GS Notes

17. Polity Notes 19

20 min read

Based on the provided topic summary, here are the detailed notes in the requested format.

Elaborate Notes

Introduction to the Organs of State and Parliamentary Democracy

The Constitution of India establishes a framework for constitutional governance through three distinct yet interrelated organs: the Legislature, the Executive, and the Judiciary. This structure is founded on democratic principles, primarily the Rule of Law, as propounded by A.V. Dicey, which posits the supremacy of law, and the doctrine of Separation of Powers, articulated by Montesquieu in his work The Spirit of the Laws (1748), which advocates for the distribution of governmental powers to prevent tyranny. India adopted a Parliamentary Democracy, a system where the executive is drawn from and is accountable to the legislature.

  • Bicameral Legislature: As enshrined in Article 79 of the Constitution, the Parliament of India is a bicameral body consisting of the President, the Lok Sabha (House of the People), and the Rajya Sabha (Council of States).

    • Lok Sabha (Lower House): Its members are directly elected by the people. The electoral process follows the First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) system, where constituencies are carved out geographically, and the candidate securing the highest number of votes in each constituency is declared the winner.
    • Universal Adult Suffrage: The right to vote is granted to every citizen aged 18 years and above, who is registered as a voter with the Election Commission of India (ECI). This was established by the 61st Constitutional Amendment Act, 1988, which lowered the voting age from 21 to 18 (amending Article 326).

  • Concentration of Decision-Making Power: In a representative democracy, sovereign power, theoretically vested in the people (over 1.4 billion in India), is delegated upwards. This process can be visualized as a pyramid of diminishing numbers and increasing power:

    1. Democracy (People): The ultimate source of power.
    2. Parliament: Around 788 Members of Parliament (MPs) represent the people.
    3. Council of Ministers (CoM): A smaller body of about 70-80 ministers, as per Article 74, who aid and advise the President. The CoM comprises:
      • Cabinet Ministers: Senior ministers holding independent charge of crucial ministries. They form the core of the government’s policy-making body, the Cabinet.
      • Ministers of State (Independent Charge): Handle smaller ministries independently and report directly to the PM.
      • Ministers of State (MoS): Attached to and assist Cabinet Ministers.
    4. Cabinet: The nucleus of the CoM, comprising 15-20 of the most senior ministers. It is the chief policy-formulating body and the supreme executive authority. Only Cabinet ministers attend its meetings.
    5. Kitchen Cabinet/Inner Cabinet: An informal body of the Prime Minister and 2-4 trusted senior colleagues, where crucial decisions are often made before formal Cabinet approval.
    6. Prime Ministerial Government: A scenario, particularly during periods of strong single-party majority, where the Prime Minister’s office and personality dominate the decision-making process, often sidelining even the Cabinet. Political scientist Ivor Jennings, in his work Cabinet Government (1936), described the PM as ‘primus inter pares’ (first among equals), but later scholars have noted the shift towards a more dominant ‘Prime Ministerial’ form.

The Constituent Assembly Debate: Parliamentary vs. Presidential System

At the time of independence, the Constituent Assembly was faced with a critical choice between the British Parliamentary model and the American Presidential model.

  • Merits and Demerits of Parliamentary Democracy:

    • Merits:
      1. Continuous Accountability: The executive (CoM) is collectively responsible to the legislature (Lok Sabha) under Article 75(3). It can be removed at any time through a no-confidence motion. This ensures daily and periodic accountability.
      2. Wide Representation: For a diverse country like India, the Parliamentary system allows for representation of various regions, communities, and interests within the Council of Ministers.
      3. Prevents Dictatorship: The diffusion of power within the Cabinet and the constant legislative oversight act as checks against the emergence of an authoritarian leader.
    • Demerits:
      1. Instability: The government’s survival depends on maintaining a majority in the Lok Sabha. This can lead to instability, especially in an era of coalition politics. The period between 1989 and 1999, which saw five Lok Sabha elections, is a prime example of this vulnerability.
      2. Policy Paralysis: The constant pressure of political survival can deter the executive from taking bold, long-term, or unpopular decisions. This was particularly evident during the UPA-II government, where a combination of coalition compulsions and fear of investigative agencies—colloquially termed the ‘4 Cs’ (Courts, CAG, CBI, CVC)—led to administrative indecisiveness.

