Debate Over 'One Nation, One Election': Judiciary Stirs Constitutional Pot

Former Chief Justices of India have backed the constitutionality of the 'One Nation, One Election' bill, yet raise issues over the Election Commission’s vast powers. Concerns include potential impacts on state assembly terms, political party dynamics, and the preeminence of national parties, all warranting legislative scrutiny.

In a significant development, the former Chief Justices of India have lent their support to the 'One Nation, One Election' bill, addressing a parliamentary committee. However, they have expressed apprehensions over the sweeping powers proposed for the Election Commission, urging for clear guidelines to govern these powers.

The concerns, articulated by figures like former CJI D Y Chandrachud and Ranjan Gogoi, primarily revolve around the potential for the Election Commission to overreach in extending or curtailing state assembly terms. This could undermine the constitutional mandate of five-year tenures in the name of aligning elections.

Chandrachud also highlighted issues such as the potential marginalisation of regional parties and the advantage granted to financially robust national parties, calling for reforms in campaign finance regulations. Despite backing the bill's constitutionality, the justices emphasize the need for a balanced approach to ensure a fair political arena.

(With inputs from agencies.)