New Delhi: Attorney General of India R. Venkataramani batted for the ‘One Nation One Election’ (ONOE) proposal at a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) meeting held Tuesday to examine the two bills for simultaneous polls, while former Chief Justice of Delhi High Court D.N. Patel said it needed changes to withstand legal scrutiny, it is learnt.
The meeting, chaired by BJP MP P.P. Chaudhary, took place hours after the JPC’s tenure was extended till the first day of the last week of Parliament’s monsoon session.
Sources told ThePrint that Venkatramani, while making his representation before the JPC, said that from a legal point of view, the ONOE proposal was sound. He is also learnt to have underlined that holding simultaneous polls was also justified economically and financially.
On the other hand, Patel—who is the current chairperson of the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT)—said that while ONOE was desirable, certain amendments were required to make it legally firm. This prompted a counter from an opposition MP, who said the scope of the JPC was limited to ascertaining whether the two bills were legal and constitutional.
The MP, sources told ThePrint, added that if more amendments were required to ensure that the ONOE clears judicial scrutiny, then the bills introduced by the government “were clearly not desirable”.
“The JPC does not have the scope to go into examining other proposed amendments,” the MP is learnt to have said.
The two bills—the Constitution (One Hundred and Twenty-Ninth Amendment) Bill and the Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill—were introduced in the Lok Sabha by Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal on 17 December last year. While one aims to synchronise the tenures of the Lok Sabha and state legislative assemblies, the other seeks to amend legislations for Union territories and the National Capital Territory of Delhi for simultaneous polls.
Previously, appearing before the 39-member JPC, former Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi had also raised questions on the constitutional validity of certain provisions in the bills. Justice (retd) U.U. Lalit had also cautioned, in his submission before the panel, that curtailing the terms of state assemblies to make ONOE possible may not stand legal scrutiny.
An MP who attended the meeting said Justice Patel also mentioned that in special circumstances, the term of the Vidhan Sabha can be extended up to a year. “Justice Patel said that though this will be against the people’s mandate, but as a one-time measure, for holding simultaneous elections, it can be done.”
Justice Patel also compared the concept of simultaneous elections with what happens in other smaller countries like Belgium and the United Kingdom, a second MP, who is a member of the JPC, said.
This was questioned by Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra, the second member added. “Priyanka Gandhi asked Patel if he has data to compare. She said that a large democracy like India cannot be compared with smaller countries like Belgium,” the MP said.
The first MP, quoted earlier, said that the DMK’s P. Wilson spoke about the damage resulting from curtailment of state legislatures’ terms. “Wilson raised the issue that while the next Lok Sabha election will take place in 2029 and the appointed date for operationalising ONOE will be fixed in the first meeting of the new session, what will happen if the BJP government does not return to power? The damage to state legislatures is already done.”
The member added that the AG responded to Wilson saying he will go through the issue and see if an amendment can be brought to address this anomaly.
(Edited by Gitanjali Das)
