Two bills outlining the framework for simultaneous elections were introduced in the Lok Sabha on Tuesday following a heated debate, with the opposition condemning the move as “dictatorial.”
However, Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal defended the legislation, asserting that it would not infringe upon the powers of the states.
The Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill was presented by Meghwal after a nearly 90-minute discussion, followed by a division of votes. A total of 269 members voted in favor of the Bill, while 198 members voted against it. Meghwal also introduced the Union Territories Amendment Bill, which aims to synchronize elections in the Union territories of Puducherry, Delhi, and Jammu and Kashmir with the Lok Sabha elections.
He emphasized that the proposed bills did not undermine the “basic structure doctrine,” as claimed by the opposition. Meghwal clarified that principles such as judicial review, federalism, separation of powers, secularism, and the supremacy of the Constitution remained unchanged. He added that the objections raised by the opposition were political rather than legal.
Congress leader Manish Tewari opposed the bills, arguing that they violated the basic structure doctrine, which asserts that certain features of the Constitution cannot be altered by Parliament. “Federalism and the democratic structure are essential features of the Constitution. These bills assault the Constitution’s basic structure and exceed the legislative competence of this House,” Tewari, a former Union minister, said.
Samajwadi Party’s Dharmendra Yadav criticized the BJP’s push for “one nation, one election,” calling it an attempt to impose dictatorship in the country.
Union Home Minister Amit Shah stated that Prime Minister Narendra Modi supported the idea of referring the bills to a joint parliamentary committee for wider deliberations at all levels. “Detailed discussions can take place in the JPC, and the Cabinet will approve the report. There will also be further discussions in the House,” Shah said.
Meghwal announced that he would move a resolution to refer the bills to a joint committee of Parliament.
Earlier, Trinamool Congress MP Kalyan Banerjee argued that the bills tied the tenure of state assemblies to the Lok Sabha’s term, undermining the people’s mandate. “State governments are not subordinate to the central government or Parliament. These bills remove the autonomy of state assemblies. It’s not an election reform, but the fulfillment of one individual’s desire,” he stated.
DMK MP TR Baalu emphasized that voters had the right to elect governments for five years, and this right should not be restricted by simultaneous elections.
Opposition members also raised objections when Speaker Om Birla allowed the treasury benches to speak first, which led to a fierce debate.
Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju responded, stating that the Speaker had given a ruling to allow floor leaders from all parties to speak on the bills. “You do not represent Parliament alone; every political party has a right here,” Rijiju said.
BJP allies, including the Telugu Desam Party (TDP) and Shiv Sena, expressed strong support for the election reform proposal. TDP MP and Union Minister Chandra Shekhar Pemmasani argued that “one nation, one election” would reduce election costs and improve logistical efficiency. Shiv Sena’s Shrikant Shinde criticized the opposition for being resistant to reforms.
DMK’s Baalu and NCP’s Supriya Sule suggested that the bills be referred to a parliamentary committee if they could not be withdrawn.
All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) leader Asaduddin Owaisi contended that the bill would primarily benefit the ruling party and damage regional parties. “This bill is aimed at maximizing political advantage and convenience. It will wipe out regional parties,” he said.
Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra also denounced the bills, calling them “anti-constitutional” and contrary to the principles of federalism. “This bill goes against the federal structure of our nation, and we oppose it,” she said, speaking to reporters on Parliament grounds.
The bills were introduced after the opposition demanded a division of votes. After electronic voting, followed by a paper slip count, the bills were introduced with 269 votes in favor and 198 against.
This marked the first use of the electronic voting system in the new Parliament House.
