Simultaneous Polls: Constitutional Perspectives and States' Role
Introduction
The idea of 'one nation, one election' has gained prominence recently with the Union Government setting up an eightmember HighLevel Committee to examine its feasibility. This committee's terms of reference include assessing whether constitutional amendments required for simultaneous polls need ratification by the States. The issue engages a series of questions on constitutional amendments and State involvement.
Constitutional Amendment Procedures
Article 368
The Indian Constitution, considered a living document, has builtin provisions for amendments under Article 368. Amendments can take place through three procedures:
Simple Majority
Certain provisions can be amended by a simple majority in the Parliament. This category excludes the purview of Article 368.
Example: Changes in the organization of states under Article 4 fall under this category.
Special Majority
A 'special majority' is required for other kinds of amendments, meaning not less than twothirds of the members present should vote in favor. This majority is needed at every effective stage of the Bill.
Example: Amendments relating to the appointment and transfer of judges require a special majority.
Special Majority & State Ratification
A third category requires a 'special majority' along with ratification by at least onehalf of the State legislatures.
Example: The GST amendment required ratification by more than half of the State legislatures.
Amendments Requiring State Ratification
Amendments affecting the federal structure of the Constitution require ratification by the States. These are referred to as 'entrenched provisions'.
Example: Amendments affecting elections to the post of the President of India or the extent of executive power of the Union or the State governments require ratification by States.
Debates on 'Entrenched Provisions'
During the Constituent Assembly debates, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar advocated for State ratification to maintain the federal structure of the Constitution. He warned against making all constitutional amendments possible by a simple majority.
Judicial Perspective
In the AntiDefection case and the case regarding cooperative societies, the Supreme Court upheld the requirement of State ratification. Amendments have been struck down for want of ratification, thus underlining the critical role played by State ratification in the amendment process.
State's Right to Rescind Ratification
The Indian Constitution is silent on whether a State can rescind its ratification, making it a legally grey area. However, experts argue that allowing rescinding would complicate the amending process.
Law Commission's Stand
The Law Commission in 2018 stated that simultaneous elections are not feasible under the existing constitutional framework. Constitutional amendments would require ratification from at least 50% of the States.
Implications for Federal Structure
Experts, including former SecretaryGeneral of Lok Sabha P.D.T Achary, caution that simultaneous elections could infringe upon the federal structure, particularly in States ruled by the opposition.
Conclusion
The debate surrounding simultaneous polls calls for a nuanced understanding of constitutional amendments and the role of States in it. As of now, simultaneous elections pose a series of constitutional challenges, requiring extensive debate and possibly, significant constitutional amendments.
