
2034 earliest for simultaneous polls under existing Bills: One Nation, One Election panel chief
P P Chaudhary, BJP MP and chairman of the Joint Committee of Parliament on Bills relating to 'One Nation, One Election', has told The Indian Express that the earliest that simultaneous elections can be held under the existing Bills is 2034, and the committee may go beyond the draft law to suggest ways to keep polls aligned, including recommending a provision for a constructive or positive vote of no-confidence.
In an interview with The Indian Express, Chaudhary, responding to a question on how long it would take the committee to finalise its recommendations, said members had unanimously decided to visit all states and Union Territories – a process that would take about two to two-and-a-half years. So far, the committee has visited two states: Uttarakhand and Maharashtra.
The Bills were introduced in Lok Sabha in December last year and were almost immediately referred to the Chaudhary-led committee which has been holding consultations with stakeholders for feedback.
Although the draft legislation provides for a one-time measure to bring Lok Sabha and Assembly elections in sync, Chaudhary felt that the committee could make additional recommendations to address how synchronisation should be maintained.
One such suggestion could be a constructive vote of no-confidence which, as is the case in Germany, requires members of a legislature who bring a no-confidence motion against a government to have the numbers to form the government instead.
Asked when the first simultaneous elections would be held, he said: 'The committee will deliberate; Parliament will decide. We can't say when, but the Bill says the first session of Parliament, if it happens with the appointed date, then it would be from 2034.'
The Constitution (One Hundred and Twenty-Ninth Amendment) Bill, 2024 and the Union Territories Laws (Amendment Bill), 2024 provide for simultaneous elections to the Lok Sabha and Assemblies. If passed, the Bills provide for the President notifying the appointed date on the first sitting of a newly-elected Lok Sabha and every state or UT Assembly elected after that appointed date would have its term curtailed to align with the Lok Sabha. This would provide for simultaneous elections to be held when the five-year term of the Lok Sabha ends. The Bills also provide for elections to be held for the remainder term in case a government falls before the five-year term.
Asked what would happen if a Lok Sabha or Assembly election returns a hung verdict or if a Union or state government falls, Chaudhary said: 'The Constitution does not mention no-confidence motion even now; it is governed by Rule 198 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha. We can bring in some provisions for stability. We can recommend new provisions in the Constitution.' He said the committee could deliberate on the issue and it was for Parliament to decide.
'If some impediments are there in the Constitution, those impediments may be redressed after discussion with all the members. Constructive no-confidence motion, like the German model, can be discussed. Once you bring a no-confidence motion, then at the same time, you should bring a confidence motion. In the rarest of rare situations, the Leader of the House can be elected on the floor of the House like the Speaker is. But, this situation will not arise. We have seen that the electorate does not support those who bring a no-confidence motion,' he said.
'All members will discuss and if there is a requirement to incorporate something or make additions to the Bill in the national interest, I believe the committee will recommend. If our end goal is to achieve 'One Nation, One Election', then definitely we will recommend amendments to enable that,' he said.
The Bills had been introduced by Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal on December 17, 2024 and were based on the recommendations of the High-Level Committee chaired by former President Ram Nath Kovind.
Responding to criticism from some in the Opposition that the move would be anti-democratic and against federalism, Chaudhary, who is BJP MP from Pali in Rajasthan, said simultaneous elections would further the cause of democracy.
'In our experience, the states where elections are held simultaneously, the voter turnout is 10-20% more. Is that in the interest of or against democracy? If there is only 40% polling and the PM or CM is elected with 21% of the votes, is that democracy? I believe polling will cross 80% if we have simultaneous elections. The expression of the will of the people will be more robust and it will strengthen democracy. Not holding simultaneous elections is anti-democratic,' he said.
He maintained that the Bills only 'fixed the time schedule' of elections and did not affect the basic structure of the Constitution, federalism and free and fair elections. He said Article 327 of the Constitution gives Parliament the power to make provision with respect to elections to legislatures.
When it comes to federalism, he said the Supreme Court, in the SR Bommai case in 1994, had reinforced that federalism is a basic feature and that the Bills before the committee do not infringe upon this as the powers of the Union and states remain the same.
'The first three elections were held simultaneously until 1967. Were those elections against federalism? Some Assembly elections are still held with Lok Sabha, is that against federalism? Has any regional party in those states demanded separate elections? Look at the example of TDP in Andhra Pradesh or BJD in Odisha. This argument is untenable. We welcome anyone who wants to come before the committee with such an argument, with foundations. We will deal with it. If there is no basis, we cannot deal with such an argument properly,' he said.
The Bills, he said, did not alter the accountability of the government to Parliament and that holding frequent elections did not mean that the government would be more accountable.
'We have a parliamentary form of democracy. The executive is accountable 24×7 to Parliament,' he said.
Asked about the concerns of regional parties that holding simultaneous elections would lead to regional issues being sidelined, he said voters were capable of electing different parties at the Centre and state.
