The government has advocated for the implementation of simultaneous elections under the concept of “One Nation, One Election,” citing reasons such as the frequent disruption of development activities and public life caused by the imposition of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC). However, the Election Commission (EC) has emphasized the importance of the MCC as a crucial tool for ensuring a fair and level playing field during elections.
In the bills introduced by the government to facilitate simultaneous elections, it was argued that holding separate elections has become increasingly expensive and time-consuming. The Constitution amendment bill further pointed out that the frequent enforcement of the MCC in poll-bound regions temporarily halts developmental programs and disrupts the normal functioning of public life. Additionally, it noted that elections, when held at different times, lead to a diversion of manpower from essential services to election-related duties for extended periods.
However, the Election Commission has firmly countered this perspective, stating that the MCC should not be viewed merely as a source of disruption. Instead, it described the code as an essential mechanism designed to ensure fairness and equity among all stakeholders participating in the electoral process.
In a detailed response to the Law Commission of India in March 2023, the EC addressed the issue of simultaneous elections. It acknowledged that rationalizing the election cycle would indeed reduce the time during which the MCC is in force, but emphasized that the MCC itself is fundamental to conducting free and fair elections with credible outcomes.
The EC highlighted that the MCC was developed in consultation with political parties and is intended as a voluntary code of conduct. It forms a key part of the electoral process by fostering fairness during campaigns and ensuring all participants abide by the same set of rules.
Further, the EC stated that it has consistently worked to minimize the duration of the MCC, restricting it to the essential period from the announcement of elections to the completion of the electoral process. The Commission noted that it has evolved strategies to ensure the MCC period is kept to a “bare minimum” necessary for maintaining the integrity of elections.
The EC’s views on various aspects of simultaneous elections have been shared with the Law Commission, the Department of Legal Affairs under the Union Law Ministry, and the High-Level Committee on One Nation, One Election chaired by former President Ram Nath Kovind. Additionally, these opinions have been made available to the Joint Parliamentary Committee currently examining the bills related to simultaneous polls.
In response to a specific query from the Law Commission on whether periodic elections result in “policy paralysis” due to the enforcement of the MCC, the EC reiterated its stance. It underlined that the MCC is not a hindrance but a vital instrument for ensuring transparency and fairness in elections. The Commission further emphasized that its implementation, rather than being viewed as a disruption, should be regarded as integral to upholding democratic principles and securing credible electoral outcomes.
The debate over simultaneous elections continues to draw contrasting viewpoints, with the government focusing on efficiency and cost reduction, while the EC underscores the importance of fairness and impartiality, which the MCC guarantees in the electoral process.
