Former CJI Flags Constitutional Concerns Over 'One Nation, One Election' Bill
Former Chief Justice of India, Sanjiv Khanna, has raised concerns before a parliamentary committee about the 'one nation, one election' proposal. In his written opinion, he cautioned that while the proposal might pass a test of constitutional validity, its desirability is questionable. He specifically noted that granting the Election Commission "unfettered discretion" to postpone state elections could undermine India's federal structure and potentially lead to an indirect imposition of President's rule, challenging the Constitution's basic structure.
Unpacked:
The 'one nation, one election' proposal aims to synchronize elections for India's central (Lok Sabha) and all state legislative assemblies, so that they are held simultaneously across the country instead of separately at different times.
Granting the Election Commission 'unfettered discretion' to delay state elections could undermine the autonomy of state governments, shifting power from states to the central government and potentially weakening the constitutional principle of federalism.
President's rule is when a state government is suspended and the central government administers the state, usually in case of a constitutional crisis. If state elections are postponed, states may be placed under President's rule more often, bypassing elected state governments.
The 'basic structure' doctrine, established by the Supreme Court in 1973, asserts that certain fundamental features of the Constitution—like federalism and separation of powers—cannot be altered or destroyed by amendments or ordinary legislation.