  • Merits and Demerits of Presidential Democracy:

    • Merits:
      1. Stability: The President is elected for a fixed term and is not dependent on a legislative majority for survival. The impeachment process is exceptionally difficult, as seen in the US, where no president has ever been removed from office through impeachment.
      2. Clear Separation of Powers: The executive is distinct from the legislature, which can lead to more efficient governance based on domain expertise rather than political compulsions.
    • Demerits:
      1. Potential for Dictatorship: The concentration of executive power in a single individual with a fixed term and less frequent accountability can lead to authoritarianism.
      2. Legislative-Executive Deadlock: A President from one party and a legislature controlled by another can lead to constant conflict and policy gridlock.

  • Reasons for India’s Choice: The Constituent Assembly, after extensive deliberation, opted for the Parliamentary system.

    1. Accountability over Stability: Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, in his speech to the Constituent Assembly on November 4, 1948, argued that while both systems had merits, the Indian context required a system that prioritized “responsibility” over “stability.” He stated that the Draft Constitution preferred a more responsible executive.
    2. Familiarity with the System: Indians had gained experience with the parliamentary form through the Government of India Act, 1919 and the Government of India Act, 1935, which introduced elements of responsible government at the provincial level. As statesman K.M. Munshi argued, this familiarity made it a pragmatic choice, famously encapsulated in the phrase “known devil” (Parliamentary system) over an “unknown angel” (Presidential system).
    3. To Prevent Autocracy: The framers were wary of creating a powerful executive that could undermine India’s nascent democracy. The trauma of colonial rule made them cautious of concentrating power in a single individual, who, if charismatic, could easily become a dictator.

Key Features of Parliamentary Democracy in India

  1. Fusion of Executive and Legislature: The executive (CoM) is an integral part of the legislature. As per Article 75(5), a minister who is not a member of either House of Parliament for six consecutive months ceases to be a minister.
  2. Dual Executive: The system features a Nominal Executive (the President, Head of State) and a Real Executive (the Prime Minister and the CoM, Head of Government). The President acts on the aid and advice of the CoM (Article 74).
  3. Majority Party Rule: The political party or coalition that secures a majority of seats in the Lok Sabha forms the government. The President appoints its leader as the Prime Minister (Article 75(1)).
  4. Collective Responsibility: This is the bedrock principle, enshrined in Article 75(3). The CoM is collectively responsible to the Lok Sabha. This means a vote of no-confidence against an individual minister or the government as a whole leads to the resignation of the entire council. They “swim and sink together.”
  5. Leadership of the Prime Minister: The PM is the central figure in the system, acting as the leader of the House, the government, and the nation.
  6. Dissolution of the Lower House: The President can dissolve the Lok Sabha before the completion of its five-year term on the recommendation of the Prime Minister, as per Article 85(2)(b), to pave the way for fresh elections.
  7. Multi-Party System: India’s political landscape is characterized by the presence of numerous national and regional political parties, which contest elections alongside independent candidates.

Instruments of Parliamentary Accountability

Parliament employs various devices to maintain oversight over the executive:

  1. Question Hour: The first hour of every parliamentary sitting (11 AM to 12 PM) is dedicated to asking questions to ministers about the functioning of their respective ministries. It is a powerful tool for enforcing executive accountability.
    • Starred Questions: Require an oral answer on the floor of the House, and members can ask supplementary questions.
    • Unstarred Questions: Require a written reply from the minister, and supplementary questions cannot be asked. This practice is borrowed from the British parliamentary tradition.
  2. Zero Hour: An Indian parliamentary innovation that is not mentioned in the Rules of Procedure. It starts immediately after the Question Hour (around 12 PM) and allows members to raise matters of urgent public importance without any prior notice.
  3. Motions:
    • No-Confidence Motion: Governed by Rule 198 of the Rules of Procedure of the Lok Sabha. If admitted and passed, the government must resign. It requires the support of at least 50 members to be introduced.
    • Adjournment Motion: Introduced in the Lok Sabha to draw the House’s attention to a definite matter of urgent public importance. It involves an element of censure against the government.
  4. Discussions and Debates: Members discuss and debate various issues of national importance, government policies, and the legislative proposals (Bills) brought before the House.
  5. Financial Control:
    • Budgetary Approval: Parliament’s approval is mandatory for the annual budget. If the Lok Sabha fails to pass the budget (or the Finance Bill), it is treated as a loss of confidence, and the government must resign.
    • Cut Motions: Moved in the Lok Sabha to reduce the amount of a demand for a grant during budget discussions. They are symbolic expressions of disapproval of government policy. Types include:
      • Policy Cut Motion: Disapproves of the policy underlying the demand.
      • Economy Cut Motion: Suggests a more economical way to achieve the objective.
      • Token Cut Motion: Ventilates a specific grievance.
  6. Parliamentary Committees: These act as ‘mini-parliaments’ and conduct detailed scrutiny of government’s legislative and financial proposals. Key committees include the Public Accounts Committee (PAC), the Estimates Committee, and the Departmentally-Related Standing Committees (DRSCs).

