YOUTH PARLIAMENT

LOK-SABHA
Work report

1. UCC
 Background - Avni Agarwal
 Pros-Cons - Shubham
 Present Stance of Lok-Sabha/ Present status/Laws related -Yash
2. One Nation One Election
 Background - Sahil
 Pros-Cons - Arbaz
 Present Stance of Lok-Sabha/ Present status/Laws related - Yash
 UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

BACKGROUND
 In the month of December, 2022, a private member’s Bill was introduced (by BJP) in
the Upper House of the Parliament ‘Rajya Sabha’ namely the Uniform Civil Code in
India Bill, 2020.
 Uniform Civil Code (UCC) means a common law governing personal matters like
marriage, divorce, inheritance, succession, guardianship rights, minority rights, etc.
 In the past, the British India Government in its Report of 1835 had laid stress on a
common set of laws governing matters relating to crime, evidence, contract. However,
in its wisdom, it chose to leave the personal matters out of such common law
codification
Uniform Civil Code (UCC), the proposed legal framework that seeks to unify the personal
matters has been a topic of debate for years now. It has been established that UCC aims to
codify and apply a uniform legal ideology with respect to personal laws in India. It is still a
longstanding demand of various sect of population as it is often viewed as a step towards
achieving gender justice and equality as it aims to provide a single law for all citizens,
regardless of their background. However, it is not warmly welcomed by everyone and is
being subjected to interference which would be caused to religious freedoms and cultural
practices as a result, argued by the opponent. There is a heated debate spreading around the
whole UCC model with respect to the feature of Secularism guaranteed under the
Constitution and what effects it would leave on the freedom of professing religious rights
and practices. The argument that UCC is ideally based on the idea of Hindu society, being
one of many drawbacks, and imposing thoughts in relation to this specific religion is taking
rounds and connecting its dots to the politics is one matter which leaves this topic high and
hanging.
Now that UCC is being subjected to such debates, the question still hangs as to what its
future will be since optimism and realism refers to two different worlds and there lies a big
gap between the two. Even though progress is being made towards its implementation,
significant challenges remain in achieving consensus among different stakeholders and this
difference does not seem to be going away anytime soon.
This aims to provide a distinction between the personal laws currently governing the
population and the proposed uniform code along with the pros and cons it brings with itself
and how the academicians and policy drafters are comparing it with the idea of Secularism.
ABOUT UNIFORM CIVIL CODE
India has had a long history of personal laws, directing the personal lives of the people based
on the religious scriptures their community follows and this diversity has been one of the
prominent features of the state. On the other hand, Uniform Civil Code, as proposed in the
parliament firstly in 1985 and then subsequently, is a law to formulate and implement
personal laws on all citizens equally regardless of their religion, gender and sexual
orientation and would be applicable in all matters ranging from marriage, divorce, heritage
and adoption. This code comes under the purview of Article 44 of the Constitution of India,
which essentially lays down that the state shall endeavor to secure a Uniform Civil Code for
the citizens throughout the territory of India.
The issue of UCC governing the personal laws of the citizens has been debated since the
time of Independence. The UCC was added as a part of the Directive Principles in the Indian
Constitution, which reflects that it is not legally enforceable but is considered a guiding
principle for the government of India to follow and implement.2 However the code might
attract equality and secularism as its core objective, its opponents are still vary of the view
that it might interfere with the religious ideologies and practices of the people, which raises
the doubts over its implementation and is the reason why it has to be withdrawn every time
being proposed in the Parliament be it in 2019 or 2020.
From the bare reading of the ideologies which UCC promulgates, it aims at protecting the
minor and vulnerable sections of the society, including but not limited to women and
maintenance religious minorities, meanwhile simplifying the segregation created on the
religious beliefs of the citizens in large, and codifying the treatment of marriage, divorce,
succession and inheritance and which has long been governed by different personal rules and
regulations divided across different communities.
PERSONAL LAWS GOVERNING THE CITIZENS TILL NOW
Different communities exist in the different part of this country, and as being one democratic,
secular and diverse country, there already exist various religions and community guidelines
which forms as the basis of governance of personal laws of the people. However, there are
two major laws governing the larger sect of the population, providing different guidelines to
its followers, maybe conflicting at instances, and proving to be an obstacle for the ambitious
policy of uniformity.
One of these policies includes the codified Hindu code bills, which largely reformed the
various sects among religions including Hindu, Buddhist, Jain and Sikh. This code bills
included The Hindu Marriage Act, 19553, The Hindu Succession Act, 19564, The Hindu
Minority and Guardianship Act, 19565 and The Hindu Adoption and Maintenance
Act,19566, providing for almost all the ambits of the governance of personal laws on a vast
majority of the population.
The other major law which formed a major determining factor of personal laws was the
