In a her letter addressed to Dr Nitin Chandra, secretary of the Centre’s high-level committee on ‘One Nation One Election’, Banerjee highlighted issues ranging from the meaning of ‘One nation One Election’ to the proposed “premature dissolution” of the Lok Sabha or Assemblies to the committee’s methodology of writing letters to political parties instead of consulting state governments.
Her letter was in response to a letter dated October 18, 2023, sent to her by the high-level committee.
“I incidentally suspect that the instant design to subvert the basic structure of the Indian Constitutional arrangements is aimed at converting the polity of ours into a Presidential system. With profound considerations, the Constituent Assembly of India had presented us with a Parliamentary / Cabinet system of government, keeping in view the diversities and pluralities of our great country. But now your design seems to be to tilt the system in favour of Presidentialisation. The design is kept covert, seemingly because autocracy wants a democratic grab now to enter the national public arena. I am against autocracy, and hence I am against your design,” Banerjee wrote.
Banerjee wrote that she has “basic conceptual difficulties in agreeing” with the proposal. Questioning the Constitutional and structural implication of the term ‘One Nation, One Election,” she wrote: “What is ‘One Nation’ in this context?…Does the Indian Constitution follow the concept of ‘One Nation, One Government’? I am afraid it does not. Our Constitution conceives of the Indian nation in a federal manner.”
Banerjee also highlighted that “forcing” states to go for “premature general elections will be violation of the electoral trust of the people”.
“How will you like to make the Parliamentary elections and the State legislature elections coeval? In 1952, the first general elections were simultaneously conducted for the Central level as well as for the State levels. There was such simultaneity for some years. But the coevality has since been ruptured. Owing to a series of historical developments, different States have different election calendars now, and those calendars are also susceptible to changes due to potential (and often unforeseen) political developments.”
“States which are not expecting general Vidhan Sabha elections should not be forced to go for premature general elections for the sake of introduction of coevality only: that will be basic violation of the electoral trust of the people,” she wrote.
“…Further, what would happen if the Lok Sabha is subjected to untimely dissolution, while Vidhan Sabhas have unaffected longevity? Instability of a government at the Centre and consequent impact on the Parliament should not destabilise the State legislatures, to be sure! How does your esteemed committee propose to navigate these questions?” the CM questioned.
Banerjee stated that ‘One Nation, One Election’ proposal seems to be conveying a unilateral approach of “top-down decisions taken by th Centre” and that she had “difficulties” with the methodological approach.
“You seem to be conveying some sort of a unilateral top-down ‘decision’ already taken by the Central Government — to impose a structure that is certainly against the spirit of a truly democratic and federal one laid down by the esteemed Constitution of India. From the tenor of your letter, it appears that you view the proposed amendments to the Constitution as a mere formality that is to be got over with..” she added.
Banerjee pointed out that the no chief ministers were a part of the high-level committee on ‘One Nation, One Election’ issue.
“Instead of consulting State Governments, that are, indeed, the very pillars of our federal Constitution, your letter brusquely informs us (as a political party) that the High-Level Committee is in agreement with the much-touted advantages of simultaneous all-India polls. We object to the most unrepresentative composition of this Committee and point out that no Chief Ministers are taken on board for fear of receiving practical objections,” Banerjee wrote.
Banerjee also added that the “approach failed to consider that Parliamentary elections and State Legislative elections are substantially different in character… Numerous State level issues and debates will just be superseded by the so-called national election”.
Banerjee highlighted that during the past 50 years, Lok Sabha has witnessed several premature dissolutions as “no political dispensation could secure a stable majority in the House”. “The same situation would also arise in a case of premature dissolution of any one the State assemblies,” she added.
“Non-simultaneous federal and state elections are a basic feature in the Westminster system which should not be altered. To paraphrase, non-simultaneity is part of the basic structure of the Indian Constitutional arrangements,” Banerjee wrote in the letter.
Highlighting her objections, Banerjee wrote, “Under the circumstances, I regret that I cannot agree with the concept of One Nation, One Election, as framed by you. We disagree with your formulation and proposal.”’