Prelims Pointers

  • The Parliament of India consists of the President, Lok Sabha, and Rajya Sabha (Article 79).
  • The minimum age for voting in India is 18 years, lowered from 21 by the 61st Constitutional Amendment Act, 1988.
  • The Council of Ministers (CoM) is collectively responsible to the Lok Sabha (Article 75(3)).
  • A person who is not a Member of Parliament can be appointed as a minister for a maximum period of six months (Article 75(5)).
  • The President of India is the Nominal Executive (Head of State).
  • The Prime Minister is the Real Executive (Head of Government).
  • Question Hour is the first hour of a parliamentary sitting.
  • Zero Hour is an Indian parliamentary innovation. It is not mentioned in the Rules of Procedure.
  • A No-Confidence Motion can only be introduced in the Lok Sabha. It requires the support of at least 50 members to be admitted.
  • The President can dissolve the Lok Sabha under Article 85(2)(b) on the advice of the Prime Minister.
  • The electoral system for Lok Sabha elections is the First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) system.
  • Two instances where the government must resign are: (1) if a No-Confidence Motion is passed, and (2) if the annual Budget is not passed by the Lok Sabha.

Mains Insights

  1. The Accountability vs. Stability Debate:

    • Core Dilemma: The choice for the parliamentary system was a conscious decision by the Constituent Assembly to prioritize daily and continuous executive accountability over the stability offered by a fixed-term presidential executive.
    • Historical Context: In post-colonial India, with a diverse and stratified society, a responsible and representative government was deemed more crucial than a potentially rigid and autocratic one. The experience of the 1990s (coalition instability) versus the post-2014 period (strong single-party majority) highlights this inherent tension.
    • Contemporary Relevance: The debate resurfaces periodically. The National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC, 2002) examined this issue but ultimately did not recommend a switch, suggesting reforms within the existing system instead.

  2. The Decline of Parliament and the Rise of Executive Dominance:

    • Cause-Effect Analysis: A strong majority in the Lok Sabha, coupled with the stringent provisions of the Anti-Defection Law (Tenth Schedule), has often led to the executive dominating the legislature. This reduces Parliament to a rubber-stamping body rather than a forum for deliberation and scrutiny.
    • Symptoms of Decline: This trend is visible in the decreasing number of sitting days, frequent disruptions, bypassing of parliamentary committees for passing crucial bills, and the increasing use of ordinances.
    • Historiographical View: Scholars like Granville Austin (The Indian Constitution: Cornerstone of a Nation, 1966) celebrated the deliberative nature of the Assembly, but contemporary political commentators like Shashi Tharoor have lamented the decline in the quality of parliamentary debate and its effectiveness as an oversight body.

  3. Effectiveness of Accountability Mechanisms in Practice:

    • Ritualism vs. Efficacy: While instruments like Question Hour and Zero Hour exist, their effectiveness is often questioned. Disruptions frequently lead to the washout of Question Hour. Zero Hour can become chaotic without structured outcomes.
    • The Role of Committees: Parliamentary Committees are often cited as the most effective mechanism for detailed, non-partisan scrutiny away from the public glare. However, there is a growing trend of governments referring fewer bills to them, undermining their purpose.
    • Beyond Parliament: In the face of perceived parliamentary decline, accountability is increasingly enforced by external actors like the judiciary (through judicial review), a vigilant media, civil society organizations, and the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005.