Muslim Personal Laws, which is based on the Shariat Law of 1937, loosely governing
almost all the personal matters of Indian Muslims. This act clearly states that the State shall
have no interference in the matters pertaining to personal disputes, and a religious authority
would make a declaration based on the interpretation of Quran and Hadith.7 The
implementation of Shariat law clearly provided for the guidelines that people ought to follow
given if they profess Muslim religion.
There were various other personal laws enacted during the period such as The Special
Marriages Act, 19548, The Indian Christian Marriage Act, 18729, and The Indian Divorce
Act, 186910, among many others which regulates the personal laws of people professing
various other religions and that the implementation of such laws have provided with the
solution to situations arising related to the religions.
So, what makes Uniform Civil Code a necessity in the largest democracy of the world, when
the governance of such laws has been substituting for the same is one question which has
been raised over its existence and that the opponents proposing this ideology have been for
so long being adamant on its recusal from being implemented and hurt religious sentiments
in large. However, does this ideology overshadows the greater good which it ought to bring
is something that needs to be analysed upon.
PROS AND CONS
Pros
The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) refers to the proposal to replace personal laws based on the
scriptures and customs of each major religious community in India with a common set
governing every citizen. Here are some significant advantages of implementing a UCC:
1. Equality Before Law
One of the primary benefits of a UCC is the establishment of equality before the law.
Currently, personal laws differ significantly among various religious communities, leading to
unequal treatment. A UCC would ensure that all citizens, regardless of their religion, are
subject to the same set of secular laws. This promotes fairness and upholds the constitutional
principle of equality, eliminating legal disparities based on religious affiliations.
2. Promotion of Gender Justice
A UCC can significantly advance gender justice by addressing the discrimination that
women often face in personal laws. Many existing religious laws perpetuate gender
inequalities, particularly in matters of marriage, divorce, and inheritance. By instituting a
uniform set of laws, the UCC can help safeguard women's rights, ensure equitable
distribution of property, and promote gender equality, thus empowering women across
communities.
3. Simplification of Legal Frameworks
The current system of multiple personal laws can be confusing and cumbersome. A UCC
would simplify the legal landscape by providing a single framework for all citizens. This
simplification can make it easier for individuals to understand their rights and obligations,
leading to greater accessibility and less bureaucratic hassle when dealing with legal matters.
4. Enhancement of National Integration
India is a diverse nation with various cultures and religions. A UCC can promote national
integration by fostering a sense of unity and common identity among citizens. By
transcending religious boundaries in matters of civil law, the UCC can help cultivate a more
cohesive society, reducing communal tensions and encouraging social harmony.
5. Prevention of Discrimination
A UCC would reduce the potential for discrimination based on religion in personal matters.
Currently, certain communities may have laws that discriminate against others. By having a
common code, all citizens would enjoy the same legal protections and rights, regardless of
their religious beliefs. This helps to create a more just society and reinforces the secular
character of the state.
6. Legal Certainty and Predictability
Implementing a UCC would enhance legal certainty by providing clear, consistent laws
applicable to all. This predictability can foster a more stable legal environment, encouraging
individuals and businesses to engage confidently in personal and commercial activities.
Knowing that the same laws apply to everyone can reduce conflicts and misunderstandings.
7. Modernization of Laws
Many personal laws are outdated and based on antiquated practices. A UCC offers an
opportunity to modernize legal frameworks, aligning them with contemporary values and
societal norms. This modernization can include progressive provisions related to marriage,
divorce, and child custody, reflecting the evolving status of women and families in society.
8. Strengthening Individual Rights
The UCC can strengthen individual rights by ensuring they are not subject to religious
interpretation. In a diverse society, individuals may feel their personal liberties are at risk due
to the application of particular religious laws. A UCC can protect individual freedoms and
uphold human rights, reinforcing the principle that all citizens deserve protection under the
same legal system.
9. Reduction of Legal Conflicts
Diverse personal laws often lead to legal conflicts and disputes, particularly in mixed-
religion marriages or families. A UCC can mitigate such conflicts by providing a common
set of laws governing civil matters, thereby reducing litigation and fostering a more amicable
resolution of disputes.
The implementation of a Uniform Civil Code in India has the potential to address numerous
social, legal, and ethical issues. By promoting equality, gender justice, and modernization of
laws, the UCC can foster a more unified and equitable society. While challenges to its
implementation exist, the benefits of establishing a common civil code are profound and far-
reaching, ultimately contributing to the nation’s progress toward true secularism and justice
for all its citizens.

