The Union Cabinet has given its nod to the government’s ‘one nation, one election’ proposal, which seeks to hold simultaneous Lok Sabha and Assembly elections along with urban body and panchayat polls within a 100-day window. This decision follows a report submitted by a panel led by former President Ram Nath Kovind.

For this proposal to become law, it must pass through both the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha. The Constitution will need to be amended, with ratification required from all states and union territories.

The panel has emphasised that holding elections at the same time would “transform the electoral process and governance” and “optimise scarce resources”. According to the report, 32 political parties and several prominent figures from the judiciary, including former Chief Justices of the Supreme Court and High Court judges, support the idea.

Key advantages listed by the panel include simplifying the voting process for the public and boosting economic growth through increased stability. The argument is that a unified election cycle would allow businesses to make decisions without the fear of sudden policy changes. Another benefit is the reduction of disruptions caused by migrant workers needing to take leave to vote in different elections, particularly in sectors dependent on their labour.

The government also believes that this move will end “policy paralysis” and eliminate the “atmosphere of uncertainty” brought on by frequent elections. The panel’s report, submitted in March, also examined practices from other countries and consulted experts, including economists and the Election Commission, before reaching its conclusions. However, they also stressed the need for a legally sustainable mechanism to synchronise the electoral cycles.

However, 15 political parties, including the Congress, have opposed it. The Congress described the proposal as “not pragmatic or practical”. During the release of the party’s manifesto for the upcoming Haryana elections, Congress chief Mallikarjun Kharge dismissed the move as “an attempt to divert public attention” and said that “the people will not accept it”.