TWO days after the BJP leaders waxed eloquent about protecting the Constitution in the debate in the Lok Sabha to mark the 75th anniversary of the framing of the Constitution, the Modi government has introduced a Constitution Amendment Bill, which seeks to damage the Constitution and the federal structure within it.
Two Bills were introduced – The Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill and The Union Territories Laws Amendment Bill – which seek to ensure simultaneous elections to the Lok Sabha and all the legislatures of states and union territories.
The Constitution Amendment Bill amends three clauses and introduces a new clause in the Constitution. The purpose of these amendments is to facilitate simultaneous elections to the Lok Sabha and the state assemblies. For this, the basic principle provided in the Constitution of a five-year term for the Lok Sabha and state legislatures is done away with.
First of all, to bring the Lok Sabha election and all state legislature elections together for a simultaneous election, at the expiry of the five-year term of the Lok Sabha after the appointed date declared by the President of India, the terms of all state assemblies will come to an end on the expiry of the full term of the Lok Sabha. This means that some assemblies will have their five-year terms curtailed to pave the way for simultaneous elections. This is the first assault on the right of a state legislature to have a full five-year term.
Further, the five-year term is not guaranteed either for the Lok Sabha or the state assemblies in the future. One of the amendments states that if the Lok Sabha is dissolved before the end of its full term, elections will be held for the next Lok Sabha only for the period of the unexpired term. This means that if the Lok Sabha is dissolved after three years of its term, the next election will only be for a Lok Sabha that will function for two years.
A similar amendment is proposed with regard to the term of the state legislatures. If a state assembly is dissolved mid-term, then elections will be held only for the remaining part of the term. As an illustration, if a state assembly is dissolved after three years, then elections will be held for only the unexpired part of the term, which will be only two years. Hence, a Member of Parliament or an MLA elected in a mid-term election will not have a five-year term. This goes against the basic scheme of parliamentary democracy set out in the Constitution.
This truncation of the tenure of a state assembly has serious implications for federalism and the rights of elected state legislators. The federal structure, which is manifested in the Union of States, will get weakened and diluted as the basic right of a five-year term for the assembly gets mutilated. It also opens the way for manipulation by the central government and the ruling party at the centre. For instance, if a state assembly is dissolved after four years of its term due to the fall of the state government, a mid-term election for just the remaining one-year term of the assembly does not make sense. Such a situation will open the way for either horse-trading to prevent the fall of the government or it will be an invitation to impose President’s rule in the state.
Federalism implies recognition of diversity and varying linguistic-socio-cultural conditions and political plurality. To straitjacket all state assembly elections together with the Lok Sabha is an effort to steamroller them into a homogenous political entity in a centralised system.
One of the major arguments advanced by the proponents of the `One Nation, One Election’ system is that it will cut wasteful expenditure incurred due to the multiplicity of elections held at varying times. However, the proposed changes to maintain the alignment of the Parliament and assembly elections opens the way for unnecessary elections in short spans of time.
By the Constitutional amendments proposed, there can be an election for a state assembly with a five-year term; then if there is a fall of the state government, a mid-term election for the remainder of the term will be held; following which there will be another election at the end of the five-year term. This means there will be three elections in the space of five years. If such a situation occurs at the Lok Sabha level, there will be three national elections in the space of five years. Such an absurd situation will only multiply the expenditure on polls many-fold.
There is also a clause introduced, which empowers the Election Commission to decide to delay elections in any state if it thinks the situation warrants it. The EC recommendation will be acted upon by the president. This is a dangerous provision which can be used to subvert the basic right of a state in the federal structure.
It is the ultra-nationalist Hindutva ideology of the BJP rulers that has motivated the `One Nation, One Election’ system. This is an ideology which hankers for an authoritarian-centralised State. It is deeply hostile to federalism, diversity and pluralism.
The Modi government has brought in these bills as part of the push for a hyper-centralised State. After the 18th Lok Sabha election, the BJP and its NDA alliance do not have a two-third majority in the Lok Sabha, nor does it have it in the Rajya Sabha. A Constitution amendment has to be passed by a two-thirds majority of the members present and voting in both Houses. Further, half of both the Houses must vote in favour of the amendment. Without such a majority, these bills have been introduced and they are being referred to a joint parliamentary committee. The aim seems to be to keep the issue afloat in Parliament and use it for political propaganda and to bide time for a favourable opening, sometime in the future.
It is essential that the anti-democratic, anti-federal character of these amendments are campaigned against and exposed before the people.
(December 18, 2024)
or reload the browser