Cons
The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) aims to establish a common set of laws governing personal
matters for all citizens in India, regardless of religion. While the UCC has several proponents
advocating for its implementation, it also faces significant criticism. Below are some of the
key concerns associated with the UCC.
1. Cultural and Religious Sensitivity
One of the foremost arguments against the UCC is its potential to infringe upon the cultural
and religious practices of various communities. Personal laws often reflect the traditions,
beliefs, and customs that are integral to the identities of different religious groups. Imposing
a uniform set of laws may be perceived as an erosion of these identities, leading to resistance
from communities that value their distinct practices. This can generate significant social
unrest and tensions among different groups.
2. Diverse Social Realities
India is marked by immense diversity in terms of culture, religion, and social practices. A
one- size-fits-all approach may not adequately address the unique needs and circumstances
of different communities. For example, the laws governing marriage, inheritance, and
divorce may need to be tailored to reflect the specific cultural contexts of various groups. A
UCC might overlook these nuances, leading to dissatisfaction and a sense of alienation
among minority communities.
3. Resistance from Religious Groups
The implementation of a UCC is likely to face strong opposition from various religious
groups who view it as an attack on their religious freedoms. Many communities may resist
the idea of a common civil code, fearing that it would dilute their traditions and beliefs. This
resistance can manifest in political mobilization and social movements, potentially
destabilizing communal harmony. The apprehension regarding loss of cultural identity can
create significant political backlash, complicating the path toward a uniform code.
4. Risk of Majoritarianism
There is a concern that a UCC could be influenced by the dominant culture or majority
religion, leading to a legal framework that favors certain groups over others. If the code is
framed without adequate consideration of minority rights, it could perpetuate inequalities
rather than resolve them. The fear of majoritarianism raises questions about the fairness and
impartiality of a UCC, particularly if it fails to represent the diverse viewpoints and needs of
all citizens.
5. Legal Complexity and Implementation Challenges
The transition to a UCC involves significant legal complexities and challenges in
implementation. Establishing a uniform set of laws requires careful consideration and
drafting, as well as extensive consultations with various stakeholders. The legislative process
may face delays and obstacles, leading to frustration and disillusionment among advocates.
Moreover, the actual enforcement of a UCC may prove difficult, as local customs and
practices could conflict with the new legal framework, creating inconsistencies in
application.
6. Impact on Existing Rights
For some communities, existing personal laws may provide specific rights and protections
that a UCC might not replicate. The change could lead to the loss of certain rights or
advantages that individuals currently enjoy under their respective personal laws. This is
particularly concerning for women, who may fear that the new laws could diminish their
rights rather than enhance them. There is a risk that the UCC may inadvertently create new
forms of inequality.
7. Judicial Overload
The implementation of a UCC could potentially overwhelm the judicial system, which is
already burdened with a backlog of cases. The introduction of new laws and the
accompanying disputes may lead to an increase in litigation, as individuals seek to challenge
or understand their rights under the UCC. This could slow down the legal process, making it
more difficult for individuals to access justice in a timely manner.
8. Fear of Bureaucratic Overreach
Some critics argue that a UCC could lead to increased bureaucratic control over personal
matters. The imposition of a uniform legal framework may require extensive monitoring and
regulation, potentially infringing on individual freedoms. Concerns about state intervention
in personal lives can generate apprehension among citizens, who may fear that their
autonomy and privacy will be compromised under a centralized legal system.
9. Socioeconomic Disparities
The UCC may not adequately address the socioeconomic disparities that exist among various
communities. Different groups may have distinct needs based on their economic conditions,
which a uniform code may not account for. For instance, the application of the same
marriage laws across all communities may disadvantage those from lower socioeconomic
backgrounds who may have different familial and financial realities. This oversight can
exacerbate existing inequalities rather than alleviate them.
10. Political Instrumentalization
The UCC can be politicized by various interest groups to serve specific agendas. Political
parties may use the UCC as a tool to mobilize support or to consolidate power, leading to the
exploitation of sensitive issues surrounding personal laws for electoral gains. Such
politicization can further polarize communities and hinder genuine dialogue and consensus-
building, making it challenging to achieve a fair and equitable code.
While the Uniform Civil Code presents a vision for legal uniformity and equality, its
implementation is fraught with challenges and concerns. Issues of cultural sensitivity,
resistance from religious groups, risks of majoritarianism, and legal complexities are
significant hurdles that must be carefully navigated. Additionally, the potential impact on
existing rights, judicial overload, and socioeconomic disparities raises important questions
about the efficacy and fairness of a uniform legal framework. As discussions around the
UCC continue, it is essential to consider these cons thoughtfully to ensure that any move
towards legal reform genuinely serves the diverse and pluralistic society that is India.
CURRENT SITUATION
Religion Law
Hindu  Hindu Marriage Act, 1955; Hindu Succession Act, 1956;
 Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956; and
 Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956

