Constitutional Standpoint
- Free and fair elections are a basic feature of the Constitution.
- The Constitution does not mandate that elections must be non-simultaneous to ensure fairness.
- Staggered elections are not an immutable feature of the Constitution.
Relevance : GS 2(Elections , Constitution)
Voter Autonomy & Maturity
- The argument that simultaneous polls manipulate voters assumes that the Indian electorate is naive.
- This, Chandrachud argues, this undermines the spirit of universal adult franchise, which has been a core value since 1950.
On Tiered Governance
- The fear that simultaneous elections would blur lines between Centre and State issues is not constitutionally grounded, per Chandrachud.
- Voters are capable of distinguishing between national and regional concerns even if elections are held together.
Smaller/Regional Parties
- Chandrachud acknowledges concerns that simultaneous polls may disadvantage smaller/regional parties.
- But argues that these challenges exist independent of the timing of elections and are not created by simultaneous elections per se.
Parliamentary Review Context
- Chandrachud will formally present his views on July 11 to the Joint Committee reviewing:
- Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill, 2024
- Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2024
- Former CJI J.S. Khehar has also been invited.
- Other ex-CJIs have flagged infirmities in the draft legislation during earlier consultations.
Conclusion
- Chandrachud’s submission appears to support the constitutional feasibility of simultaneous elections.
- He challenges the presumptions against voter maturity and the rigidity of staggered elections.
- However, he also acknowledges the need to address political and practical concerns, especially for regional representation.
