BENGALURU: The recent push by union ministers for the “One Nation, One Election” initiative exposes a disturbing disregard for the democratic process and the sacrifices made by the public to uphold it. While proponents claim that aligning election cycles would save resources and promote stability, this push reveals an underlying desire to consolidate power and minimize political accountability. The argument that frequent elections ‘hinder India’s progress’ conveniently ignores the crucial role of electoral participation in safeguarding democracy’s vibrancy.
Instead of fostering a genuine engagement with citizens, such proposals tend to prioritise political convenience over meaningful representation. Leaders like Shivraj Singh Chouhan, who advocate for constitutional amendments to hold simultaneous elections, seem more interested in streamlining political machinery for their own agendas rather than addressing the underlying issues of governance and transparency. The pursuit of ‘long-term planning’ becomes a guise for avoiding accountability, as broken promises are buried beneath claim of ‘uninterrupted growth.’
It’s instructive how this narrative conveniently sidesteps the real costs—both financial and democratic—imposed by such consolidation. Instead of focusing on transparency and electoral integrity, this push appears to serve the interests of a political class eager to escape scrutiny under the guise of reform. The recent election results, where the political landscape shifted yet again, demonstrate that dismissed voices and dissenting opinions are essential to a functioning democracy—something a “One Nation, One Election” approach risks silencing at the altar of political expediency.
Backing such a move, supportive experts often talk about ‘savings,’ but ignore the vital importance of the electoral process as a safeguard of democratic accountability. This push for quick fixes reflects a broader tendency in ruling circles to manipulate electoral cycles, weakening the checks and balances that prevent abuse of power. The notion that removing election cycles will somehow catalyse development reeks of an overly simplistic solution to deeply complex governance challenges.
Ultimately, the call for a “One Nation, One Election” is less about national interest and more about entrenching the power of a political elite eager to reduce democratic oversight. Instead of strengthening our institutions, such reforms threaten to diminish the voice of the citizenry, making government more opaque and less responsive. There is a clear need for politicians to prioritise genuine representation over shortcuts that serve only their own political longevity. As the election cycle begins to shift, the true test of our democracy lies in resisting these attempts to undermine the very foundations upon which our political system is built.
Source: Noah Wire Services