Islam  Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937

 Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939
Christian India Christian Marriage Act, 1972
Parsi Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936
Sikh Anand Marriage Act, 1909

JUDICIAL APPROACH
Since 1950 and until the judgment pronounced in the Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano
[AIR 1985 SC 945], the debate on UCC remained mostly dormant. The Supreme Court of
India [‘SCI’] in this case observed that the UCC will help “national integration by removing
disparate loyalties to laws which have conflicting ideologies”. Same year, in the case of Ms.
Jorden Diengdeh v. S.S. Chopra [(1985) 2 SCC 556], the SCI showed dissatisfaction on the
lack of uniformity among various personal laws related to divorce in India. A decade later, in
the case of Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India [(1995) 3 SCC 635], the SCI made some strong
observation on the need of UCC in India. SCI in Pannalal Bansilal Pitti & Others etc. v. State
of Andhra Pradesh & Another [1996 SCC (2) 498], a year later, cautioned against the
bringing of UCC in one go. In the case of John Vallamattom & Anr v. Union of India [1995
(3) SCC 635] decided by the SCI in the year 2003, 3 | P a g e reiterated Sarla Mudgal
observation on UCC dictating that it will help in removing ideological contradictions. Most
recently, Shayara Bano v. Union of India [AIR 2017 9 SCC 1 (SC)] [commonly referred to as
triple talaq case] reminded all of us on the debate of UCC and its desirability in India.
ISSUES
1. Ensuring equality:
Not only among different religions but also within a religion itself, there exists a lot of
differences and lackof uniformity violating right to equality enshrined in the
Constitution.
2. Uniform laws are not exactly uniform:
The uniform laws which have been given as an example by the proponent of UCC for
eg. IPC, CrPC, etc. are not uniform throughout the territory of India. There are various
state amendments which makes these uniform laws diverse and pluralistic.
3. Constitutional contradictions:
There are certain provisions in the Constitution itself which on the one hand provides
for exceptions to the states of Assam and others with respect to law relating to family
and on the other hand provision for UCC in Part IV.
4. Against right to freedom of religion:
Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution provide for the freedom of conscience and free
profession, practice and propagation of religion and freedom to manage religious
affairs respectively. However, UCC goes against these provisions as per the opponents
of the UCC.
5. Respecting diversity and plurality:
The Law Commission of India in its report in 2018 remarked that UCC is neither
necessary nor desirable in India. It also remarked that secularism cannot be
contradictory to plurality. Besides various observations by the Judiciary on the need
and desirability of UCC more prominently in the last 3-4 decades, it is the
demography of our great Nation that has kept the UCC issue alive and vibrant. Right
after the coming into force of the Indian Constitution, the codification of the Hindu
Customary Practices took the centre stage because of the prevalence of discriminatory
gender practices. However, the codification of the Hindu Marriage Act, Succession
Act, Minority and Guardianship Act and Adoptions and Maintenance Act in the years
1955-56 retained its majorly patriarchal bias. Whereas the Muslim personal laws were
kept untouched keeping in mind the recent tragedy of partition on the basis of religion.
Then, Shah Bano case in 1985 led to the politicization of the UCC issue where the
Government of India overturned the decision of the SCI. However, it is hoped that in
very near future the- re there shall be one uniform code for all citizens irrespective of
their religion.
WAY FORWARD
The social transformation from diverse civil code to uniformity shall be gradual and cannot
happen in a day. Therefore, the government must adopt a “Piecemeal” approach.
Government could bring separate aspects such as marriage, adoption, succession and
maintenance into a uniform civil code in stages.
Government must emulate Goan practice of a common civil code, which has been the law
since 1867, when the state was under the Portuguese colonial rule.
Moreover, when constitution espouses the cause of Uniform civil code in its Article 44, it
shouldn’t be misconstrued to be a “common law”.
The word uniform here means that all communities must be governed by uniform principles
of gender justice and human justice.
It will mean modernization and humanization of each personal law.
It would mean, not a common law, but different personal laws based on principles of
equality, liberty and justice.
Government has to take steps towards increasing the awareness among the public,
especially minorities, about the importance of having a UCC.
The UCC must carve a balance between the protection of fundamental rights and religious
dogmas of individuals. It should be a code, which is just and proper according to a man of
ordinary prudence, without any bias with regards to religious and political considerations.
CONCLUSION
 This is not the first time that any MP has presented a Bill on UCC. A similar attempt
has been made before the Lok Sabha by Ld. Shri Chandrakant Khaire in the year 2018
and by Ld. Shri Krupal Tumanein 2019. Whereas, a similar Bill was presented by Ld.
Shri Sushil Kumar Singh in the year 2020 before the Lok Sabha.
 The whole point is that the issue surrounding UCC is a serious one and therefore
requires a careful examination. Even after more than 7 decades of the Indian
Constitution coming into force, is it the right time to implement DPSP provision on
UCC in India, remains a burning issue. On the one hand, UCC can be seen as the
realization of some basic rights for women like equality and elimination of any form
of discrimination. On the other hand, the UCC issue is tested on the altar of secular
ism.
 Be that as it may, the state of Goa acts as a shining example for having a common
family law applicable to all uniformly. Further, the fear and concerns of the State can
be addressed by first implementing the UCC at the state level and then scaling up at
the national level. This way the regional concerns of the resi dents of the state can be
taken care of first before implementing UCC at the national level.
 The steps taken by the states of Uttarakhand, Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh are some of
the examples in this direction, which are not only commendable but also elaborately
points towards our great nation being truly democratic.
 ONE NATION ONE ELECTION

BACKGROUND
India is the world's largest democracy with over 900 million eligible voters. The country
conducts elections for the Lok Sabha (lower house of parliament), Rajya Sabha (upper
house), state legislative assemblies, and local governing bodies. The foundation of India's
electoral system is enshrined in its Constitution which provides for a federal structure with a
clear delineation of powers between the central and state governments.
The Constitutional framework empowers the Election Commission of India (ECI) as an
autonomous and permanent body to conduct free and fair elections. The ECI holds
responsibility for superintendence, direction and control of all elections at the national, state
and district levels. It exercises extensive regulatory oversight on political parties and
electoral financing. Over the decades, the ECI has emerged as a highly respected and
independent institution bolstering the integrity and credibility of the electoral process
Ever since the first general election in 1951-52, Lok Sabha elections have been held every
five years, unless the house is dissolved prematurely. The last election in 2019 saw over 67%
voter turnout, illustrating the vitality of Indian democracy. However, the five-year cycle
often falls out of sync with state assembly elections resulting in frequent election mode. In
effect, some part of India is perpetually in election cycle given staggered state election
timings. The multiphase nature of these elections also impose significant costs and
governance disruptions.
For instance, the recently concluded 2019 general elections were conducted in 7 phases from
April 11 to May 19 while state elections are usually held in 1-5 phases. The ECI deploys
millions of polling staff and security personnel for monitoring polling stations across the
country. Enforcing the Model Code of Conduct for prolonged electoral periods hinders
implementation and launch of welfare schemes, infrastructure projects, and key policy
decisions for incumbent state and central governments.
While Indian elections since the 1990s have generally reflected voters' preference for anti-
incumbency and thriving multiparty competition, the splintered electoral calendar poses
challenges for governance efficiency, electoral expenditure and voter fatigue. It also gives
disproportionate power to the central government of the day to target state resources and set
the narrative during simultaneous state elections.
Various high-level committees have examined electoral reforms like public funding of
elections, right to recall legislators, and switching to proportional representation from the
first-past-the-post system. However, the most debated reform proposal has been the 'One
Nation One Election' idea aimed at synchronizing central and state election cycles.
Proponents argue it will reduce election costs, improve governance, cut back on populist
measures and induce a more coherent national outlook on issues. Critics contend it could
dilute regional issues, reduce accountability of state governments and undermine federalism.
It will require significant political consensus and constitutional amendments to enable fixed
term state assemblies.
To summarize, India's size, socioeconomic diversity, federal structure and vibrant democracy
make it an extraordinary electoral experiment. While the ECI has enabled credible and
legitimate electoral participation over the decades, electoral reforms need to keep pace with
India's changing political economy and the imperatives of efficient governance. The proposal
for synchronized national and state level elections promises several advantages but also
poses risks which require rigorous examination.

