The CPI(M) today told the Law Commission that holding Lok Sabha and Assembly polls together is inherently "anti-democratic" and negates the principles of federalism which is a fundamental feature of Constitution.
The panel had on June 14 written to all recognised political parties seeking their views on the issue.
In his letter to the commission, CPI(M) General Secretary Sitaram Yechury listed the party's objections to the proposal stating that it goes beyond the ambit of law reform entailing major amendments to Constitution, and would run against both the "letter and spirit of our Constitution".
"The aspects of our Constitution, we believe, cannot be undermined, or tweaked. We believe that such a proposal is inherently anti-democratic and negates the principles of federalism which is a fundamental feature of our Constitution," he wrote.
The Law Commission will hold a two-day consultation with major political parties in New Delhi this week on the possibility of holding Lok Sabha and Assembly polls together.
Yechury had thanked the panel for inviting his party to the consultation, but said that it "may not be necessary" that they would attend.
Seeking to give shape to the government's concept of "one nation, one election", the Law Commission's internal working paper has recommended holding the Lok Sabha and Assembly polls simultaneously but in two phases beginning 2019.
The second phase of simultaneous polls can take place in 2024, the document states.
The document has proposed amending the Constitution and the Representation of the People Act to shorten or extend the terms of state legislative assemblies to effect the move.
The states, which are recommended to be covered under phase-I, are where Assembly polls are due by 2021.
States which will come under phase-II are Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat, Karnataka, Delhi and Punjab. To hold elections in these states along with Lok Sabha polls, the terms of the Assemblies have to be extended.
Based on a suggestion made by the Election Commission, the working paper says that a no-confidence motion against the government should be followed by a confidence motion.
This would ensure that if the opposition does not have the numbers to form an alternative government, the regime in office cannot be removed.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
