- Created on Saturday, 06 August 2016 15:17
- Hits: 4579
(Officials wait to collect voting machines. Image Courtesy:PIB)
Decades-old idea of holding simultaneous elections to the Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies (LS&SLAs) has gained currency with Prime Minister Narendra Modi pitching for it.
The fact is NDA Government is operating like all other previous regimes that chewed on this idea of restoring status quo in electoral process without taking any decisive initiatives within certain timeframe.
The proposal has thus been shelved, rejected, revived, debated and dragged on for decades. And the situation is also unlikely to be different during the current regime.
This is obvious from an official reply to a question on this issue put in Rajya Sabha on 6th May 2016. The Government answered: “The issue involved requires wide consultation with various stake holders and hence, no specific time frame can be indicated.”
The Government should seize the opportunity to restore status quo as it existed till 1967, the year till which LS&SLA polls were held jointly. If the Government succeeds in this direction, then the initiative can turn out be a big-bang reform. It would benefit the economy and national exchequer in big way. It would also save precious time and energy of citizens as well as of candidates and all political parties.
Imagine the impact of removal of elections-induced policy paralysis & decisions holiday on economic growth, employment and wealth creation. GDP might certainly increase by two percent annually if elections at the Centre, State and local government level are synchronized and organized together. The yearly acceleration to growth might be 1% if the idea of holding simultaneous polls is limited to LS&SLAs.
Mr Modi might well like to draw inspiration from his mentor, Bharat Ratna-cum-Ex-PM Atal Bihari Vajpayee. Inaugurating a seminar on electoral reforms in January 1999, Mr. Vajpayee stated: “Frequent elections at the Centre and in the States are good neither for the economy nor for healthy law and order....At present there is no year without some election or the other taking place. Efficient Government is the first casualty when winning elections is the first priority of all political parties and understandably so.”
Mr. Modi, who himself contested LS polls from two constituencies, should also work for an outright ban on candidates contesting Lok Sabha and/or State Assembly elections from more than one seat and later vacating a seat after winning from both the seats.
The seat vacation necessitates bye-election. This, in turn, disrupts governance and economic activities in the constituency, apart from wasteful expenditure borne by the Centre or States as the case may be.
The citizens’ time and government expenditure should not be wasted to cushion political insecurity of leaders, who contest from two seats at one go. A bye-election triggers collateral damage to projects, apart from disrupting the regular socio-economic process in the constituency.
The Election Commission (EC) has therefore twice recommended restriction on candidates contesting simultaneously from two constituencies – first in September 1982 and second time in July 2004 as part of electoral reforms proposals submitted to the Government. Even National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC), in its report submitted in March 2002, recommended ban on practice of candidates contesting election simultaneously for the same office from more than one constituency.
It is here pertinent to note that successive government have turned blind eye to this recommendation perhaps because survival instinct unites all leaders to sabotage this reform.
One can appreciate the proposed reform better by looking at the letter dated 10th February 2015 that L&T Arunachal HydroPower Limited (L&T AHPL) wrote to Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MOEF&CC).
L&T AHPL submitted environment impact assessment (EIA) report on Tagurshit hydroelectric project to Arunachal Pradesh State Pollution Control Board (APSPCB) way back in September 2013 but the public hearing for the project could not be conducted by the Board within the stipulated period.
Taking this fact in view, expert committee for appraisal of hydel projects extended terms of reference (TOR) for hydropower project by one year, that is, up to 12th March 2015.
Later, APSPCB deferred the public hearing by 12 days to 23rd February 2015 at the request of Deputy Commissioner keeping in view bye-election for Liromoba constituency on 13th February 2015.
The Letter says: “As the new date of public hearing is very close to the expiry date of TOR validity, it is apprehended that completing the whole process may get delayed.” It thus sought six-month extension in the validity of TOR.
Postponement of public hearing on projects following announcement of elections has become the de facto norm. Elections thus delay the process of environmental clearance for projects and the consequent investments on projects and project-linked mandatory social welfare.
Take the case of Mahavir Coal Washeries Pvt. Ltd. (MCWPL). In January 2014, it requested Chhattisgarh Environment Conservation Board (CECB) to hold public hearing for its proposed coal washery in Raigarh district. CECB delayed public hearing for want of copies of EIA reports in Hindi. The company submitted 10 copies of EIA report in Hindi in May 2014.
In a letter dated 20th November 2014 to MOEC&CC seeking 1-year extension of validity of TOR for the project, MCWPL stated: “Public hearing for the said project got delayed due to the Assembly elections in the State in which the State machinery was quite busy.”
The letter continued: “Presently, the officers of the District Level Administration & Police including CECB are busy with the local Municipal elections. The public hearing is likely to be held in the month of January / February 2015. By the time the proceedings of the public hearing will be received for finalization of the EIA report for obtaining environmental clearance, the validity of TOR may expire”.
