‘One Nation, One Election Will Damage Idea Of Parliamentary Democracy’
FILE PHOTO: Voters stand in a queue as they wait to cast their vote outside a polling booth in New Delhi
The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) has said that “holding simultaneous elections in the country will damage the basic structure of the Constitution and the idea of parliamentary democracy. It will actively encourage anti-defection and be unable to deal with hung legislature.
The AAP is a constituent of the INDIA bloc and its remarks came a day after the Congress — part of the same entity — strongly opposed the idea of holding simultaneous elections in the country; the Congress said it goes against the basic structure of the Constitution and the guarantees of federalism.
The AAP said further that democracy and the tenets of the Constitution cannot be sacrificed for administrative convenience and “narrow financial gains”.
On January 19, the Congress had strongly opposed the “undemocratic” idea of holding simultaneous elections in the country, with Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge also demanding that the idea be abandoned and the high-powered committee formed to study it be dissolved.
Kharge, in a letter to the secretary of the committee on one nation, one election, requested president Ram Nath Kovind, who heads the panel, “not to allow his persona and the office of the former president of India to be abused by the Union government to subvert the Constitution and parliamentary democracy in this country”.
In his letter to Niten Chandra, the secretary of the committee, Kharge said, “The Indian National Congress is strongly opposed to the very idea of ‘One Nation, One Election’. For the sake of maintaining a thriving and a robust democracy, it is imperative that the entire idea must be abandoned and the high-powered committee dissolved.”
Kharge said, “The government, parliament and ECI should work together to ensure people’s mandate is respected rather than divert people’s attention by talking about undemocratic ideas like simultaneous elections.”
Kharge asserted, “There is no place for the concept of simultaneous elections in a country that has adopted a Parliamentary system of government. Such forms of simultaneous elections that are being floated by the government go against the guarantees of federalism contained in the Constitution.”
The Congress chief claimed, “The holding of simultaneous elections would require the dissolution of several legislative assemblies which are still halfway (or less) through their terms. This would be a betrayal of the electorate in those states.”
He said the prime minister of the chief minister holds office for as long as he or she enjoys the confidence of the house and if a chief minister loses confidence of the house and no other party is able to form a government. However, the Niti Aayog report says that the state should be put under President’s Rule till new elections can be organised, said Kharge. “This would be a travesty of democracy,” he said.
According to Kharge, the argument that holding simultaneous elections will result in financial savings is amusing. “The argument that cost of conducting elections are extremely high seems baseless,” he asserted.
The expenses on polls are less than 0.02 per cent of the total Union budget for the last five years, Kharge said. “We feel the people will be willing to consider this small amount as the cost of free and fair elections to uphold democracy,” he said.
Kharge said the expenditure on 2014 elections was Rs 3, 870 crore, which the committee claims is high. “If the committee, the government and ECI are serious about the expenditure made on elections, it would be more appropriate if they could make the funding process more transparent, especially in the matter of electoral bonds. This would truly empower the voter and increase voter awareness,” he said.
Kharge also said that the committee is relying on the Niti Aayog report, which is neither a statutory nor a constitutional body and the high-level committee should not have referred to it. He added, “This reinforces our concern that the committee seems to have already made up its mind and seeking a consultation seems to be an eyewash”.
