Stepping off the poll wheel: Why simultaneous elections make sense

Recently, the Tamil Nadu government issued an order to deploy over 300,000 teachers in government and private schools for election duty for assembly polls in May 2021. Such poll work can typically go on for more than a month, counting the time for training, conducting the elections and then assisting with the declaration of results.

Meanwhile, the state government is also considering reopening schools in January-February. Having poll duty, with the school session in play after a long Covid-19 pandemic-induced break, is likely to play havoc with the school calendar, potentially leading to it being extended to June 2021. Somehow, in the push for frequent elections, we have forgotten to understand the costs they bear on society. Perhaps, the time has come to consider the idea of simultaneous elections.

Conducting an election in India is a challenging and expensive affair. Aside from using elephants to carry electronic voting machines (EVMs) to hilly and forested areas, there is significant administrative effort and cost associated with running elections — estimated at about 4,500 crore in 2014 for the Lok Sabha and assembly elections by the 79th report, Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice, 2015, ‘Feasibility of Holding Simultaneous Elections to the House of People (Lok Sabha) and State Legislative Assemblies’. Other countries do this differently.

In Sweden, elections to the local county councils and municipal councils happen simultaneously with the general elections on the second week of September on a Sunday. Such elections are organised by the local municipality and the national election authority, with voting typically happening in a municipal building (schools, community centres, etc). Meanwhile, South Africa conducts its elections to the national and provincial legislatures on a simultaneous basis, with municipal elections being conducted about two years later.

Conducting elections simultaneously in India is not a new idea. The very first general elections to the Lok Sabha and the state legislative assemblies were conducted simultaneously in 1951-52. As were the next three elections. However, when a few state assemblies were dissolved prior to their term ending, the overall cycle was disrupted. Over time, even the Lok Sabha started getting dissolved on a premature basis. All this meant that elections for the Centre and the state assemblies soon grew out of sync.

Now, politicians of all parties are forced to stay in a state of a permanent campaign, as they waddle from one election to another while the administrative machinery of the Centre and state is used on a quarterly basis to conduct elections here and there. Imagine, the number of hours of teaching time disrupted from being roped into conducting such duties on a frequent basis.

Also, consider the implications for internal security, as Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) and Central Armed Police Forces (CAPF) companies are pressed into service for holding elections on a frequent basis. Such use can impact their training and the rule of law.

Holding simultaneous elections as far as possible —barring the occasional use of Article 356, and byelections —would help reduce the significant expenditure incurred while reducing the period during which the Model Code of Conduct is applicable. This can have a significant impact, leading to a stoppage of development work and impacted governance, especially as we move into phase-wise elections. One would also hope that having a clockwork frequency of elections would help concentrate political minds on policy matters while reducing policy paralysis and overall deficit in governance.

Of course, this will have infrastructural challenges. EVMs will have to be stocked in advance to do this while voter-verified paper audit trail (VVPAT) paper and indelible ink will have to procured. But, perhaps, we can even consider innovations as adopted in other countries — postal ballots, having a single common form for many posts in an election, etc.

Additionally, constitutional changes may be required to ensure such a sync-up is not disrupted significantly in the future by no-confidence motions, perhaps making a for confidence motion to form an alternative government mandatory with a no-confidence motion, fixing windows for holding all by-elections, etc — some of these as suggested by the Law Commission of India in its 170th Report on Reform of Electoral Laws.

At the same time, we must consider additional reforms, like state funding of elections and electronic voting. Of course, in all this, the will of the people must be respected. Away from partisan glare, many political parties have actually welcomed such suggestions. At the very least, we can make a start by holding simultaneous elections for panchayats, municipal bodies and state assemblies. Consider the example set by Britain. The British Parliament passed the Fixed-term Parliaments Act in 2011, with a push for providing further stability and predictability to the British Parliament’s tenure.

It mandated that elections would be held on the first Thursday of May every five years, with Parliament barred from extending its session beyond five years. Early elections were only allowed, if 2/3rd of the House agreed, or a no-confidence motion was passed. Perhaps, India can consider something similar to, at least, start with. Of course, there are those who raise concerns about India losing its electoral diversity. Perhaps, they should leave that to the maturity of the Indian voter.

The writer is a BJP MP





Source link

Leave a comment