  4. Challenges of Coalition Politics and Policy Paralysis:

    • Cause: In a coalition government, the Prime Minister must balance the interests and ideologies of multiple partner parties. This can lead to compromises on policy, delays in decision-making, and instability if a partner withdraws support.
    • Effect: The fear of governmental collapse or antagonizing allies can lead to “policy paralysis,” where the government avoids taking tough but necessary economic or administrative decisions. The link between political instability and administrative inertia is a key challenge for the parliamentary system in a fragmented polity.

Previous Year Questions

Prelims

  1. With reference to the Parliament of India, which of the following Parliamentary Committees scrutinizes and reports to the House whether the powers to make regulations, rules, sub-rules, by-laws, etc. conferred by the Constitution or delegated by the Parliament are being properly exercised by the Executive? (UPSC CSE 2018) (a) Committee on Government Assurances (b) Committee on Subordinate Legislation (c) Rules Committee (d) Business Advisory Committee Answer: (b) Committee on Subordinate Legislation Explanation: This committee’s function is to check whether the executive is properly exercising its power of ‘delegated legislation’ within the scope conferred by the Constitution or the Parliament.

  2. In India, which of the following review the independent regulators in sectors like telecommunications, insurance, electricity, etc.? (UPSC CSE 2019)

    1. Ad Hoc Committees set up by the Parliament
    2. Parliamentary Department Related Standing Committees
    3. Finance Commission
    4. Financial Sector Legislative Reforms Commission
    5. NITI Aayog Select the correct answer using the code given below: (a) 1 and 2 (b) 1, 3 and 4 (c) 3, 4 and 5 (d) 2 and 5 Answer: (a) 1 and 2 Explanation: Parliamentary committees, both Ad Hoc and Standing (like DRSCs), are the primary bodies within the legislature responsible for overseeing the functioning of various sectoral regulators.

  3. A parliamentary system of government is one in which: (UPSC CSE 2020) (a) all political parties in the Parliament are represented in the Government (b) the Government is responsible to the Parliament and can be removed by it (c) the Government is elected by the people and can be removed by them (d) the Government is chosen by the Parliament but cannot be removed by it before completion of a fixed term Answer: (b) the Government is responsible to the Parliament and can be removed by it Explanation: This is the core principle of a parliamentary system, known as collective responsibility, where the executive’s survival depends on the confidence of the legislature.

  4. We adopted parliamentary democracy based on the British model, but how does our model differ from that model? (UPSC CSE 2021)

    1. As regards legislation, the British Parliament is supreme or sovereign but in India, the power of the Parliament to legislate is limited.
    2. In India, matters related to the constitutionality of an Amendment of an Act of the Parliament are referred to the Constitution Bench by the Supreme Court. Select the correct answer using the code given below. (a) 1 only (b) 2 only (c) Both 1 and 2 (d) Neither 1 nor 2 Answer: (c) Both 1 and 2 Explanation: Statement 1 is correct as the UK follows parliamentary sovereignty, while India has constitutional supremacy with judicial review. Statement 2 is also correct as the Supreme Court of India can review the constitutionality of parliamentary acts, a power not held by UK courts.

  5. Consider the following statements: (UPSC CSE 2022)

    1. Pursuant to the report of H.N. Sanyal Committee, the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 was passed.
    2. The Constitution of India empowers the Supreme Court and the High Courts to punish for contempt of themselves.
    3. The Constitution of India defines Civil Contempt and Criminal Contempt.
    4. In India, the Parliament is vested with the powers to make laws on Contempt of Court. Which of the statements given above are correct? (a) 1 and 2 only (b) 1, 2 and 4 (c) 3 and 4 only (d) 3 only Answer: (b) 1, 2 and 4 Explanation: Statement 3 is incorrect. The Constitution empowers courts to punish for contempt but does not define ‘civil’ or ‘criminal’ contempt; this is done by the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, which is a law made by Parliament.

Mains

  1. “The Indian party system is passing through a phase of transition which looks to be full of contradictions and paradoxes.” Discuss. (UPSC GS Paper II - 2016 - Slightly older but highly relevant)

    • Answer Outline:
      • Introduction: Explain the evolution from a one-party dominant system (Congress system) to a multi-party coalition era, and now towards a phase of a single party’s dominance with a strong opposition presence in states.
      • Contradictions and Paradoxes:
        • National Dominance vs. Regional Strength: A single party may dominate at the national level, but strong regional parties continue to hold sway in various states (e.g., BJP at the Centre, but parties like TMC, DMK, BRS strong in their states).
        • Ideological Convergence vs. Polarization: While major parties may converge on economic policies, there is sharp ideological polarization on social and cultural issues.
        • Personalization of Politics vs. Institutional Importance: Politics is increasingly centered around charismatic leaders, yet electoral outcomes still depend on party machinery and organizational strength.
        • Decline of National Parties, Rise of a Nationalized Party: While the influence of some older national parties has waned, one party has expanded its footprint across the country, altering the federal political dynamic.
      • Conclusion: Conclude by stating that this transitional phase reflects the deep social, economic, and political churn in India, making the party system dynamic and unpredictable.