'The voters today are very intelligent and politically educated. We can't underestimate the Indian voters. Underestimating them will tantamount to undermining them. The voters, particularly in rural areas like where I come from, know who to vote for in national elections based on national issues, and in local elections, based on local issues,' he said.
Chaudhary said the cost of frequent elections was borne by the education system, particularly government schools where teachers are sent on election duty for months, and the economy. On how much it would cost to hold simultaneous elections, he said it would be 'maximum Rs15,000 crore'. But this, he said, would be a small amount when compared to the benefit to the economy in terms of fewer disruptions to governance, policy-making and investments. On the other hand, he said the practice of announcing freebies and caste-based politics around elections would also be reduced if all elections were held once in five years.
As a part of the committee's hearings, he said all states and UTs had been asked to prepare reports on the impact of frequent elections to their economy and society. Stakeholders like the Indian Bank Association were also asked to study the impact of simultaneous elections. The Committee has so far met former Chief Justice of India U U Lalit and several former Supreme Court and High Court judges as a part of its consultations. He said the committee plans on meeting more legal luminaries, apart from political leaders and other stakeholders in states.
Asked how the BJP would be able to have the Constitutional amendment passed as it required two-thirds majority, which the NDA does not have, he said he believed the parties who think of the national interest would support the Bills.
'It is not in the party's interest, it is in the national interest. It will not take time to be passed if they think in national interest. I have full faith that the parties that think of national interest will support. If Congress or any other party thinks of national interest first, then not just 2/3, but we will get 3/4 majority,' he said.
The committee, comprising 39 members and two co-opted members, had been given an extension until the Monsoon session during the last session.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hindu
18 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Congress president slams Modi for keeping Deputy Speaker post in Lok Sabha vacant
Leader of Opposition in the Rajya Sabha and Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge strongly criticised Prime Minister Narendra Modi for keeping the post of Deputy Speaker in the Lok Sabha vacant for a third consecutive term, calling the move 'undemocratic and unconstitutional'. 'Since Independence, no Prime Minister — except Mr. Modi — has left the Deputy Speaker's post vacant. He is now in his third term, and the position has remained vacant throughout. The Constitution provides for the election of a Deputy Speaker, and it is customary to appoint someone from the opposition. When we were in power, we appointed a member from the opposition. Mr Modi's refusal to do so is illegal and undemocratic,' Mr. Kharge said, adding that he had written to the Prime Minister on the matter. PM ignores past contributions to Kashmir rail network Speaking to media representatives at his residence in Kalaburagi on June 11, Mr. Kharge took aim at Mr. Modi for failing to acknowledge the contributions of previous governments in expanding the railway network in the Kashmir Valley. 'The work to connect the Valley to the Indian mainland via rail was initiated by former Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao in the 1990s. It was further advanced by former PM Atal Bihari Vajpayee. However, the most significant progress occurred during the UPA government under Dr. Manmohan Singh. As Railway Minister, I allocated substantial funds to Kashmir and the North East. Mr. Modi has merely continued what we had already begun, and considerably did. It is his habit to inaugurate projects initiated by others without giving due credit,' he said. '36 wrongdoings in 11 years' Responding to queries on the 11-year tenure of the Modi-led NDA government, Mr. Kharge said that Mr. Modi committed 36 wrongdoings in these 11 years. 'I have not seen a Prime Minister who lies so frequently, commits so many mistakes, misleads the public, deceives the youth, and manipulates people for votes as Mr. Modi does. In my 65 years in politics, and 55 years in power, I have never encountered a Prime Minister like him. He does not act without resorting to falsehoods. When questioned about his claims, he offers no answers. He never admits his mistakes, nor does he apologise for them,' he added.


Deccan Herald
32 minutes ago
- Deccan Herald
'One of world's most rigorous, transparent exercises': CEC on electoral rolls preparation in India
His comments during his keynote address at the Stockholm International Conference on Electoral Integrity came against the backdrop of Congress leaders, including Rahul Gandhi, levelling complaints about the electoral rolls and the processes adopted during the Maharashtra Assembly elections held five months after the Lok Sabha polls.

The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Sri Lanka's 13th Amendment at a Crossroads: Can the NPP Deliver on Minority Rights and Devolution?
