their elections.

Before moving forward with the ambitious One Nation, One Election (ONOE) initiative, the government should prioritize smaller, actionable electoral reforms that could enhance developmental activities and improve policy implementation like, “One Candidate- One Seat” and “One Citizen-One Election” 

Under Section 33(1) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, candidates are allowed to contest elections in two constituencies. However, if they win in both, they are required to vacate one seat, leading to by-elections that impose financial burdens on the public exchequer and disrupt developmental work. This aims to create a safety net for politicians from all parties, lowering their risk of losing elections and making it harder to simplify the electoral process. This can be changed with a simple majority in both houses.

Recently, the Wayanad by-election is drawing attention, with Priyanka Gandhi set to contest for this Lok Sabha seat. Although a Lok Sabha election was held just two months ago, a by-election is needed because Rahul Gandhi won both the Amethi and Wayanad seats in May 2024 and then vacated the Wayanad seat. This situation isn't new in Indian politics. In 2014, Narendra Modi won from both Varanasi in Uttar Pradesh and Vadodara in Gujarat. In 1999, Sonia Gandhi won from Amethi in Uttar Pradesh and Bellary in Karnataka, while Mulayam Singh Yadav won in both Kannauj and Sambhal. In each case, by-elections were held because the politicians had to give up one of their seats.

Report Number 255 of the Law Commission, headed by Justice A. P. Shah in the year 2015, states that

If a candidate wins from two seats, it necessitates an unnecessary by-election at the expense of the exchequer, the efforts of the ECI, and the inconvenience to the electorate, who must vote again (potentially lowering turnout due to election fatigue). Additionally, the cost of conducting a by-election should not be underestimated. In the 2014 Lok Sabha elections, the ECI estimated that approximately ₹10 crore would be spent on each constituency, and by-elections are likely to cost even more due to the lack of economies of scale.

The Goswami Committee in 1990, the 170th Law Commission Report in 1999, the Election Commission in 2004, the Legislative Department’s Background Paper on Electoral Reforms in 2010, and most recently, the 255th Law Commission Report in 2015, all recommended that the Representation of the People Act (RPA) should be amended to prevent a person from contesting more than one seat at a time.

Second issue is, the ongoing shifts of the politician between the state capital and Delhi contribute to unnecessary expenditures and delays in developmental projects. Bhagwant Mann, who was elected as an MP from the Sangrur constituency in the 17th Lok Sabha, became the Chief Minister of Punjab after the Aam Aadmi Party's (AAP) victory in the 2022 Assembly elections. His subsequent decision to vacate his Lok Sabha seat in Sangrur necessitated a by-election. Addressing these recurring issues should be a priority before embarking on the larger One Nation, One Election initiative.

The concept of One Nation, One Election (ONOE) is often confused with simultaneous elections, but it’s important to understand that these are different ideas. While the Election Commission can conduct parliamentary and state elections together, challenges arise when defections among MPs and MLAs lead to a series of by-elections, undermining the spirit of ONOE.

To move forward effectively, we should first focus on more manageable reforms, such as implementing a "One Person, One Election" policy that prohibits sitting MPs and MLAs from running in multiple elections. Additionally, we could introduce a "One Citizen, One Seat" policy, allowing individuals to contest only from a single constituency. These foundational steps can help create a more cohesive electoral framework before we pursue the broader objective of ONOE.