EXPLANATION OF THE PROPOSED CONCEPT OF "ONE NATION, ONE

ELECTION"
 The idea of aligning and synchronizing the timing of elections across India has
garnered much debate over the past few years. Commonly referred to as 'One Nation
One Election', this proposal envisions structuring the electoral calendar so that
elections to Lok Sabha, State Assemblies, and local government bodies occur
simultaneously or get clustered together in a predetermined cycle.
 Proponents argue that this electoral reform will result in significant cost savings,
improve governance efficiencies, reduce pressure on political parties, check populist
measures, and induce a more coherent outlook on national issues. By avoiding
frequent election mode, governments can focus on long-term policymaking rather than
short-term electoral considerations. Currently, state and central governments are in
perpetual campaign mode which hinders effective administration.
 The Election Commission of India (ECI) has also supported the proposal for
simultaneity of elections. They highlight that the multifarious election cycle imposes a
massive logistical and administrative burden on the ECI as it has to repeatedly deploy
staff, equipment and security forces. Further, enforcing the Model Code of Conduct
(MCC) for prolonged periods due to staggered state elections disrupts governance and
policy implementation.
 However, critics argue that holding simultaneous elections will dilute regional issues,
undermine federalism and reduce the accountability of state governments. It will
require extensive political consensus and major constitutional amendments to enable
synchronization. Regional parties believe it disproportionately benefits national
parties. Incumbent governments will have excessive power during their fixed term
with reduced incentives to perform and address grievances.
 The Law Commission of India recently released a draft report that evaluated various
modalities for achieving 'One Nation One Election'. The most radical option involves
amending the Constitution to convert state assemblies and Lok Sabha into fixed five-
year terms running concurrently. This will mandate simultaneous elections but faces
issues related to no-confidence motions, hung assemblies and dissolution of house.
 A second option is to hold national and state elections together but provide flexibility
for states to differ by a few months. This staggered synchrony model has challenges
 regarding security availability, enforcement of MCC over expanded timeframes, and
practicality of clubbing only some state elections together.
 The third option is to commence elections in two phases - one for Lok Sabha and the
other for state assemblies. However, this reduces the intended benefits of electoral
synchrony. The Law Commission report highlights the need for cross-party
deliberation to assess feasibility.
 Critically, 'One Nation One Election' requires political consensus which remains
elusive. Past attempts to align election cycles have struggled to sustain continuity. The
dissolved Lok Sabha in 1970 resulted in separation of parliamentary and assembly
elections. Future dissolution or no-confidence motions can upset synchronization.
Constitutional amendments also pose a high barrier given current political dynamics.
 In summary, while simultaneous elections appear logically appealing, the practical
difficulties cannot be ignored. Synchronizing the electoral calendar for a vast, diverse
country like India with a federal structure raises concerns about regional
representation, accountability, campaign focusing and power distribution between the
centre and states. The reform promises substantive benefits but also poses significant
governance risks that require detailed analysis. As the debate continues, achieving a
feasible consensus remains the key challenge.
PROS AND CONS
Pros
One of the main arguments made in favor of aligning electoral cycles is that it will allow
state governments more time for focused governance instead of being perpetually engaged in
electioneering.Under the current model, there is an election taking place almost every year in
some state or the other in addition to the Lok Sabha polls every five years. This places
tremendous pressure on state administrations to remain in campaign mode continuously. As a
result, state governments remain distracted from implementing a coherent policy agenda and
get drawn into competitive populism and election driven sops.Simultaneous elections will
significantly increase the available governing tenure without election pressures interrupting
administration. For instance, if Lok Sabha and Vidhan Sabha elections are synchronized
across states, incumbent state governments will also get a fixed 5-year term like the Centre.
Currently, not all states have a 5-year assembly term. Synchronization will require
Constitutional amendment for fixed tenure assemblies. But once aligned, state governments
can fully utilize the extended governing period for long-term planning and executing
development programs without frequent election distractions.
Some key benefits of having more time focused on governance are:
 State administrations can pursue policy continuity and consistency instead of resorting
to reversals to appease voters during polls. For example, power sector reforms can be
carried through instead of resorting to free electricity during elections.
 Election distractions will reduce, allowing the state machinery to function more
efficiently on implementation of welfare schemes, infrastructure projects and
economic policies.
 Incumbents can make difficult but necessary decisions on issues like subsidy cuts
without electoral pressures influencing the timing of such steps.
 There will be scope for better monitoring and oversight of government programs
instead of announcements motived by immediate electoral gains.
 Populist measures and sops aimed at wooing voters during elections will reduce with
extended stable governing periods. Resources can be optimally allocated.

