‘One nation, one election’: Law Commission supports term changes to enable unified polls

The Commission argued that aligning election schedules would curb the frequent administrative and political disruptions caused by staggered polls. Even if achieving synchronisation requires trimming the existing terms of some legislatures, it said the wider national benefits outweigh that trade-off.

The panel, rejecting claims that the proposal dilutes democratic principles, maintained that the electorate’s right to choose its representatives remains fully intact. However, what changes, it said, is the calendar, not the democratic process.

On the procedural front, the Commission made it clear that the proposed constitutional changes do not fall within the categories that require ratification by at least half the states. Parliament alone, it said, can pass the amendment.

The Commission also countered concerns that the Bills hand disproportionate authority to the Election Commission of India. The additional responsibilities envisaged for the ECI are consistent with its current constitutional mandate and do not amount to excessive delegation, it said.

Responding to objections rooted in the basic structure doctrine, the Commission stated that synchronising election cycles does not infringe on the principles of free and fair elections. While courts have affirmed that these principles form part of the Constitution’s basic structure, the panel argued that adjusting the timing of elections does not undermine voters’ rights or the democratic system.

The Commission’s opinion is expected to play a significant role in shaping the JPC’s assessment of the simultaneous elections proposal, a major electoral reform initiative the government says will reduce costs, improve administrative efficiency and ensure smoother governance cycles.