ONOE’s supporters claim that the one nation one elections restores the Bharatiya tradition of unity and continuity, I would like to present an idea from the world's renowned Arthashastri – Kautilya. Kautilya’s Mandala theory is of the idea that the Arthashastra itself assumed power should sit in multiple, autonomous, independent, mutually checking centres and not one synchronized core. So to put it in simple idea, it is the process when all the elections in a country take place at same time.It includes state elections as well as central elections.
ONOE is the Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill, 2024 being presented in the parliament but it has not been passed because in order to get it passed it needs a two-thirds majority in the upper house which the opposition won’t let happen.It aims at synchronising the elections in the country, according to the bill presented in the parliament, it states that the one nation one election’s implementation would be divided into 2 phases namely:1 ) Full term, 2) Unexpired term. To have a basic idea as of what is a full term and an unexpired term, we need to understand that when an election takes place, a government is formed for the next five year and it rules, and if the government loses it power in the middle of its tenure, the rest period is termed as unexpired term. The bill also mentioned that the local level elections would be concluded within 100 days of the ONOE elections.
Here arises the issue that if the government is aiming at all elections being done at a time then why these local elections are left out. This particular action defeats the whole purpose of the ONOE. Now in order to bring more insights over how this is going to work, we should notice that whenever a state holds its election, it is divided into 3-7 phases,A report shows that Jharkhand's own 2019 elections were concluded in 5 phases, West Bengal election in 2021 concluded in 8 phases, the Lok Sabha elections concluded in 7 phases. Now if a single state takes these many phases to fully conduct an election, how is it possible to conduct election across India at a time. The main advantage the government cites with the implementation of ONOE is that it would bring down the campaigning costs, a significant amount would be saved but the government conflates two entirely different budgets. The Election Commission's administrative costs (EVMs, security, deployment) are indeed government expenditure. But the 2024 Lok Sabha elections saw parties spend an estimated ₹1.35 lakh crore in campaign expenditure private money on star campaigners, rallies, jets, and social media and ONOE does not reduce this by a single rupee. It concentrates it. A national party with deep pockets wins a synchronized cycle decisively; a regional party that builds momentum through staggered state campaigns loses its structural advantage. ONOE's cost argument, in other words, saves what the government spends and ignores what damages democracy. And what is the problem when a state has its own elections? It tackles the problems related to the state specifically and lets the government make its manifesto state-oriented. It would lead to the welfare of the state. Suppose the state of Maharashtra, which is equivalent to the population of two different nations such as France and U.K, when it holds its own elections, it can govern better through a government chosen for its own needs and demands.
This is the Mandala theory at work- distributed states making locally accountable decisions is not a deviation from classical
Indian statecraft, it is what that tradition assumed.
But if an overall, country-level election take place it would tackle the macro fundamental problems of a country as a whole and not the micro-level issues, it would lead to the neglect of state-specific problems and eventually it will take India towards a presidential form of government from the parliamentary form of government.It would undermine the inclusive democracy of the nation by excluding most of the state problems. The second most defended point of the government implementing the ONOE is that, it would lead to the stability of the nation by implementing mcc only once, so if that is the case, the government should amend the Model code of conduct (MCC) clauses, the thing which needs to be changed is the campaigning system, the celebrity campaigning.Elections in India are seen as a festival, a festival whose presiding goddess is democracy. People worship and choose; they cast their vote as an offering to her, in expectation of a good life or if not a good life, then at least a home to live in, food to eat, clothes to wear. Kautilya never imagined a Bharat governed by a single clock,The Mandala theory assumed many centres which are mutually accountable for the consequences. this is the essence which ONOE asks us to give up.
This is not an argument against the unity of the nation or the continuity of it, it is indeed against mistaking synchronization for unity.The unexpired term clause does not restore or bring back the rhythm of Rajdharma, it replaces it with a countdown. India does not need one election; it needs elections that answers to its own people and remains accountable for its own consequences. A festival does not lose its meaning because it is celebrated on different days in different homes.