The recent momentum around the ‘One Nation, One Election’ initiative, following the Union Cabinet’s approval of the report by the committee led by former President Ram Nath Kovind, has sparked a fresh debate on electoral reforms. Proponents argue that synchronising national and state elections could streamline governance, reduce election-related disruption, and even boost GDP. However, as with many grand reforms, the devil lies in the details. It is crucial to ask: What would this reform mean for women who rely on local elections — panchayats and municipalities — as critical entry points into politics?
The Kovind Committee report proposes synchronising panchayat and municipal elections within 100 days of the Lok Sabha and state assembly elections. This approach undermines the critical role that local elections play in fostering women’s political participation and leadership at the grassroots level. While national and state elections tend to focus on broader, macro-level issues, local elections are grounded in the everyday concerns of communities — domains where women’s leadership has been particularly vital.
Local bodies have long served as essential platforms for women’s empowerment in India. The 73rd and 74th Amendments to the Constitution, mandating the reservation of one-third of seats for women in panchayats and municipalities, have been instrumental in driving women’s participation in politics. Today, women account for nearly 46 per cent of the elected representatives in panchayati raj institutions, a significant contrast to the 13.6 per cent representation of women in the Lok Sabha and the 9 per cent national average in state legislative assemblies. This stark difference highlights the critical role local elections play in providing women — particularly those in rural areas — a path into political life.
Moreover, many of these women are first-time candidates, as noted by the 2024 ORF Report, with little to no prior political experience. They often come from families with small landholdings or without political backgrounds, unlike their male counterparts. This makes local elections a vital space for women to engage in public life and address critical community issues like access to basic services, which disproportionately impact women.
For instance, a 2010 study by Nobel Laureate Esther Duflo and her colleagues, conducted across 11 states found that villages led by women saw improved delivery of services with lower levels of corruption. Greater investments were made in critical areas like water supply, sanitation, education, and infrastructure development — issues that matter deeply to women. Chhavi Rajawat, India’s youngest woman sarpanch, is a prime example of this leadership in action. During her tenure in Soda village, Rajawat revitalised the local water supply by restoring the village reservoir, ensured access to sanitation facilities in every household, and championed education improvements.
If local elections are merged with national and state elections, grassroots leaders like Rajawat may struggle to compete. The direct impact of synchronising local elections with state and national elections could significantly reduce the visibility of women candidates at the grassroots level. When these elections are held together, women running for panchayats and municipalities will have to compete for attention and resources with candidates in high-profile state and national races. These larger campaigns often have more funding, media coverage, and political clout, making it more challenging for women — especially those from rural or less-privileged backgrounds — to make their voices heard.
Indirectly, synchronising elections may also dilute the focus on local, women-centric issues. Local elections typically centre around community-specific problems like water management, sanitation, and education — areas where women have demonstrated strong leadership. In contrast, national and state elections prioritise broader issues such as defence, economic policies, and governance. Merging these elections carries the risk of local priorities being overshadowed by the national agenda, making it harder for women leaders to advocate for the issues that are directly tied to the everyday lives of rural populations.
Proponents of One Nation, One Election may argue that the reservation system for women in local bodies will still remain intact, ensuring participation. However, the issue goes beyond mere numbers. Women’s leadership depends not just on representation but on their ability to focus on local and women-centric issues that are often overshadowed in broader state and national campaigns. Merging elections risks pushing these vital issues and grassroots progress into the background, weakening women’s political influence at the local level.
Financial efficiency, but at what cost?
One of the most compelling arguments in favour of One Nation, One Election is the potential for financial savings. Reducing the cost of conducting multiple elections is certainly an attractive prospect. However, elections are not just a procedural activity; they are the cornerstone of democracy. Beyond financial concerns, they represent an investment in inclusive governance and fair representation.
By compressing the election cycle into a single, larger event, those with greater resources and influence are likely to benefit disproportionately. This could further widen the gender gap in political representation, particularly in rural areas where women’s access to resources is already constrained. The question, then, is whether financial efficiency justifies the potential loss of diverse voices in governance — especially those of women who have fought hard to be heard.
Women’s voices in local democracy
While the One Nation, One Election aims to streamline the election cycle, it is crucial to consider its impact on women’s political influence at the grassroots level. Women have worked hard to carve out a space in India’s political landscape through local elections where they have led on critical issues like education, public health, and sanitation. Any reform that risks diminishing their leadership in these spaces requires careful reconsideration.
Rather than moving forward with sweeping changes that could unintentionally sideline women’s leadership, the focus should be on strengthening the existing structures that encourage their political participation. As Prime Minister Narendra Modi rightly emphasised during the G20 Ministerial Conference on Women Empowerment, “When women prosper, the world prospers.” To genuinely achieve this vision, democratic reforms must not only preserve local elections as truly independent platforms for women to lead but also address the systemic barriers they face, such as gender bias, limited resources, and social constraints.
Singh is a development practitioner and Paul is a lawyer and research consultant
