Last Updated:
Law Commission Chairman Justice Dinesh Maheshwari told the JPC on ONOE that the Bill neither violates the Basic Structure of the Constitution nor disrupts the federal balance
Addressing concerns about citizens’ voting rights, the Commission reiterated the Supreme Court’s consistent position that the right to vote is a statutory rather than fundamental right. (Representational image: PTI)
At a meeting of the Joint Parliamentary Committee on December 4, Law Commission of India Chairman Justice Dinesh Maheshwari briefed members on the constitutional soundness of the proposed One Nation One Election (ONOE) framework. Presenting the Commission’s expert assessment, Justice Maheshwari stated that the Bill neither violates the Basic Structure of the Constitution nor disrupts the federal balance. Citing multiple judicial precedents, he affirmed that Parliament possesses full legislative authority to introduce such a reform, provided it respects the Basic Structure—an obligation the Bill, he stressed, fully meets.
Addressing concerns about citizens’ voting rights, the Commission reiterated the Supreme Court’s consistent position that the right to vote is a statutory rather than fundamental right. Therefore, synchronising electoral cycles, including adjusting timelines or frequency, does not infringe upon voters’ rights. On the matter of curtailed tenures for Parliament or State Assemblies to enable synchronisation, the Commission argued that the proposed adjustments are limited, reasonable, and well within constitutional boundaries.
Responding to federalism concerns, Justice Maheshwari underlined that India’s constitutional design is inherently quasi-federal with a clear Union tilt. Since the Constitution also explicitly empowers Parliament to legislate on elections—including those to State Assemblies—the ONOE proposal, he said, does not disturb the federal character. Consequently, the Commission maintained that state ratification is not required, as the bill does not alter any provision directly impacting federal structure under Article 368(2).
The Law Commission also dismissed apprehensions tied to specific clauses of the bill, asserting that all provisions are constitutionally sound and rooted in established legal principles. Regarding the enhanced powers proposed for the Election Commission under clauses 82A(3) and 82A(5), the Commission noted that Article 324 already grants the ECI broad, exclusive authority over elections. Describing Article 324 as a “reservoir of power,” it concluded that the bill merely formalises responsibilities the Commission is already empowered to exercise.
The PP Chaudhary-led JPC has spent the past few months speaking to political parties, constitutional experts, and former Chief Justices. Although the idea of “One Nation One Election” has found supporters, the deeper the panel has gone, the more complex the picture has become.
Click here to add News18 as your preferred news source on Google. December 05, 2025, 03:29 IST
Read More
Disclaimer: We do not own any of the content, ideas, images, or text presented here. All rights belong to their respective owners. For more information and to view the original source, please visit the following link: