Legal Perspectives on the Feasibility of ‘One Nation, One Election’

The ‘One Nation One Election’ (ONOE) unifies all electoral cycles at the national/federal, state and local government levels by synchronizing the dates to overcome the financial and administrative inefficiencies that are caused by the staggered or non-overlapping system of holding elections in India. While originally stemming from India’s first post-constitution representative electoral model of 1951-52, the ONOE seeks to help the Election Commission of India work more efficiently, reduce the cost of holding elections, and limit the time that the Model Code of Conduct is in force (model code restricts the scope of governance for the parties). ONOE’s critics argue that it may distort public perception of the differences between state and national issues, disadvantage small and regional parties, and centralize power anyway, undermining India’s federal system, especially if the legislature is overhauled as well. ONOE entails constitutional amendments and a significant amount of logistical planning is required, including aligning divergent electoral cycles and the logistic orchestration of holding simultaneous multi-level national combined elections. However, observers on a high-level committee argue for a staggered rollout of India’s post-constitution model of 1951-52 by synchronizing the next major elections. Although this strengthens balance between democratic integrity and administrative efficiency, the big-bang policy model mitigates concerns about patterns of voting and the prioritization or marginalization of local-level issues. Political will is a necessary first step, but successful legal and logistical execution is where implementation faces its biggest hurdle.