Answer

The practice of One Candidate, Multiple Constituencies (OCMC) provides political flexibility by allowing candidates to contest elections from more than one constituency, enhancing their chances of electoral success. While this strategy offers advantages in political maneuvering, it raises concerns about the economic burden of by-elections and the potential undermining of democratic principles.

Enroll now for UPSC Online Course

OCMC raises Concerns about Democratic Principles and Economic Burden

• Undermines Democratic Accountability: When a candidate vacates a seat after winning multiple constituencies, it disregards the trust and aspirations of the voters in the vacated constituency.
  For example: An elected MP’s resignation from Wayanad in 2024 led to a decline in voter turnout from 72.92% in the general election to 64.24% in the bypoll.
• Non-Level Playing Field: By-elections favor ruling parties due to their ability to mobilize resources and influence the process, undermining fair competition.
  For instance: Trends in by-elections across States have shown that ruling parties frequently secure victories due to their dominance in resource allocation.
• Economic Burden on Public Exchequer: Organizing by-elections imposes significant costs on taxpayers.
  For example: The additional cost of holding by-elections due to candidates vacating seats in the 2024 general election was estimated at ₹130 crore.
• Excessive Financial Strain on Opposition Candidates: Opposition parties are forced to invest resources again in by-elections, which can be especially challenging after an expensive general election.
  For example: Political parties spent an estimated ₹1,35,000 crore in the 2024 general election, creating financial hardships for defeated candidates contesting again.
• Distorts the Spirit of Representation: Contesting multiple constituencies often serves the leader’s strategic interests rather than public welfare, undermining the principle of “government for the people.”
  For instance: Leaders used OCMC as a contingency plan, highlighting how the practice prioritizes individual or party needs.
• Decreases Voter Confidence: Voter disillusionment with candidates vacating seats can lead to apathy and lower electoral participation.
  For instance: The reduced voter turnout in by-elections like Wayanad demonstrates growing discontent among the electorate.

Positives of OCMC Practice 

• Safety Net for Candidates: Allows candidates to hedge against uncertainties in closely contested constituencies, ensuring continuity in leadership.
  For instance: A candidate contesting from two constituencies ensures their position even after losing one seat.
• Ensures Leadership Continuity in Leader-Centric Politics: Helps leader-centric parties maintain their leadership structure, ensuring stability in governance post-elections.
  For instance: A leader secured their position through a by-election after losing their original seat in a state election.
• Enhances Message Delivery and Voter Mobilisation: Contesting multiple constituencies helps amplify a political agenda and gain traction for the party.
  For instance: Contesting from multiple seats increased a party’s visibility and consolidated voter support in national elections.
• Facilitates Strategic Decisions in Electoral Battles: Contesting multiple seats gives political parties the flexibility to adjust strategies based on local dynamics.
  For instance: Multiple-seat candidacies have allowed political parties to secure crucial regions during elections.
• Encourages Participation in Competitive Democracies: Enables candidates to balance electoral prospects across regions, fostering healthy competition.
  For instance: Candidates in regional parties have used this practice to maintain a presence in key constituencies.
• Reflects International Practices: Other democracies, like Pakistan and Bangladesh, allow multiple candidacies, reflecting its utility in diverse political systems.
  For instance: In Pakistan’s elections, a Prime Ministerial candidate contested from several seats, ensuring representation in a critical constituency.
• Promotes Inclusion in Leadership Transition: Ensures that influential leaders remain part of the government even in unpredictable electoral outcomes.
  For instance: Leaders have avoided governance disruptions through such practices.

Shortcomings of OCMC Practice

• Economic Burden on the Exchequer: Contesting from multiple constituencies leads to frequent by-elections, increasing costs for the government and taxpayers.
  For example: The cost of organizing a single Lok Sabha by-election can exceed ₹12 crore, while State-level by-elections further strain State finances.
• Unfair Advantage to the Ruling Party: By-elections often favor the ruling party, which can mobilize state resources and patronage to secure victory. This creates an uneven playing field, disadvantageous to opposition candidates.
  For example: In multiple States, ruling parties have consistently won by-elections, as seen in Uttar Pradesh and Tamil Nadu in the past decade.
• Violation of Democratic Principles: OCMC undermines voters’ trust and democratic ideals, as candidates vacate constituencies post-election, prioritizing their own political calculations over the public interest.
• Increased Political Expenditure: Frequent by-elections necessitate additional campaign expenses for all parties, burdening candidates and encouraging reliance on unaccounted black money.
  For example: Political parties spent an estimated ₹250 crore per constituency in the 2024 general elections, with additional costs incurred during by-elections.
• Distortion of Leadership Dynamics in Parties: OCMC is often used to ensure a leader’s political survival, especially in leader-centric parties, thereby undermining merit-based leadership transitions.
• Disruption of Electoral Accountability: Winning from multiple constituencies but vacating seats soon after diminishes the accountability of elected representatives to the electorate.
  For example: Leaders vacating one constituency after being elected create confusion and dissatisfaction among voters, impacting electoral turnout and engagement, as seen in Uttar Pradesh’s by-elections in 2023.
• Conflict with Freedom of Speech and Expression: Voters’ right to elect a representative who serves their interests is compromised when a winning candidate abandons their seat..

Measures to Balance Political Necessities with Democratic Ideals and Electoral Reforms Needed

• Ban on OCMC: Amending Section 33(7) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, to restrict candidates to contesting from a single constituency, eliminating the need for frequent by-elections.
  For example: The Election Commission of India (ECI) and the 255th Law Commission report have recommended this change since 2004.
• Recovering By-election Costs from Candidates: Impose full financial liability for by-election costs on candidates who vacate a seat, discouraging the practice of OCMC.
• Delaying By-elections: Amending Section 151A of the RP Act, 1951, to hold by-elections after one year of a seat’s vacancy, giving time for fair competition and reducing ruling party advantage.
  For example: This approach ensures voter awareness and provides opposition candidates ample time for preparation, as seen in Germany’s election policies.
• Encouraging Internal Party Democracy: Promote intra-party democracy to reduce overreliance on individual leaders and foster merit-based leadership selection processes.
  For example: In mature democracies like the United Kingdom, party systems focus on collective leadership rather than leader-centric approaches.
• Enhancing Transparency in Political Funding: Implement stricter regulations for campaign financing to curb black money in elections and ensure accountability in political expenditures.
  For example: The Centre for Media Studies highlighted that ₹1,35,000 crore in unaccounted funds were spent in India’s 2024 elections.
• Public Awareness Campaigns: Educate voters about the implications of OCMC, encouraging them to demand accountability from candidates.
  For example: Civil society organizations and voter education programs in Scandinavia have significantly improved electoral transparency and engagement.
• Adopting International Best Practices: Learn from countries that have banned or limited OCMC, such as the United Kingdom and Bangladesh, to ensure better electoral representation and fairness.
  For example: The UK banned the practice in 1983, promoting clear representation and reducing the burden of by-elections.

Check Out UPSC CSE Books From PW Store

The practice of OCMC offers strategic flexibility to candidates but challenges democratic principles by burdening taxpayers and disrupting electoral fairness. Electoral reforms, such as limiting candidates to contesting a single constituency, can address these issues. Alternatively, mandating candidates to bear the re-election costs in case of dual victories could balance political strategy with accountability, promote a more efficient and equitable democratic process.

DOWNLOAD PDF