One nation one election undermines the belief our constitution has a basic structure and that could lead to the introduction of Hindutva: Chief Editor, Studies in Indian Politics, Suhas Palshikar, to Karan Thapar for The Wire.

..........................................


In a conscious and deliberate attempt to shift the debate about one nation one election away from its impact on our democracy, which he admittedly considers important, to the impact the constitutional amendments it requires could have on the character and identity of our constitution, which he considers far more important and dangerous, one of India’s foremost political scientists and analysts has said of one nation one election: “It delegitimizes the idea that there is anything fundamental or sacrosanct about the constitution … this government does not care if key aspects of the Constitution have to be changed in a fashion that hurts its very identity.” Prof. Suhas Palshikar fears that this process could “open the doors” to further changes in the constitution to align it with “our culture, our ancient ideas and (the) aspirations shaped by those ideas”, which could lead to the introduction of Hindutva into the constitution.



In a 25-minute interview to Karan Thapar for The Wire, Prof. Palshikar also argues that the constitutional amendments necessary for one nation one election will “prioritize neatness, uniformity and sameness” over the heterogeneous multi-faceted character of the country and, therefore, flatten what he calls India’s asymmetry. He points out that India is not one nation one religion, one nation one culture, one nation one language. Therefore, one nation one election would “transform the democratic logic (of our constitution) into a logic of ‘oneness’.”



The interview comprises two separate but connected parts. In part one, Prof. Palshikar identifies three specific areas where one nation one election would have an adverse impact on our democracy. In brief, he says, it would be “a death blow to the parliamentary system”, “a major attack in the arena of states’ autonomy” and on “the promise of representation”. I will leave you to see the first half of the interview to get a fuller picture of what Prof. Palshikar is referring to and why he believes these are important.



In the second part of the interview, which I believe is the more important part, Prof. Palshikar talks about the impact on our constitution and its character and identity of the amendments required to introduce one nation one election. These are the arguments I began this note with. Again, I will leave you to see the second part of the interview to get a fuller and more comprehensive idea of Prof. Palshikar’s arguments.



As far as I know, Prof. Palshikar is the first person to have drawn attention to the impact the constitutional amendments necessary for one nation one election will have on the character and identity of our constitution and how that, in turn, could “open the doors” for further amendments that could lead to the introduction of Hindutva into our constitution. This is why this is an important interview, regardless of whether you agree or disagree with Prof. Palshikar’s concerns and fears.



Here is the link:


Join The Wire's Youtube Membership and get exclusive content, member-only emojis, live interaction with The Wire's founders, editors and reporters and much more. Memberships to The Wire Crew start at Rs 89/month.    / @thewirenews