Kohima: Nagaland MLA Achumbemo Kikon strongly opposed the ‘One Nation, One Election’ (ONOE) proposal, calling it a direct threat to India’s federal structure and democratic values. Speaking under Rule 54 in the Nagaland Legislative Assembly, the Naga People’s Front (NPF) legislator argued that simultaneous elections for the Lok Sabha and state assemblies would weaken regional autonomy and disregard the country’s diverse political landscape.
Kikon asserted that India’s democracy thrives on its unique federal model, with states formed for different reasons, including political agreements and linguistic identities. He cautioned that imposing a uniform electoral system would erode the essence of India’s ‘Unity in Diversity’ and limit regional representation. Citing the deep-rooted significance of state politics, he pointed out that Indian voters often prioritize local candidates over national parties, making regional political outfits crucial for addressing grassroots issues.
The legislator further warned that ONOE could reduce voter participation, stripping Indian democracy of its vibrancy. Rejecting the argument that simultaneous elections would lower expenses, he noted that election costs account for only 0.33% of India’s GDP and argued that alternative cost-cutting measures could be implemented without disrupting the federal structure.
Kikon also criticized the possibility of India shifting to a List Party Proportional Representation (LPPR) system, similar to those in smaller countries like Belgium and South Africa. He argued that the First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) system, which India has followed since independence, fosters direct accountability between elected representatives and voters. A transition to LPPR, he warned, could detach politicians from their constituencies, reducing public engagement and transparency.
Raising concerns about the impact on regional parties, Kikon said ONOE would allow national parties to overshadow local voices, potentially leading to centralized governance that neglects cultural and socio-political nuances. He cautioned that dominant national parties could leverage financial and administrative power to marginalize regional entities, creating an environment of political monopoly.
Highlighting logistical challenges, the MLA noted that conducting simultaneous elections in Nagaland’s difficult terrain would overburden security personnel and election officials. He also pointed out that the initial cost of aligning electoral infrastructure, such as EVMs and voter rolls, would strain states with limited financial resources.
Kikon underscored the importance of frequent elections in holding governments accountable, especially in a state like Nagaland, where ongoing peace negotiations require continuous political engagement. He warned that ONOE could dilute focus on Naga-specific issues, including the state’s special constitutional protections under Article 371(A), by shifting political discourse to national agendas.
Taking a historical perspective, Kikon argued that ONOE could revert India to an era of political centralization reminiscent of the Congress dominance in the 1950s and 60s. He pointed out that the collapse of simultaneous elections in 1967 led to the rise of coalition politics, which ultimately paved the way for the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) itself to gain prominence.
In a firm concluding statement, Kikon urged a thorough debate on the issue in the Nagaland Legislative Assembly, declaring his outright rejection of ONOE. He emphasized that electoral policies must uphold India’s democratic foundations rather than impose a uniform system that disregards regional identities and governance structures.
READ More: Manipur: Highway Blockade Erupts in Kangpokpi, Tear Gas Deployed Against Protesters