The Issue with Delimitation’s Population-Based Process

Context

• Delimitation, the redrawing of boundaries of electoral constituencies based on census data, is a constitutional mandate in India, enshrined in Articles 82 and 170.
• While the exercise is rooted in democratic principles, it has sparked widespread debate, ranging from scholarly concerns about constitutional fidelity to more sensational calls for demographic mobilisation.
• Amid these debates, it is important to analyse historical trends, political challenges, and the need for a more nuanced approach to representation in a federal democracy.

Historical Context and Electoral Trends

• An analysis of past data reveals a dynamic yet non-linear approach to delimitation.
• Between 1951 and 2004, Lok Sabha seats increased from 489 to 543, with significant redistribution among states based on changing demographics.
• Yet, no standardised formula has ever determined the ideal population per representative.
• In 1951, each MP represented about 7.32 lakh people, which rose to 10.10 lakh in 1977. By 2024, the figure stood at a staggering 27 lakh.
• Similarly, Vidhan Sabha seats increased from 3,283 to 4,123 over the same period, meaning state legislators now serve triple the number of constituents as they did in 1951.
• Despite the overarching reliance on population as the criterion, past delimitations have also considered geographical contiguity and administrative boundaries.
• This flexibility highlights that population-based representation, while foundational, is not inviolable and can be tempered by other considerations to preserve the representative and federal character of the Indian polity.

Multifaceted Challenges of Delimitation

• Constitutional Foundations and Contemporary Ironies
  • The Constitution mandates that after every census, the number and boundaries of constituencies in both Parliament and State Assemblies must be readjusted to reflect population changes.
  • However, through the 42nd Constitutional Amendment in 1976 and subsequent extensions, the implementation of this provision has been deferred until after the first census conducted post-2026.
  • Ironically, some of the strongest critics of the government’s alleged disregard for constitutional norms are now advocating for further postponement of delimitation, raising questions about the selective invocation of constitutional values.
• Demographic Anxiety and Regional Disparities
  • Delimitation based strictly on population figures could advantage states with higher population growth, predominantly in the north, while penalising states in the south that have successfully implemented population control policies.
  • Although fears of marginalisation among southern states may lack empirical justification, they cannot be dismissed outright.
  • The debate thus centres on whether representation should be purely a function of population, or if federal balance and performance in governance should also factor into electoral design.

Necessary Approach to Address these Challenges

• Rethinking Representation and Governance
  • The current debate forces a re-examination of what it means to represent a constituency.
  • In a first-past-the-post electoral system, the numerical size of a constituency does not necessarily correlate with the effectiveness of its representation.
  • There is little evidence to suggest that smaller constituencies are better governed.
  • Instead, strengthening local self-governance and devolving more power to municipal and panchayati raj institutions may be more effective in enhancing democratic accountability and governance.
• Need for Deeper Structural Reforms
  • The burden on MPs and MLAs as representatives in overpopulated constituencies has increased disproportionately.
  • Yet, their core functions, law-making, committee participation, and oversight, are not inherently affected by constituency size.
  • This calls into question whether merely increasing the number of representatives will resolve governance challenges or whether deeper structural reforms are needed.
• Towards a More Equitable Framework
  • The primacy of population as the sole criterion for representation must be moderated, especially since population control has been a deliberate policy goal of the central government.
  • Penalising states for succeeding in this objective creates a paradox.
  • As a corrective, scholars have proposed the use of a deflator, akin to inflation adjustments in economic statistics, that could neutralise the advantage gained by states with high population growth.
  • For instance, adjusting seat allocation using Total Fertility Rate (TFR) data could offer a more equitable distribution.
  • A hypothetical application of such a model suggests that instead of ballooning the Lok Sabha to 1,440 seats based on raw population, using TFR as a divisor could limit the number to around 680, striking a balance between democratic representation and federal equity.

Conclusion

• Delimitation is not merely a technical exercise but a deeply political one, with profound implications for national unity, federal balance, and democratic representation.
• While population must remain a cornerstone of representation, it cannot be the sole determinant.
• A nuanced approach that incorporates demographic trends, governance performance, and regional equity is
• India must engage in a robust, inclusive debate to ensure that the next round of delimitation strengthens the democratic fabric rather than frays it.

Q1. What is delimitation in the Indian context?
Ans. Delimitation is the redrawing of electoral constituency boundaries based on census data.

Q2. Why is there concern about population-based delimitation?
Ans. It may unfairly benefit states with higher population growth, disadvantaged those that controlled the population effectively.

Q3. Has population always been the only factor in delimitation?
Ans. No, factors like geography and administrative boundaries have also been considered.

Q4. What is one proposed solution to balance population-based representation?
Ans. Using Total Fertility Rate (TFR) as a deflator to adjust seat allocation fairly.

Q5. What alternative to increasing seats is suggested for better governance?

Ans. Strengthening local self-government and devolving more power to local bodies. 

Source:The Hindu