Let’s talk about ‘one candidate, multiple constituencies’

/ Editorials, English /

Let’s talk about ‘one candidate, multiple constituencies’

(Source – The Hindu, International Edition – Page No. – 8)

Topic: GS2 – Indian Polity

Reforming the Practice of One Candidate, Multiple Constituencies (OCMC)

  • The practice of one candidate contesting from multiple constituencies (OCMC) in Indian elections raises significant concerns about democratic integrity, voter satisfaction, and financial implications.
  • While legally permissible, OCMC can lead to substantial costs for taxpayers, provoke frequent by-elections, and perpetuate leader-centric politics, thus undermining democratic values.

Background of One Candidate, Multiple Constituencies (OCMC)

India’s Constitution mandates elections every five years, with the Election Commission overseeing the process. Until 1996, candidates had no limit on the number of constituencies they could contest. Following amendments to the Representation of the People Act, candidates are now limited to two constituencies, yet the practice continues.

Challenges of OCMC

  • Financial Burden: By-elections can be costly. For example, the general election expenses rose from ₹3,870 crore in 2014 to ₹6,931 crore in 2024. Vacated seats from winning candidates can lead to costs around ₹130 crore if multiple candidates step down.

  • Electoral Imbalance: Ruling parties often benefit from by-elections due to better resource mobilization, creating an uneven playing field that weakens opposition voices.
  • Continued Financial Pressure: By-elections place additional financial strain on already defeated candidates, compelling them to divert resources from other critical needs.
  • Undermining Democratic Principles: This practice prioritizes individual political leaders over constituents, reflecting a drift toward family-centric political dynamics.
  • Voter Confusion and Discontent: Constituency vacating creates voter dissatisfaction, evidenced by a significant drop in voter turnout in Wayanad, Kerala, from 72.92% to 64.24% during by-elections.

Responses from Other Nations

  • Countries like Pakistan allow multiple candidacies, requiring candidates to vacate all but one, while Bangladesh has limited this practice.
  • The UK banned OCMC in 1983 to ensure accountability, reflecting a broader international trend toward clearer representation.

Recommendations for Reform

  • Ban OCMC: Amend Section 33(7) of the Representation of the People Act to prohibit candidates from contesting multiple constituencies, as recommended by the Election Commission and the Law Commission.
  • Cost Recovery: Implement a rule requiring candidates who vacate seats to cover the full costs of by-elections.
  • Delay By-Elections: Allow by-elections to occur only after a year of vacancy, enabling better-informed voter choices.

Conclusion

OCMC contributes to electoral inefficiency and voter discontent, threatening the fundamental democratic principle of accountability. Adopting a “one candidate, one constituency” policy aligns with the ideals of “one person, one vote,” and would significantly enhance electoral integrity in India. These reforms require political consensus, but are essential for cultivating an accountable and representative democracy.