 Less Voter Fatigue From Frequent Election Cycles

One of the arguments made in favor of synchronized national and state electoral cycles is
that it will reduce voter fatigue arising from frequent elections year after year. India
witnesses multiple state assembly polls coupled with the Lok Sabha elections every five
years. As a result, parts of India vote in some election almost every few months. For
voters in a particular state, there is often barely a gap between general elections,
panchayat polls and municipal elections.
This endless cycle of elections takes a toll on voters causing voter fatigue and
disillusionment. Key issues highlighted include:
  The logistical hassle of voting frequently in different types of elections is taxing for
voters. Travelling to booths, waiting in long queues multiple times a year
eventually leads to voter apathy and indifference.•Continuous electioneering by
parties splits focus of governments and hinders substantial work, which in turn
demotivates voters from turning up.
 Constant campaign rhetoric and negative politics to attract votes breeds cynicism
among citizens regarding electoral process and outcomes.
 Frequent voting disrupts lives of people as elections result in closure of schools,
shopsand disruptions in transport and public services.
 Heavy security arrangements during polls cause inconvenience. Restrictions on
movement, campaigns, cash withdrawals etc. hamper lives and economic activity.
 The massive expenditure of frequent elections is seen as wasteful when citizens
want focus on governance.Simultaneous elections are therefore projected to make
the entire voting exercise more efficient. One nationwide poll reduces costs, efforts,
challenges and time committed by voters to the electoral process. Voters can devote
this time more productively.

 Focus on Governance Vs. Continuous Campaigning

Another oft-stated benefit of aligned election cycles is that governments can devote more
time towards governance and implementation instead of being perennially in campaign
mode. Citizens stand to gain when elected regimes focus on fulfilling their mandates
versus just electioneering.Under the current staggered poll schedule, some state or the
other is in election mode perpetually. As a result, parties in power remain distracted by
populist measures aimed at boosting electoral prospects. This fosters discontinuity in
governance and reforms.
Some key advantages for citizens if governments can have extended periods for focused
governance are:
 Better implementation of welfare schemes and public services when
administrations are not interrupted by frequent model code of conduct during polls.
Services cannot be withheld during election period.
 Infrastructural capabilities can be augmented more efficiently when governments
devote time between two polls to execution rather than announcements.
 Economic reforms withshort-term costs but long-term benefits can be undertaken
when regimes don't have to worry about immediate electoral fallout. Citizens gain
in the long run.
 No discretionary handouts and freebies expected from governments to woo
electorate before polls.
 Resources are optimally allocated towards capability building.•Policy consistency
and stability improves when administrations need not recalibrate policy priorities
as per proximity to polls. Citizens can expect more coherent policy direction.
 Responsiveness on grievances can improve when ruling regimes don't have to
waste time firefighting elections and can administrative efficiency.
  Improved Policy and Regulatory Stability
One of the arguments made by proponents of synchronized electoral cycles is that it will
lead to improved policy and regulatory stability for industry and businesses by reducing
disruptions caused by frequent elections and uncertainty over electoral outcomes. Under
the current model of continuous electioneering, long-term policymaking often takes a
backseat as governments remain in campaign mode focused on populism to attract votes.
This fosters reversals in economic policies, prevention of crucial reforms during election
code of conduct, and inconsistent implementation of regulations.
Some key ways in which aligned national and state election cycles can enable more policy
stability are:
 Economic policies and reforms roadmaps can be designed and pursued over 5-year
government terms without intermittent course corrections due to impending
state/national elections.
 Governments can take tough economic reform decisions early in their tenures without
worrying about immediate electoral ramifications given the longer non-electioneering
period.
 Taxation reforms like GST that went through complex negotiations across party lines
can progress smoothly once enacted without election-inspired policy flip flops.
 Regulatory frameworks on land, labor and other business aspects formulated by
governments get uninterrupted time for implementation without disruptions by code of
conduct during polls
 Policy inconsistencies and contraventions due to state election timings falling out of
sync with Centre’s tenure will reduce significantly under synchronized national and
state election calendar.
 Industry associations have highlighted how simultaneous polls can improve business
confidence given greater predictability in policy direction over 5-year election cycles.

Cons
 Voters Lose Ability to Express Dissatisfaction With State Govts
A key concern highlighted regarding synchronized national and state elections is that citizens
will lose the opportunity to express dissatisfaction with incumbent state governments by
voting them out at different times than the Centre.
Under the existing model, voters can differentiate between state and central regimes and
performance. If dissatisfied with the state government even when the Centre is performing
well, citizens can vote out the state rulers in the assembly elections held months apart from
Lok Sabha polls.
However, when Lok Sabha and Vidhan Sabha elections are held simultaneously, the electoral
fortunes of state governments get tied to perceptions about the central government. Even if
voters are unhappy with their state government, they cannot vote it out separately without
also voting against the Centre if polls are synchronized.
Some major downsides of reduced accountability of state regimes are:
• Voters lose the leverage to punish state governments for issues like poor delivery of
welfare schemes, regional unemployment, agrarian crisis, lack of infrastructural
development etc through the ballot.
• Parties espousing regional aspirations cannot be individually voted in or out based on
their state vision and performance. Local issues get dwarfed by national trends.
• Positive governance gains like checking anti-incumbency, inducing political
accountability, ensuring multi-party democracy at regional level are diluted if state polls are
tied to Centre.
• Constructive role of state-based regional parties, who form the opposition in many
states, gets undermined when they face national headwinds.
• Citizens lose an important channel of providing direct feedback to state governments
which are constitutionally closer to ground issues.
However, proponents argue that voters are smart enough to make discerning choices between
state and central regimes based on performance. But the high stakes make it imperative for
regional parties to strategically manage the dynamics of simultaneous polls.

