The only likely impact of the One Nation One Election policy—if ever implemented—is that the ruling party politicians will have to cut the ribbons of various developmental projects on the poll eve once every five years and thus give them substantial time to build or complete. Be it the religious places, statues, bridges, highways, railway stations, airports, hospitals, educational institutions etc all will be inaugurated a couple of months before the Election Commission’s announcement of poll schedules, and not in a hurry quite frequently as now when the elections are held quite regularly.
So, it would be very hectic period for Prime Minister and chief ministers ahead of simultaneous elections for Parliament, Assembly and local urban and rural civic bodies.
Protracted Process
The Election Commission of India which took more than 80 days—from March 16 to June 4—to complete elections for Lok Sabha and four Assemblies in 2024, may by this speed, take one full year to undertake the election of Parliament, Assemblies and local bodies all over the country. So,the Model Code of Conduct would remain in effect all over India for such a long period and not just in any particular poll-bound state as now.
As per the recommendation of the Ramnath Kovind Committee Report Parliament and state Assembly election should be held together while local bodies poll should be conducted in the second phase within 100 days. It will need 18 Constitutional Amendments, some of them will have to be ratified by half of the states of India. The BJP and its allies may not be in power in half of them as they are likely to lose Haryana and Maharashtra Assembly elections.
The Election Commission which could not hold election for five Assemblies—Haryana, Maharashtra, Jharkhand, Jammu and Kashmir and Delhi now—will be entrusted with the responsibility of undertaking such an enormous exercise. Conducting poll of the Assemblies and local bodies take much longer time and demands much larger number of human resources and security personnel. In state like West Bengal the local bodies election are still marred by large-scale violence. Hardly any state in India has ever held simultaneous election for panchayat and municipal corporation or municipalities.
Thus, about one full year may be devoted to no other work in entire India, but in inauguration of various projects and conducting elections. Yet the BJP bigwigs are claiming that One Nation One Election would ssave time, money and energy.
Unnecessary Media Hype
The problem is not just that the Bharatiya Janata Party is obsessed with this idea,, but with the electronic media which once again literally wasted hours on this non-issue on September 18 Prime Time. All these aspects related to simultaneous elections have been discussed many times in the last 10 years.
What the BJP is not understanding is that when Ram Mandir issue—notwithstanding massive propaganda and involvement of religious sentiment– could not yield desired result for it in Uttar Pradesh, in particular Ayodhya, the gimmick of simultaneous elections of Parliament, Assembly and subsequently of rural and urban local bodies are not going to work for the saffron party.
Whatever the BJP claim The average voters are fed up with this fantastic idea which has never worked anywhere in the world. In the initial elections in India Parliament and Assembly polls were held together, but not of the municipalities and panchayats.
When two opening batsmen come to pitch they both start their innings from zero, but it is only after a few balls that their score are different—or one may even get out. Similarly, it was possible to hold initial elections for Parliament and Lok Sbha together, but not later when the political situation changed.
Frequent Elections in Democracies
All the developed democracies whom we blindly imitate, be it the United States, Japan, France, Germany, Italy, Britain, Canada, Israel etc have much more frequent election than India, yet nobody complains that polls come in the way of progress.
In contrast, infrequent or no election is held in countries having dictatorship, or less developed ones of Africa, Middle East and even Latin America. Do we want to associate ourselves with the latter.
In the United States election for 435-member House of Representatives (Lower House) is held every two years and not five years as of Lok Sabha in India. The Presidential election is held after every four years. A Senator is elected for every six years and that too directly by the people and not by the legislators as in India. But here to one-third of 100 Senators are elected every two years.
Similar is the process in 50 states. But no one ever allege that such frequent elections are coming in the way of development in the United States. Thus, the fake logic of hampering of the developmental works due to regular election needs to be demolished.
Indian Experience
In India too the period between 1967 and 1972 was marred by the political instability and frequent elections. The Congress lost power in nine states and barely managed to survive in the Centre after 1967 Lok Sabha and Assembly elections.
Many states witnessed turmoil and violence. Governments came and went in several of them forcing Prime Minister Indira Gandhi to announce Lok Sabha election a year ahead in March 1971. Her own Congress party got split in 1969. Immediately after the election India got involved in nine months long liberation war in Bangladesh. After that in March 1972 Assembly elections were held in many states.
Notwithstanding all these obstacles the then government took some bold initiatives such as nationalization of banks in 1969 and of coal in 1972. India started witnessing Green Revolution at that very period though it had to face famine in 1966-67 after wars with China in 1962 and Pakistan in 1965.
In 1974 India made nuclear test.
Similarly, the minority V P Singh government introduced the Mandal Commission report in August 1990 and another minority government of Narasimha Rao brought about Liberalization Privatization and Globalization in 1991. Nobody complained that India could not develop then because of frequent
elections.
Whatever our panelists in studios and apologists for the BJP may argue against the frequent election, the common person on the streets across India are of the view that all the developmental works are undertaken keeping in mind the elections. If elections for all these three tiers of democracy are held once after every five years, it is generally feared that the governments will become less accountable and more authoritarian and reckless.
| 
