There is no evidence on how ONOP reduces net expenses

Congress leader and top constitutional lawyer Abhishek Manu Singhvi spoke to Saubhadra Chatterji about the 'one national, one elections' bills tabled in the Lok Sabha this week, listing his objections to the idea and arguing that it is not a right fit for a parliamentary democracy such as India.

- By Saubhadra Chatterji

NEW DELHI:

Edited excerpts:

ONOP is not a new concept. The first four elections between 1952 to 1967 were held simultaneously. So why not bring back the system?

The idea has a peculiar though superficial attraction to what I call the drawing-room classes and the chattering classes. It appeals to our sense of discipline, orderliness and uniformity but that is an unreal view of democracy. To impose a compulsory legal mandate upon the people's verdict is clearly unconstitutional.

If the electoral cycle is once reset and it continues in that synchronised way, we will be very happy. But this law means repeated resets. And how do you ensure that one state will not fall after two or three years of the initial reset? When you have these multiple frailties and uncertainties of government, which are an essential part of the democratic bargain, and then enforce an artificial legally mandated election cycle repeatedly, it is clearly a decimation of vital democratic principles.