 Dominance of National Issues Over Regional Issues

Critics of synchronized national and state elections argue that citizens stand to lose when
campaigns get overwhelmed by national issues at the cost of regional priorities that impact
their local lives and livelihoods.
Under the existing election cycle, state assembly polls see regional issues and factors take
centerstage as national narratives get relegated to the background. Voters evaluate parties on
governance metrics like state infrastructure building, jobs, implementation of welfare
schemes, farm loan waivers, electricity and water supply etc.
However, simultaneous Lok Sabha and Vidhan Sabha polls will witness outsized focus on
national issues like national security, foreign policy, macroeconomic growth, national
leadership etc. during campaigning. Regional issues impacting citizens' everyday lives risk
getting undermined.
Some key downsides of national issues prevailing over regional considerations are:
• Voters get less opportunity to seek accountability from state governments on bespoke
regional problems like inter-state water disputes, agrarian crisis, state unemployment etc
when campaigns coalesce around national topics.
• Mainstream national parties tend to benefit from national debates dominating rather
than focus on grassroots state issues affecting voter priorities.
• Local factors like performance of the state government, infrastructure building, social
indices get sidelined when parties mobilize voters on broader ideological issues.
• Voters lose the leverage to use the ballot as a signal of evaluating state governments on
governance parameters that affect their families and communities.
• Smaller regional parties find limited space to highlight their state development vision,
achievements and agenda when national controversies grab eyeballs.
• Polarizing national issues end up determining electoral outcomes rather than
pragmatic regional considerations.
However, proponents argue robust local outreach can still spotlight state issues. But
undoubtedly, the stakes are higher for regional parties to strike a fine balance and ensure
relevance of local concerns when national narratives dominate.

 Long Periods of Same Government Reduces Accountability

A concern highlighted regarding holding simultaneous Lok Sabha and Vidhan Sabha
elections is that it can lead to extended periods of single party rule. This reduces political
accountability and pressures for responsive governance over 5-year cycles between two
polls.
Under the current system, regular state elections interspersed between Lok Sabha polls exert
pressures on central governments to deliver on economic promises due to electoral
uncertainties. Simultaneous elections will remove this accountability mechanism.
Some potential downsides of long durations of the same government are:
• Business policymaking and reforms can stagnate without the democratic pressures to
perform induced by impending electoral scrutiny. Complacency may set in.
• Central governments may become opaque, non-transparent and unresponsive to
economic changes without electoral oversight for 5 years.
• Cronyism between government and big business can increase without the restraint of
potential periodic change in dispensation through asynchronous polls.
• Corruption allegations may arise given the extended tenure without accountability to
voters. Interest groups can gain disproportionate influence on policy.
• Governments may abuse power by overriding state governments or institutions
without short-term electoral compulsions compelling course corrections.
• Economic populism and doles can still mark the last 1-2 years of the 5-year term
trying to woo voters for next simultaneous polls.
However, proponents contend that simultaneity itself does not compromise accountability
which depends on robust institutions, administrative practices and media freedom. Periodic
elections are only one instrument of democratic accountability.
  Less Frequent Opportunities to Defeat Incumbent Govts
A major drawback highlighted by opposition parties regarding simultaneous Lok Sabha and
Vidhan Sabha polls is that it reduces the frequency of opportunities to unseat incumbent
governments both at the Centre and states.
Currently, regular state assembly elections held months apart from Lok Sabha polls offer
periodic chances for opposition parties to dislodge state-level incumbent governments or
weaken national ruling regimes by eroding their electoral strength in states.
However, simultaneous state and national elections will mean opportunities arise only once
in five years for opposition parties to defeat the ruling dispensations. This negatively impacts
opposition parties in multiple ways:
• Long 5-year stints without accountability pressures reduce the urgency for
governments to perform and reform. Lack of imminent electoral risks breed complacency.
• Opposition parties get limited chances to highlight governments' policy failures until
the next simultaneous polls. This strengthens the ruling party.
• Fresh voter mandates arising from changed realities during the 5-year term cannot be
expressed with simultaneous election cycle restricting ballots to once every five years.
• Closer to elections, sops and populist measures by governments to woo voters go
unchallenged for longer periods without intermediate state elections.
• Democratic pressures to make regimes responsive to changing public opinion are
diluted when simultaneous polls enforce rigid 5-year terms insulating governments from
people's will.
• Course corrections by ruling parties to rectify policy blunders in response to
opposition criticism have reduced effect without proximate electoral risks.
However, the counterview suggests that robust democracies depend on efficient governance
and strong institutions beyond just frequency of elections. But the high-stakes electoral cycle
does raise the bar for improved opposition politics to maximize periodic opportunities
simultaneous elections offer to defeat incumbents.
CONCLUSION
The debate on aligning electoral cycles to conduct simultaneous Lok Sabha and State
Assembly elections once in five years offers reasonable arguments on both sides. Upon
evaluation, some definitive gains for governance, economics and voters emerge while the
tradeoffs on federalism and diversity need measured balancing.
Potential Benefits
 Simultaneous polls can optimize governance efficiency by reducing disruptions and
enabling uninterrupted policy implementation over five-year government terms.
 Central and State governments can focus more on economic development and welfare
schemes instead of expending efforts and resources perpetually on electioneering.
 Policy stability and consistency improves which fosters greater macroeconomic and
investor confidence leading to accelerated growth.
 Logistical expenditures can be optimized for the Election Commission as well as
political parties by aligning campaign efforts instead of frequent separate polls.
 Security arrangements, enforcement and administrative logistics also become more
efficient by conducting one nationwide simultaneous election instead of scattered
state/national polls.
 Align Parliament and State assembly elections across 2 or 3 cycles by dissolving
assemblies or extending terms once for up to 6 months.
 Once synchronised, establish a fixed 5-year tenure regardless of party standings.
However, allow for dissolution/extension only in exceptional circumstances, ensuring
a balanced tenure for the new parliament/assembly.
 In the case of a hung parliament/assembly, invite the largest single party to form a
minority government. Post-election coalitions are encouraged but not obligatory. This
minority government won't face a vote of confidence as a special case. Bills must
undergo discussion and clearance by a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC)
encompassing all parties, to be tabled in parliament/assembly for approval. The
responsibility of governance will be jointly shared.
 Bye-elections resulting from the death of a sitting member or their resignation are to
be avoided. The respective party shall provide three candidates (excluding the
deceased member's family), and following thorough evaluation, the President of India
will nominate one candidate to serve in the House of People for the remaining term.
 To curtail the presence of independent candidates in state assemblies or local bodies,
the security deposit for contesting elections should be increased to ₹2 lakhs for state
assemblies and ₹1 lakh for local bodies. Candidates failing to secure at least 10% of
the valid votes will forfeit their deposit and face a ban on contesting any election for
the subsequent 6 years.
  In the event of the demise or resignation of an independent candidate, the vacant seat
should be filled by nominating a person from the same constituency. Consideration
for this nomination could extend to individuals from similar fields as the independent
candidate, those involved with compliant NGOs, contributors to various media
platforms discussing pertinent issues, or individuals adhering to relevant laws and
regulations.