Published : Jun 11, 2025 14:42 IST - 5 MINS READ Until a new, inclusive constitution is developed, Sri Lanka should implement the provisions of the 13th Amendment to its Constitution and hold elections to the provincial councils in the island nation, an academic study has said. The study, titled 'Divided and weakened: the collapse of minority politics in Sri Lanka', has been authored by Sri Lankan-British scholar Farah Mihlar and was released on June 11 by the Minority Rights Group, an international human rights organisation, and Oxford Brookes University. According to the study, the need of the hour was 'constitutional reforms that strengthen minority rights and non-discrimination'. The study also wanted the Sri Lankan government to find 'a political solution to the ethnic conflict acceptable to all communities that involves devolving power to minorities beyond the Thirteenth Amendment.' Also Read | Anura Dissanayake: The outsider with a difference The report acknowledged the fact that the Anura Kumara Dissanayake-led National People's Power (NPP) government, with its two-thirds majority, has a unique opportunity to transform the national narrative. Historic opportunity for NPP It said: 'The NPP historic opportunity to produce a constitution that represents all communities in Sri Lanka. Considering the many rights and justice claims that have a long history and were causes of the conflict, earnestly resolving them should be a priority for all political parties, mainstream national and ethnic minority ones alike, to ensure a just and lasting peace in Sri Lanka.' The 13th Amendment to the Sri Lankan Constitution devolves powers to the Tamil-dominated Northern and Eastern provinces, and was part of an accord signed by Sri Lankan President J.R. Jayawardene and Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi in 1987. That accord still remains the only hope for some autonomy for the Tamils of Sri Lanka. Rajiv Gandhi's defeat in the 1989 general election and the subsequent instability in India's polity for the next few years gave Sri Lanka the escape route it was looking for. The killing of Rajiv Gandhi in 1991 and the lack of interest in the Sri Lankan solution during Narasimha Rao's tenure as Prime Minister (1991-96) ensured that India did not push forward the implementation of the accord. However, many Sri Lankan politicians, across the ethnic divide, find the 13th Amendment unacceptable. Sinhala politicians consider it Indian interference in Sri Lankan affairs, while Tamil politicians say that the amendment will be of no effective consequence because power will only be transferred from the Sinhala majoritarian government in Colombo to the Governors appointed by the same federal government to the provinces. The NPP government, which was propelled to power because of people's disenchantment with the established political parties, has held elections to the local bodies. But so far, it has not announced a firm date for elections to the provincial councils. In the local body elections, NPP won a huge majority, winning over 250 of the 339 local body councils, but its vote share dropped by an alarming 34 per cent compared to the 2024 parliamentary election. In April 2025, when Dissanayake met Prime Minister Narendra Modi in New Delhi, Modi urged him to hold provincial elections. Collapse of minority politics The Farah Mihlar study noted that 'ethnic minority parties from all three minority communities [Tamils, Muslims and plantation Tamils] have splintered into several factions, and the larger, more popular ones are internally deeply divided. These divides have been caused in part as a consequence of majoritarian nationalism, but also due to weak leadership and allegations of corruption within parties.' The study concluded that minorities in the country have 'lost almost all space in the big political parties in Sri Lanka'. These parties cater to Sinhala nationalism and view this as the one and only route to political power. Minority politics in the nation is collapsing because of a host of factors ranging from corruption to minority political parties taking extreme positions. Since the end of the civil war in 2009, prominent minority parties, including the largest party, the Ilankai Tamil Arasu Kachchi (ITAK), have struggled to define their political path, given the prevalence of Tamil ultranationalism in the areas formerly affected by the civil war. The study said: 'Ethnic minority parties from among the second largest minority, Muslims, and the smaller Malaiyaga Tamil community (of recent Indian origin), present a story of disarray, division and lost credibility. These parties have erratically switched allegiances with nationalist mainstream parties trying to capitalise on shifting alliances and coalition formation, which eventually damaged them deeply. Their own lack of openness to new leadership and progressive reforms, amidst allegations of corruption, has not helped their cause.' Change in strategy At the national level, the study noted that there has been a change in strategy on minority representation: instead of fielding minority candidates, these parties are forming alliances and coalitions with ethnic minority parties while offering less space inside their own parties for both minority representatives and minority issues. Also Read | Is Sri Lanka witnessing a shift in its ethnic politics? It added: 'Minority representatives who have been elected from the former two major parties, the United National Party (UNP) and the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP), and their various fronts have felt isolated, with little opportunity to take up minority issues in national party agendas.' It is in this context that recent NPP actions in many councils need to be seen. In Batticaloa, for instance, ITAK joined hands with the main opposition party, the Samagi Jana Balawegaya. to win the post of Mayor. The NPP, which stands for clean politics, joined hands with Tamil Makkal Viduthalai Puligal, whose leader, Pillayan, is in jail on a kidnapping and killing charge. He is also accused of aiding and abetting those behind the April 2019 Easter attacks. Shanakiyan Rasamanickam, MP and ITAK leader, said: 'Given that Pillayan remains in custody over multiple serious allegations, the NPP's willingness to align with such a figure in pursuit of power has raised serious concerns.' As of today, with 159 MPs NPP's dominance in parliament is absolute. But it is increasingly under attack for its policies and what is seen as a lack of competence in governance. Despite the setbacks in governance, NPP has the unique opportunity to go beyond what other ruling combines have attempted on the political reconciliation front so far.