The Missing Spotlight on Urban Local Government Elections

Context

• Urban Local Governments (ULGs) are essential components of India’s democratic framework, responsible for delivering civic services and ensuring quality of life for citizens.
• The introduction of the 74th Constitutional Amendment Act (CAA) in 1992 was a milestone in codifying the role of ULGs as decentralised units of local self-governance.
• Therefore, it is important to examine the challenges of ULG elections, their significance in the broader democratic process, and the urgent need for reforms to strengthen local governance.

ULGs and the Concept of Simultaneous Elections (ONOE)

• The Socio-Economic Importance of ULGs
• India’s urban centres play a pivotal role in its socio-economic fabric, with over 4,800 ULGs serving nearly 40% of the population—a figure projected to exceed 50% by 2050.
• These ULGs contribute over 60% to the nation’s GDP, making their efficient governance indispensable for sustaining economic growth and societal development.
• Given their importance, the synchronization of ULG elections with national and state elections could ensure that governance at all levels is streamlined and cohesive.
• Introduction of One Nation One Election (ONOE)
• This proposal is aimed at synchronising elections for various legislative bodies to reduce administrative costs, voter fatigue, and election-related disruptions.
• While the discourse around ONOE has primarily focused on aligning the elections for the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies.
• The inclusion of ULG elections in this framework has received limited attention.
• Advantages of Synchronising ULG Elections
• Including ULG elections in the ONOE framework has several potential benefits.
• First, synchronised elections could reduce the financial and administrative burden of conducting frequent electoral exercises.
• Second, they could minimise the interruptions caused by staggered election schedules, enabling continuous governance and development activities.
• Third, aligning ULG elections with state and national elections might increase voter turnout by leveraging the momentum of larger electoral campaigns, thereby enhancing citizen participation at the grassroots level.
• An Analysis of Historical Exclusion of ULGs and Shift in Perspective
• ULGs as State Subjects and Historical Exclusions
• Historically, ULG elections have been treated as distinct from state and national elections due to their status as State subjects under the Indian Constitution.
• Reports such as the 79th report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Law and Justice (2015), the NITI Aayog’s discussion paper on simultaneous elections (2017), and the Law Commission of India’s draft report (2018) have excluded ULGs from ONOE deliberations, citing logistical challenges and the sheer number of ULGs in India.
• The argument presented was that aligning elections for thousands of ULGs alongside national and state elections would be impractical and overly complex.
• A Shift in Perspective by the High-Level Committee (HLC)
• However, the High-Level Committee (HLC) on simultaneous elections has taken a more inclusive stance.
• Recognising the critical role of ULGs in governance, the HLC proposed that local body elections be synchronized within 100 days of Lok Sabha and State Assembly elections.
• This recommendation reflects an understanding of the need for a holistic approach to electoral reforms, encompassing all tiers of government.

Challenges Surrounding ULGs and Disempowerment of State Election Commissions

• Delays in ULG Elections
• The magnitude of these delays is striking. According to a 2024 report by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India, elections were delayed in over 60% of ULGs across the country.
• In many cases, these delays span several years, leaving ULGs without democratically elected representatives.
• Instead, these bodies remain under the administrative control of State governments, which violates the spirit of local self-governance enshrined in the CAA.
• Disempowerment of State Election Commissions
• The challenges of ULG elections are compounded by the disempowerment of State Election Commissions (SECs), the constitutional bodies tasked with supervising and conducting these elections.
• Only a few States have empowered their SECs to conduct critical functions such as ward delimitation.
• This lack of autonomy often results in delays due to political interference, incomplete delimitation processes, or disputes over reservations.
• Given the high stakes involved in delimitation and reservations, these tasks should be entrusted to independent and empowered SECs to ensure transparency and efficiency.

Broader Implications of Delayed ULG Elections

• Administrative Inefficiency
• The procedural inefficiencies and lack of capacity within State Election Commissions (SECs) exacerbate delays.
• For instance, delays in ward delimitation and reservation exercises, often carried out by State governments, prevent the timely announcement of election schedules.
• Political Interference
• State governments often delay elections to ULGs for political gain, either to consolidate power or to avoid elections during unfavourable political climates.
• This manipulation undermines the autonomy of ULGs and compromises their ability to function effectively.
• Citizen Disengagement
• The absence of regular elections alienates citizens from the democratic process.
• When elections are delayed, the public loses trust in the system, leading to reduced civic participation and engagement in governance.
• Necessary Measures to Address the Challenges of Delayed ULG Elections
• Empowering SECs and Strict Enforcement of Timelines
• State Election Commissions must be given greater autonomy and resources to conduct timely elections.
• This includes enabling them to carry out ward delimitation and reservation exercises independently, reducing reliance on State governments.
• The constitutional mandate for holding ULG elections every five years must be enforced strictly, with penalties for unwarranted delays.
• The judiciary can also play a proactive role in ensuring adherence to these timelines.
• Decentralised Governance and Integration into Broader Electoral Reforms
• Strengthening the operational capacity of ULGs and promoting citizen participation in governance can mitigate the negative impacts of delays.
• Regular elections are essential to empower local representatives and enable them to address urban challenges effectively.
• The discussion on simultaneous elections provides an opportunity to address the issue of ULG election delays.
• By aligning ULG elections with national and state elections, the logistical and administrative challenges can be streamlined, reducing the scope for delays.

Conclusion

• The 74th Constitutional Amendment Act envisioned ULGs as the bedrock of decentralised governance.
• However, persistent delays in elections, disempowered SECs, and administrative roadblocks have hindered their functioning.
• As India moves towards synchronising elections at various levels, it is imperative to include ULG elections in these reforms. 

Q) Why are Urban Local Governments (ULGs) important in the context of simultaneous elections?

ULGs are critical as they govern nearly 40% of India’s population and contribute over 60% to the country’s GDP. Synchronizing their elections with national and state elections could streamline governance, reduce administrative costs, and increase voter participation, ensuring urban areas are better equipped to drive economic growth and address citizen needs.

Q) What challenges hinder the inclusion of ULG elections in the One Nation One Election (ONOE) framework?

Key challenges include logistical complexities, such as coordinating elections across thousands of local bodies, inconsistencies in electoral rolls, and delays caused by ward delimitation and reservation policies. Additionally, the decentralized nature of ULG governance requires independent election schedules, which may conflict with the uniformity intended by ONOE. 

Source:The Hindu