BJP MP P P Chaudhary, who heads the Joint Parliamentary Committee on the ‘One Nation, One Election’ Bills, has said that simultaneous elections under the proposed legislation could be implemented as early as 2034.
In an interview with The Indian Express, he noted that while the draft Bills provide for a one-time measure to align Lok Sabha and Assembly elections, the committee may also recommend long-term mechanisms to maintain synchronisation.
“The committee will deliberate; Parliament will decide. We can’t say when, but the Bill says the first session of Parliament, if it happens with the appointed date, then it would be from 2034,” Chaudhary said.
The Constitution (One Hundred and Twenty-Ninth Amendment) Bill, 2024, and the Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2024, were introduced in the Lok Sabha in December 2024 and referred to the committee chaired by Chaudhary. The Bills are based on recommendations by a High-Level Committee headed by former President Ram Nath Kovind.
To finalise its recommendations, the committee plans to visit all states and Union Territories, a process expected to take about two to two-and-a-half years. So far, it has visited Uttarakhand and Maharashtra. The committee is also consulting former judges and legal experts, and has asked states and institutions like the Indian Banks’ Association to assess the impact of frequent elections.
According to the Bills, the President would notify an appointed date during the first sitting of a newly elected Lok Sabha. Every Assembly elected after that date would have its term curtailed to align with the Lok Sabha. If a government falls early, elections would be held only for the remainder of the term.
Chaudhary said the committee may suggest mechanisms to ensure political stability in support of synchronised elections.
He noted that the Constitution does not currently mention a no-confidence motion, which is governed by Lok Sabha Rule 198, and added, “We can recommend new provisions in the Constitution.”
He suggested considering a “constructive no-confidence motion” on the lines of the German model, where “a confidence motion is brought alongside a no-confidence motion.”
In rare cases, he said, “the Leader of the House could be elected like the Speaker,” though such a situation is unlikely, as “the electorate does not support those who bring a no-confidence motion.”
“If our end goal is to achieve ‘One Nation, One Election’, then definitely we will recommend amendments to enable that,” he added.
Responding to criticism that the proposal is anti-democratic or against federalism, Chaudhary said, “In our experience, the states where elections are held simultaneously, the voter turnout is 10–20% more. Is that in the interest of or against democracy? If there is only 40% polling and the PM or CM is elected with 21% of the votes, is that democracy? I believe polling will cross 80% if we have simultaneous elections. The expression of the will of the people will be more robust and it will strengthen democracy. Not holding simultaneous elections is anti-democratic.”
He asserted that the Bills do not alter the powers of the Union or states. “The Supreme Court, in the SR Bommai case in 1994, had reinforced that federalism is a basic feature and that the Bills before the committee do not infringe upon this as the powers of the Union and states remain the same.”
Chaudhary also questioned concerns that simultaneous elections would harm regional parties, “The first three elections were held simultaneously until 1967. Were those against federalism?” he asked. “Some Assembly elections are still held with Lok Sabha—has any regional party in those states, like TDP in Andhra Pradesh or BJD in Odisha, opposed that?”
Calling the argument “untenable,” he added, “We welcome anyone to present such a claim before the committee with a solid foundation. Without basis, such arguments can’t be addressed meaningfully.”
Addressing fears that national issues might overshadow local concerns, Chaudhary said, “The voters today are very intelligent and politically educated. Underestimating them is tantamount to undermining them.”
He added that especially in rural areas, “voters know whom to choose in national elections based on national issues, and in local elections, based on local issues.”
He cited the burden on schools and public administration caused by frequent elections and said holding simultaneous elections could reduce such disruptions.
“Maximum Rs 15,000 crore,” he said when asked about the cost, adding, “But this would be a small amount when compared to the benefit to the economy in terms of fewer disruptions to governance, policy-making and investments.”
He also stated that “The practice of announcing freebies and caste-based politics around elections would also be reduced if all elections were held once in five years.”
When asked about the BJP’s ability to pass the Constitutional amendment without a two-thirds majority, Chaudhary said, “It is not in the party’s interest, it is in the national interest. It will not take time to be passed if they think in national interest. I have full faith that the parties that think of national interest will support. If Congress or any other party thinks of national interest first, then not just 2/3, but we will get 3/4 majority.”
The committee comprises 39 members and two co-opted members and has been granted an extension until the Monsoon session.