One can cite several other cases in which public hearing was postponed due to elections. In all such cases, the companies queue up before the Governments for extension of validity of TOR. The vibrant democracy is indeed taking toll of projects and growth through deferred investments and time and cost overruns in projects.
Much before this became the trend, G.S Pathak, an MP, made a strong case for not abandoning the process of holding simultaneous LS & SLA elections. On 18th May 1966, he observed: “the people do not want to go in for elections. Therefore, having regard to the circumstances prevailing in that part of the country, having regard to the fact that the political parties themselves will be saved double expense, having regard to the fact that a candidate for the legislative Assembly if he works with a candidate for Parliament will have to spend less on the elections if the elections are simultaneous this is the best thing to be done.”
Participating in a debate on The Orissa Legislative Assembly (Extension of Duration) Bill, 1966 in Rajya Sabha, Mr. Pathak added: “There cannot be any doubt that the candidates themselves will have to incur a lesser amount of expenditure if the elections are simultaneous. Parties themselves will be saved duplication of expenditure if the elections are simultaneous.”
It here appropriate to recount past milestones and discourse on this subject before taking up latest developments.
On 17th March 1975, Law Minister, H. R. Gokhale, however, ruled out scope for simultaneous LS& SLA polls. He told Parliament: “Holding of elections to the Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies will depend on the duration of the respective Houses and other unpredictable factors. As such, the proposition that the elections to the Lok Sabha and the State Legislative Assemblies may be held simultaneously is not feasible.”
The proposal for simultaneous elections got revived in the early eighties. Replying to a question on 4th October 1982, the then Law Minister Jagannath Kaushal stated that the Government was considering EC’s suggestion to develop a system by convention under which the general elections to LS&SLAs are held simultaneously, if it is not possible or feasible to bring about a legislation.
Mr. Kaushal added: “For this purpose, the Commission has suggested that, to start with, it may be possible to hold simultaneous elections at least in those cases where the gap between these two elections is less than one year or such elections are due within one year of earlier election.”
The Law Commission, in its report on ‘Reform of the Electoral Laws’ submitted in May 1999 strongly advocated the need for simultaneous holding of LS&SLAs polls.
The Report stated: “the holding of a separate election to a Legislative Assembly should be an exception and not the rule. The rule ought to be ‘one election once in five years for Lok Sabha and all the Legislative Assemblies’.”
On 27th February 2003, Dr. Alladi P. RajKumar, pitched for simultaneous elections at all three tiers of public representatives in Rajya Sabha.
Mr RajKumar stated: “I propose to the Government to consider for bringing in a new legislation to regulate the Indian elections, right from the local body Panchayat elections, municipal elections, State Legislature elections to the Parliament elections, to be held simultaneously throughout India on a single day, to avoid huge manpower loss and monetary loss, besides creating a healthy atmosphere in politics.”
He continued: “At present, India has virtually only three MPs - money power, muscle power and mafia power - which are controlling all elections and resist every attempt of reforms. It will make the duties of the officials of the Election Commission easier, as they are responsible for holding elections and keeping the electoral rolls up to date.”
On 29th July, 2009, Law Minister Dr. M. Veerappa Moily informed Parliament that the Election Commission had given a 22-point electoral reforms package to the Government. Even as the Government was considering the reforms proposals, the Chairman, Rajya Sabha referred EC’s reforms proposals to the Department Related Parliamentary Standing Committee (PSC) on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice for examination and report.
PSC, in its report submitted in December 2015, succinctly underscored the virtue of simultaneous polls. As put by PSC, “elections lead to imposition of Model Code of Conduct (MCC) in the poll bound State/area. The imposition of MCC puts on hold the entire development programme and activities of the Union and State Governments in the poll bound State. It even affects the normal governance. Frequent elections lead to imposition of MCC over prolonged periods of time. This often leads to policy paralysis and governance deficit.”
The Report says: “in the larger context of economic development and implementation of election promises without creation of the impediments due to enforcement of Model Code of Conduct as a result of frequent elections, the prospects of holding simultaneous elections need to be weighed and deeply considered by all political parties."
In June 2016, Election Commission has reportedly endorsed idea of simultaneous polls. In response to Law Ministry seeking its comments on PSC report, EC reportedly stated: “In so far as the Election Commission is concerned, the issues involved in holding simultaneous elections are not insurmountable for it. If there is political consensus and will across the board, needless to say that the Commission supports the idea of considering simultaneous elections.”
Different means to holding simultaneous polls including amendments to the Constitution have been mentioned in different documents. It is now for the Government to take a call and take requisite legislative action. Let the law makers act positively on this issue by relegating narrower political interests and putting on forefront national development agenda.
As put by PSC, “a solution will be found to reduce the frequency of elections which relieve people and government machinery being tired of frequent electoral processes. This is important for India if it is to compete with other nations in developmental agenda on real time basis as robust democratic country.”
Published by taxindiaonline.com on 3rd August 2016
