Rather, Election should be held frequently, every third year at the most...

In the interests of one and all...

My dear countrymen!

A lot of discussions are going on for the last few months about Election of Lok Sabha (centre) and Assemblies (states) to be held simultaneously but be it so and is it really good for the people and in national interests?

On the contrary, according  to me, Election must be held as frequently as possible due to following good reasons:

1) If Election is held sooner than very longer like as the present, Candidate contesting the first time or sitting MP or  MLA.....etc re- contesting, will think at least twice before making promises and try to fulfill them sincerely as they have to seek votes again soon. This very Pressure and some sorts of Indirect fear will compel them to deliver.

2)  Hardly anyone disagrees with the fact that there is a world of differences generally noticed in the candidate's overall attitudes in their approach and behavior towards electorates before ( as Sewak) and after an election (as king) particularly when they win. They should remain as sewak, not lords, frequent Election is necessary and will do definitely.

3) Five years longer tenure make them secure and hence dull to think about the constructive activities towards constituency and electorates. On the other hand, a Shorter period will keep them on their toe to perform.

4)  Factually speaking, Despite tall talk by all the parties and Govts, none of them is really keen in the implementation of electoral reforms pending since quite long. It is not at all on their priority agenda even now. Before Election, every party makes a lot of commitments but they forget all their promises after Election. They will not be able to make excuses every time if election gap is less.

5) Not to speak of full electoral reforms, After about 70 years of Independence, we somehow half - heartedly be able to implement none of the above clause button (NOTA) now.

6) Same way provision of "Right To Recall "must also be given to electorates sooner pending full-fledged electoral reforms, to make our representatives behave, perform and deliver.

7) Since poor electorates loose their right for whole five years once they vote, if their decisions are wrong at least they will have more chances to exercise their rights in state or centre elections as the case may be.

8) If elections are held simultaneously and one party comes to power at the centre and state both they will hardly bother for poor electorates and Act unilaterally and there might be some possibilities of going undemocratic ways as there will be none to question or challenge them effectively.

9) Though we already have had all types of Govt. with mix experiences, exceptions to rules are always there, however it is always healthy if there is a coalitions Govt. having no one gets an absolute majority.

10) We must also keep in mind the popular saying, "power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely." If elections are held separately on different times as and when due and tenure is less, maximum 03 yrs, it will not only help the electorates manifold but also the party and govt.in power. While people have more opportunities to convey their views, at the same time Govt. will be able to change the course of its actions according to people 's mood on any issue of nation's interests.

In light of the above, it is necessary that neither elections of centre and states are held together nor tenure of people 's representatives is kept as long as 05 yrs in overall public interests.

There is no merit in arguing about the urgency to minimize the huge election expenses thereby having sufficient time to implement govt policies and welfare program more effectively. Rather, Subject to will at political level everything is possible.

JAI HIND.






Writer (Sinha.P.K a member, AAP) is an amateur and views are strictly personal. Feedback / Criticism welcome at Email -pkmsinha@gmail.com or follow @ pkmsinha.blogspot.in]