Critically analyze the debate on ‘one nation, one election’ in India while keeping light light the key arguments made for and against this idea by different stakeholders.

The ‘one nation, one election’ debate centres on the proposal to synchronize national and state assembly elections in India. This idea has been promoted by the ruling BJP government for over 5 years to streamline the election process.

Key arguments made in favour include:

• Reduced expenditure on frequent elections which currently happen almost every year (PM stated over 200 days are spent on elections annually)
• Minimized disruption to governance and policymaking due to imposition of Model Code of Conduct during election period
• Decreased need to mobilize massive security and bureaucracy for election duties every year

However, several reasonable counter arguments exist:

• Difficult to implement in case of premature dissolution of Lok Sabha or state assemblies
• Could reduce government accountability to citizens for 5-year periods between synchronized elections
• Perpetuates communal and caste identities which get amplified during elections

Thus, the proposal involves complex trade-offs between efficiency and accountability. Consensus needs to emerge taking into account positions of all major national and regional parties. Synchronized elections may streamline governance processes but should not come at cost of diluting democratic mechanisms of periodic change in leadership based on public mandate.

Topics: GS-II: Salient Features of the Representation of Peoples Act