‘Informal discussion’ on agenda, SC visit cancelled by One Nation, One Election panel

New Delhi: The Joint Parliamentary Committee examining the One Nation, One Election Bills has cancelled its scheduled October 6 visit to the Supreme Court, days after its circulated agenda mentioned an “informal discussion” with the Chief Justice of India and other judges.

The Lok Sabha Secretariat informed committee members on Thursday evening that the planned “Local Study Visit” to the Supreme Court had been cancelled. No reason was given in the communication.

Committee chairman P P Chaudhary said the visit was intended to familiarise members with the Supreme Court, including its library, and was not planned to discuss the proposed legislation with judges. He said the programme had been put off because of other commitments and scheduling issues.

The development came after an agenda circulated among members described the October 6 programme as including an “informal discussion” with the CJI and other Supreme Court judges on simultaneous elections.

Kapil Sibal raises separation of powers concern

Rajya Sabha MP and senior advocate Kapil Sibal had questioned the proposed interaction, arguing that Parliament and the judiciary have distinct constitutional roles.

Sibal said the Bills could eventually face constitutional challenges before the Supreme Court and questioned the appropriateness of a parliamentary committee discussing their contents with sitting judges before the legislation had been enacted.

His comments were an argument about institutional separation; they do not establish that the proposed interaction itself was unconstitutional. The visit was subsequently cancelled.

What the committee is examining

The 39-member committee, chaired by Chaudhary, is examining the Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill, 2024 and the Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2024.

The proposed constitutional changes seek to create a framework for synchronising elections to the Lok Sabha and state Assemblies. The Constitution amendment Bill proposes a new Article 82A and provides for newly elected Houses, in certain circumstances, to serve only the remainder of an existing common electoral cycle.

The Bills followed recommendations made by the high-level committee headed by former President Ram Nath Kovind. That committee had consulted political parties, legal experts, former judges, election officials and other stakeholders before submitting its report.

Why the proposal remains contentious

Supporters of simultaneous elections argue that holding polls together could reduce election-related expenditure, repeated enforcement of the Model Code of Conduct and the diversion of administrative and security resources.

Opposition parties have raised concerns about federalism, parliamentary democracy and provisions that could shorten the tenure of state Assemblies to bring elections into a common cycle.

The parliamentary committee has already consulted former Chief Justices and other legal experts as part of its examination. The cancellation of the Supreme Court visit means the proposed interaction with sitting judges will not take place as described in the earlier agenda.

The episode has highlighted a separate constitutional question from the merits of simultaneous elections themselves: how Parliament should interact with the judiciary while examining legislation that could later come before the courts.

The committee remains responsible for examining the two Bills and submitting its recommendations to Parliament. The government’s official One Nation, One Election framework says the proposal is intended to synchronise Lok Sabha and state Assembly elections, while the legislation itself would require Parliament to consider the proposed constitutional and legal changes.