One Nation, One Election: Opposition MPs Challenge Simultaneous Elections, BJP Stands By It

The first meeting of the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) on the ‘One Nation, One Election’ (ONOE) bills, held recently, saw significant debate between opposition members and BJP MPs on the proposed legislation. The bills in question—the Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill and the Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill—were introduced in Lok Sabha in December 2024, marking the beginning of the review process by the JPC. The committee, comprising 39 members, will now assess the impact of these bills and provide recommendations.

During the meeting, the Ministry of Law and Justice presented the provisions of the bills and the rationale behind them. Opposition members, including Congress leader Priyanka Gandhi Vadra, raised concerns about the claims that simultaneous Lok Sabha and assembly elections would reduce expenditure. They also questioned if any impact assessment was conducted following the 2004 general elections, which were the first to use electronic voting machines (EVMs) across all 543 parliamentary seats. The opposition also sought clarification on whether the proposal could undermine democratic values and federalism.

In response, BJP MPs defended the ‘One Nation, One Election’ initiative, with MP Sanjay Jaiswal pointing to historical precedents such as the dissolution of seven state assemblies in 1957 to facilitate simultaneous elections. They argued that continuous elections hinder the country’s development, waste resources, and drain the national exchequer. BJP MP VD Sharma emphasized that the proposal had received widespread support from the public, citing a high-level committee led by former President Ram Nath Kovind, which consulted over 25,000 people.

Shiv Sena MP Shrikant Shinde highlighted the disruptions caused by back-to-back elections in Maharashtra, where Lok Sabha, assembly, and local body elections are often held in quick succession. He expressed concerns about the effect on state-level development initiatives. Opposition members, including those from Congress, DMK, and the Trinamool Congress (TMC), raised alarms that the bills would harm the Constitution’s fabric and federalism. A TMC MP emphasized the importance of protecting people’s democratic rights over financial savings.

Some opposition MPs, including V Vijayasai Reddy of the YSR Congress, questioned the bills’ provisions and demanded the return of paper ballots, citing security concerns over the potential manipulation of EVMs. Reddy also warned that simultaneous elections could marginalize regional parties and dilute the representation of local issues.

The debate became more complex as JD(U) MP Sanjay Jha brought up concerns regarding the governance impact of short-term governments, which may not have the same focus as those with a full five-year tenure.

With the enormity of the exercise, some opposition MPs suggested extending the JPC’s review period to at least one year. As the committee moves forward, it remains to be seen how it will address the contentious issues raised during this meeting and whether the bills will gain broader consensus.

ALSO READ: Delhi Elections 2025: Who Ruled Last Time? A Detailed Look At National Capital’s 70 Constituencies