Context

• The question of electoral delimitation in India is a crucial aspect of democratic governance.
• The upcoming delimitation exercise in 2026 has sparked widespread debate due to concerns regarding the balance of power between States, the impact on minority communities, and the overall implications for India’s federal structure.
• Amid these ongoing debates, it is crucial to examine the key arguments surrounding the issue, explores the potential dangers of disproportionate representation, and the importance of maintaining democratic integrity in the delimitation process.

A Detailed Analysis of the Debate on Delimitation: A Democratic Dilemma

• Balancing Population Growth with Representation
  • One of the central issues in the delimitation debate is the disparity in population growth across different regions of India.
  • Northern States such as Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, and Rajasthan have experienced rapid population growth.
  • On the other hand, southern States like Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Karnataka, and Andhra Pradesh have managed to stabilise or even reduce their population growth rates through effective governance, education, and healthcare policies.
  • A population-based delimitation would naturally lead to an increase in parliamentary seats for northern States while reducing the representation of the southern States.
  • This raises a critical question: should States be rewarded or penalized for their demographic trends?
  • If parliamentary seats are allocated strictly based on population, it could disincentivise efforts to control population growth, as States that successfully implement population control measures would see their political influence diminish.
  • This would be unfair to the southern States, which have made significant socio-economic progress and implemented successful development policies.
• Revisiting Rajya Sabha Representation
  • Another proposal to counterbalance the potential loss of influence for certain States is redistributing Rajya Sabha seats equitably among the five geographic zones of India, northern, central, eastern, western, and southern.
  • The Rajya Sabha, as the upper house of Parliament, is meant to represent States rather than individual voters, making it a crucial institution in maintaining federal balance.
  • Currently, Rajya Sabha representation is uneven, with more populous States having greater influence.
  • A reallocation of seats across geographic zones could ensure that regions with slower population growth do not lose their voice in national policymaking.
  • However, the effectiveness of this approach depends on the functioning of India’s zonal councils, which were originally established to resolve inter-State disputes and foster regional cooperation.
  • Unfortunately, these councils have become largely inactive, with many not convening for years.
  • Strengthening these councils and linking them to the Rajya Sabha’s representation structure could enhance cooperative federalism and ensure that all regions have a meaningful role in governance.
• Challenges to Federalism and Democratic Equity
  • While these proposed solutions attempt to maintain fairness in representation, they do not fully address the deeper issue of political power dynamics in India.
  • A purely population-based delimitation risks concentrating power in the northern States, where electoral majorities could dictate national policies without sufficient input from the more developed southern and western States.
  • This could lead to tensions between regions, developing resentment and weakening national unity.
  • Moreover, historical precedents suggest that delimitation exercises have sometimes been influenced by political considerations rather than purely democratic principles.
  • If the 2026 delimitation follows the patterns seen in Jammu and Kashmir or Assam, where constituency boundaries were redrawn in ways that disproportionately benefited certain political groups, it could erode trust in India’s electoral system.
  • Ensuring a transparent, non-partisan approach to delimitation is crucial to preserving both democratic integrity and federal stability.

Lessons from Jammu and Kashmir and Assam

• Lessons from Jammu and Kashmir
  • Recent experiences in Jammu and Kashmir (2022) and Assam (2023) highlight potential pitfalls in the upcoming delimitation process.
  • The Jammu and Kashmir delimitation added six seats to the Jammu region but only one to the Kashmir Valley, disproportionately favouring Jammu.
  • Additionally, the redrawing of constituencies resulted in administrative and geographic inconsistencies, such as the merging of Poonch and Rajouri (traditionally part of Jammu) with the Valley’s Anantnag Lok Sabha seat.
  • More concerning is the apparent communal bias in the redistricting.
  • All six new Assembly constituencies in Jammu were Hindu-majority, while some Muslim-majority areas were reshaped to create Hindu-majority districts.
  • This pattern raises alarms about the potential use of demographic engineering in future delimitation exercises.
• Lessons from Assam
  • Similarly, in Assam, the government’s decision to merge districts led to the elimination of ten Muslim-majority constituencies while increasing Hindu and tribal seats.
  • The creation of constituencies with vastly different population sizes further exacerbates concerns about political bias.
  • These cases suggest that population size alone is not the only factor influencing constituency creation; communal considerations have played a role, which could have serious consequences for national unity. 

The Dangers of Communal Polarisation

• Despite the risks, opposition parties have largely failed to highlight the potential communal polarisation that could result from delimitation.
• While States such as West Bengal and Tamil Nadu have historically exhibited secular voting patterns, there is no guarantee that this will continue.
• If electoral boundaries are redrawn along communal lines, the resulting polarisation could shift voting behaviours, as seen in Jammu and Assam.
• A further concern is the precedent set by the central government’s policies in border States.
• Harsh laws and suppressions of dissent, once limited to conflict-prone areas, have gradually been extended to the rest of the country.
• Similarly, if communal redistricting is allowed in border regions, it could become a nationwide practice, further dividing communities along religious lines. 

The Way Forward: Need for a Delicate Balancing Act

• The debate on delimitation highlights the tension between democratic representation and federal equity.
• While it is essential to ensure that all citizens are fairly represented in Parliament, this must not come at the cost of marginalising certain States or regions.
• Proposals such as freezing parliamentary seats while increasing Assembly representation and redistributing Rajya Sabha seats offer possible compromises, but their success depends on careful implementation and political will.
• As India moves toward the 2026 delimitation, policymakers must prioritise a balanced and inclusive approach that strengthens, rather than weakens, the foundations of the country's democracy and federal structure.

Conclusion

• The upcoming delimitation exercise poses two major threats; an imbalance of power between northern and southern States, and the communalisation of electoral constituencies.
• If not addressed, these issues could weaken India's pluralistic democracy and undermine the federal structure.
• A fair and transparent delimitation process that upholds democratic principles is essential to ensuring equitable representation and preventing political and social fragmentation.
• The challenges ahead require urgent attention from policymakers, opposition parties, and civil society to safeguard the unity and integrity of the nation.