150+
mock exams
17,855
tests completed
2,28,478
questions answered
The central government aims to revive two crucial electoral reforms before the 2029 Lok Sabha elections: the delimitation Bill and the 'One Nation One Election' (ONOE) Bill. Following the failure to pass the , 2026, the government is drafting a fresh delimitation Bill while the reviews the ONOE Bill. The government is attempting to build consensus with regional parties, particularly in southern states, to address their concerns regarding representation and federalism.
The central issue revolves around Delimitation, the process of redrawing boundaries of Lok Sabha and State Assembly constituencies based on recent census data. The article mentions the Constitution (One Hundred and Thirty First Amendment) Bill, which likely aimed to amend Article 82 (readjustment after each census) and Article 170 (composition of Legislative Assemblies). A key constitutional challenge is the 'southern penalty.' Southern states, having successfully implemented population control measures, fear that delimitation based purely on current population would reduce their proportionate representation in the Lok Sabha compared to northern states with higher population growth. This highlights a tension between the democratic principle of 'one person, one vote' and recognizing states' achievements in national policy goals. The proposed compromise of a uniform 50% increase in seats across all states attempts to address this, preserving the existing ratio while expanding the total number of seats.
The push for 'One Nation One Election' (ONOE) aims to synchronize Lok Sabha and State Assembly elections. This would require significant constitutional amendments, potentially affecting Article 83 (duration of Houses of Parliament), Article 85 (dissolution of Lok Sabha), Article 172 (duration of State Legislatures), Article 174 (dissolution of State Legislatures), and Article 356 (President's Rule). The governance argument for ONOE is that continuous election cycles lead to policy paralysis due to the frequent application of the Model Code of Conduct, escalating campaign expenditures, and administrative burden on security forces and polling personnel. However, critics argue it could overshadow regional issues with national narratives and undermine the federal structure. The article notes the potential for a phased rollout, acknowledging the logistical and constitutional complexities of aligning varying assembly terms, some of which may require early dissolution or extension.
The political maneuvering described illustrates the dynamics of coalition politics and the necessity of consensus-building for constitutional amendments. A constitutional amendment under Article 368 requires a special majority (two-thirds of members present and voting) in both Houses. Given the government's recent inability to secure this majority, reaching out to regional parties like the DMK is a strategic necessity. The DMK's stance highlights the primary concern of regional parties: safeguarding state interests and federal rights. Their conditional openness to negotiation, based on assurances that their parliamentary representation won't be penalized, underscores that political alliances can be issue-based rather than strictly ideological, especially concerning structural changes that affect a state's political weight at the national level. The requirement for a Joint Parliamentary Committee report on the ONOE Bill further demonstrates the legislative processes designed for detailed scrutiny and consensus-building on complex, contentious bills.