Potential Risks
 Over-centralization by linking State election outcomes to perceptions about the
Central government can dilute regional aspirations and federal accountability.
 Regional and State-specific issues risk getting undermined by the predominance of
national issues, ideologies and leadership narratives during unified campaigns.
 The pressures on Central and State governments to perform and reform induced by
asynchronous electoral cycles will decrease leading to complacency over long
unanimous stints.
 Accountability to voters through frequent opportunities to express dissatisfaction
against non- performing regimes reduces with simultaneous elections enforcing rigid
5-year terms.
 Simultaneous elections might cut down on election expenses, yet they come with
their own financial and administrative obstacles. Making this happen would need
substantial financial and administrative resources. To effectively execute such a
change, a strong legal framework for budget allocation and resource coordination
becomes imperative.
 The complexity of India's political and constitutional framework poses a formidable
challenge to the implementation of One Nation, One Election. Achieving this goal
requires substantial changes to the Indian Constitution, particularly in key areas
governing the terms of elected bodies like the Lok Sabha, state assemblies, and local
bodies. Amendments to at least five Articles of the Constitution—83, 85,


 172, 174, and 356—along with adjustments to several statutory laws, are crucial
prerequisites for this proposal.
 Additionally, establishing fixed tenures for both Union and state assemblies is
essential. This ensures that the House's term remains unchanged, except in cases of
declared emergencies, while also allowing for the House to dissolve before its
designated tenure ends. Amending the Constitution is a lengthy and politically
sensitive process, demanding a two-thirds majority in both Houses of Parliament and
the consent of states.
  Aligning the election schedules across different tiers of government—central, state,
and local— presents a legal complexity due to their distinct terms. The varied terms
of state governments, some benefiting from special provisions under Article 371 of
the Constitution, grant them significant autonomy. Any effort to synchronise these
elections might be viewed as an infringement on this autonomy, potentially impacting
their constitutionally protected independent operations.
 Similarly, local governance operates on a decentralised model, affording considerable
autonomy to local bodies. Achieving simultaneous elections would demand revisions
to the laws governing local body elections, ensuring alignment with the revised
election timeline.
Therefore, while simultaneous polls offer demonstrated benefits, a robust national consensus
needs to be built by balancing efficiency with diversity, continuity with accountability, and
stability with change.
The notion of One India, One election stands as an admirable concept, yet its potential to
alleviate issues requires in-depth discussion. Despite the announcement of the 2019 General
election, this idea remained unimplemented. However, if executed with precision, it holds
promise to transform India's electoral system, addressing the urgent need for capable
administrative personnel and robust security measures. Highlighted by the standing
committee, there's a call to reduce election frequency to grant both the government
machinery and the election commission time for other crucial administrative tasks. While an
immediate shift may not be feasible, it's vital to deliberate and seek pathways for its eventual
adoption. In today's political sphere, every action often gets interpreted as a strategic move to
secure votes or undermine opponents. The crucial question persists: Is democratic India
prepared to depart from the traditional election model and embrace One India, One Electiion.