Former CJIs Chandrachud, Khehar endorse ‘One Nation, One Election’ Bill with key reservations

File Photo


Former Chief Justices of India D Y Chandrachud and J S Khehar on Friday told the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) on the One Nation, One Election Bill that while the proposal does not violate the basic structure of the Constitution, it requires significant refinement.

The two former CJIs appeared before the JPC to present their views on the proposed legislation.

According to sources, Justice Chandrachud expressed concerns over provisions in the bill that grant broad powers to the Election Commission of India (ECI), particularly the authority to postpone elections or alter constitutional provisions.

He suggested that the ECI’s power to delay elections should be limited to situations involving national security or public order. Such decisions, he said, must be ratified by both Houses of Parliament and should only be permitted for a fixed duration.

Justice Chandrachud highlighted two major gaps in the bill. First, it does not clarify how the synchronized election cycle would be impacted during a national emergency, during which the tenures of Parliament and state assemblies may be extended by one year. Second, the bill lacks clarity on managing premature dissolutions of state assemblies.

He also stressed the importance of maintaining constitutional balance by ensuring that the ECI’s powers are clearly defined and limited, citing Article 356(5) as a useful reference point.

The JPC, chaired by BJP MP P P Chaudhary, is examining the Constitution (One Hundred and Twenty-Ninth Amendment) Bill, 2024, and the Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2024, which propose simultaneous elections by aligning the election cycles of the Lok Sabha and state assemblies.

Former CJI J S Khehar, who also appeared before the panel, stated that while the bill does not, in principle, violate the Constitution’s basic structure, the provisions relating to the powers of the Election Commission warrant further consultation.

Both former CJIs emphasized the need for precise legislative language and checks on the ECI’s powers to prevent potential misuse.