Former Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjeev Khanna has recently shared his views with a parliamentary committee reviewing the "One Nation, One Election" (ONOE) proposal, emphasizing a crucial distinction: constitutional validity does not automatically equate to desirability. His insights, delivered to the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) examining the Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill and the Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill for simultaneous polls, have highlighted potential pitfalls and called for careful consideration of the proposal's broader implications.
Khanna's central argument revolves around the potential impact of the ONOE bill on India's federal structure and the discretionary powers granted to the Election Commission (EC). While the bill may not directly undermine the principle of a government remaining in power as long as it maintains majority support, he cautioned that its indirect effects could be problematic.
One major concern raised by Justice Khanna pertains to the scenario where a state government collapses before completing its full term. Under the proposed ONOE system, any newly elected legislative assembly would not have the typical five-year tenure. Instead, its term would be limited to the period remaining until the next scheduled nationwide simultaneous polls. Khanna warned that deferring elections in such cases "may result in indirect President's rule". This could lead to the Union government effectively taking control of a state government, a move that he suggested might be "questionable judicially, as violating the federal structure envisaged in the Constitution".
Furthermore, Khanna drew attention to Clause 5 of the proposed Article 82A, which grants the Election Commission of India (ECI) significant discretion in deciding whether to postpone assembly elections. This clause allows the ECI to recommend to the President that an assembly election be conducted at a later date, even if other polls are being held simultaneously. Khanna flagged this provision as potentially problematic, arguing that it grants "unfettered discretion" to the EC and could be seen as "violating and offending the basic structure of the Constitution on the ground of being arbitrary and offending to Article 14 of the Constitution". Article 14 guarantees equality before the law, and any provision perceived as arbitrary could face serious legal challenges.
Several former CJIs, including DY Chandrachud, JS Khehar and UU Lalit, have also interacted with the ONOE committee and voiced concerns about the bill. Chandrachud and Khehar, who deposed before the panel on July 11, expressed concerns over some "major gaps" in the proposed bill, while maintaining that the proposed law does not violate the basic structure of the Constitution. They cautioned the JPC that the Election Commission has been given excessive power in the proposed law.
The ONOE initiative proposes aligning the elections for the Lok Sabha and all state legislative assemblies. The contentious bill proposes the alignment process to begin in 2029 and the first simultaneous elections in 2034. The Lok Sabha has extended the tenure of the ONOE panel, headed by BJP MP P P Choudhary, until the last week of the 2025 Winter Session. The 39-member multi-party panel is examining The Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill, 2024, and the Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2024, which provide for simultaneous polls.
Justice Khanna is scheduled to attend another JPC meeting on August 19. The committee has already held nine meetings.
