Thursday 1 February 2018

Poll of polls: Simultaneous polling creates myriad complications and no easy resolutions

By broaching (introduce/raise-विषय छेड़ना) the viability (vitality/liveliness-व्यवहार्यता) of simultaneous elections, President Ram Nath Kovind’s address to Parliament has created a fresh buzz humming-गुनगुनाहट) around BJP’s political strategy (action/plan) for its fifth year in power. The President’s address is perceived (recognize/understand-समझना) as a statement of government policy and the choice of words – “frequent elections adversely impact (effect/influence-प्रभाव) the economy and development” – is a strong critique (review/appreciation-आलोचना) of the present scenario. But the elections became fragmented (break up/disintegrate-खंडित) in due course because of the federal nature of our polity. Parliament and state assemblies have followed their own dynamics, dissolving prematurely when political realignments undermined governments or when prime ministers and chief ministers opted for snap (unplanned/unexpected-अनियोजित) polls.
The influence of a strong leader like Prime Minister Narendra Modi is undoubtedly pushing the idea of simultaneous elections. But hung assemblies and Parliaments are common and governments often tend to lose majority midway. Do states then go in for fresh elections, or form “unity governments”, or do they remain under President’s Rule? The first defeats the purpose of simultaneous elections, the second could lead to instability and the last option would be constitutionally unfeasible(impractical-अव्यावहारिक). What if it is Parliament that dissolves prematurely? Again it needs to be settled whether new governments after mid-term polls serve out the five-year tenure of the previous house.
A legislative solution must answer such tricky (difficult/problematic-मुश्किल) questions. Leaving them unaddressed renders (provide/supply-प्रस्तुत करना) the present exercise as a one-time synchronisation, an arbitrary (capricious/random-मनमाना) attempt at tinkering (try to mend-फेरबदल) with a system that has worked for 66 years. The relationship between Centre and states is not one of master and client. Even contentious(controversial/disputable-विवादास्पद) provisions like Article 356 cannot be misused by the Centre. If PM Modi finds frequent state elections consuming precious time and resources he can resort (shelter/refuge-आश्रय) to less disruptive (troublesome-हानिकारक) solutions like reviewing involvement of central ministers in assembly campaigns. Ultimately, the most workable option is for BJP ruled states and any other consenting(agree/assent-सहमति दे) governments to dissolve their assemblies prematurely to time with the upcoming general elections.
Ensuring peaceful election is another challenge. Volatile states like Uttar Pradesh, Bengal and Bihar required 7, 7 and 5 phases of polling respectively for assembly elections. Election Commission opted for such elaborate (detail/ extensive-विस्तृत) arrangements because of the limited supply of paramilitary personnel and the peculiar (odd/weird-अजीब) law and order challenges in these states. A scenario where general elections are held over 9 phases as in 2014, and overlapping with 29 assembly polls, many of which require multi-phasing, could become a logistical nightmare(bad dream/incubus-बुरा सपना).

No comments:

Post a Comment

Murky mining: on SC cancelling mining leases in Goa

Mining activity in Goa should now begin on a clean slate( an absence of existing restraints or commitments) The Supreme Court order ...