  2. Why did the framers of the Constitution of India choose a parliamentary form of government in preference to the presidential system? (Rephrased question based on topic summary)

    • Answer Outline:
      • Introduction: Briefly define both systems and state that the Constituent Assembly made a deliberate choice after weighing the pros and cons of each.
      • Reasons for Choosing Parliamentary System:
        • Prioritizing Accountability over Stability: Elaborate on Dr. Ambedkar’s argument that a government must be responsible and answerable, which was more critical for a new democracy.
        • Familiarity with the System: Discuss the experience gained under the Government of India Acts of 1919 and 1935, making the system a “known devil.”
        • Suitability for a Diverse Nation: Explain how the parliamentary system ensures better representation of India’s diverse regions, languages, and communities in the executive.
        • Aversion to Executive Autocracy: Detail the fears of the framers that a powerful, directly elected President could become a dictator, especially given India’s history of hero-worship.
      • Reasons for Rejecting Presidential System:
        • Risk of legislative-executive gridlock.
        • Potential for personality cults and authoritarianism.
        • Unsuitability for managing a heterogeneous society through a single executive point.
      • Conclusion: Conclude that the choice was a product of historical experience, a pragmatic assessment of India’s unique socio-political context, and a deep-seated commitment to democratic accountability.

  3. Do you think that the functioning of the Indian Parliament has declined in recent years? Give reasons for your answer. (Analytical question based on topic)

    • Answer Outline:
      • Introduction: Acknowledge that while Parliament remains the central institution of Indian democracy, there are growing concerns about the decline in its effectiveness.
      • Arguments for the Decline:
        • Reduced Sittings: Mention data showing a decrease in the number of days Parliament is in session.
        • Lack of Deliberation: Frequent disruptions, passing of bills with minimal debate, and increased use of the voice vote.
        • Bypassing Committees: Crucial bills, including finance bills, are often not referred to parliamentary committees for detailed scrutiny.
        • Ordinance Raj: Increased reliance on ordinances by the executive, undermining the legislative process.
        • Role of Anti-Defection Law: Explain how the 10th Schedule restricts the freedom of speech of MPs on the floor of the House, making them beholden to the party whip.
      • Counter-arguments/Nuances:
        • Parliament still acts as a forum for raising issues of public importance during Zero Hour and Question Hour.
        • Committee system, when utilized, still performs robust scrutiny.
        • Live telecast of proceedings has increased public awareness and transparency.
      • Conclusion: Conclude that while the institution faces significant challenges that have eroded its deliberative and oversight functions, it remains an indispensable pillar of Indian democracy. Suggest reforms like a fixed calendar for Parliament and mandatory scrutiny of all bills by committees.

  4. The role of the individual MP (Member of Parliament) has diminished over the years, and as a result, healthy constructive debates on policy issues are not usually witnessed. How far can this be attributed to the anti-defection law, which was legislated but with a different intention? (UPSC GS Paper II - 2013 - Older but a classic question)

    • Answer Outline:
      • Introduction: Briefly explain the intended purpose of the Anti-Defection Law (10th Schedule) - to curb political defections and provide stability. State the premise that it has had unintended consequences on the role of MPs.
      • How the Anti-Defection Law Diminished the MP’s Role:
        • Curbing Freedom of Speech: The law forces MPs to toe the party line on every issue, lest they be disqualified. This stifles dissent and independent judgment.
        • From Representative to Delegate: The MP becomes a mere delegate of the party leadership rather than a representative of their constituency’s interests and their own conscience.
        • Decline in Debate Quality: When votes are pre-decided by the party whip, the incentive for reasoned debate and persuasion on the floor of the House is lost. Debates become ritualistic.
      • Other Factors for Diminished Role:
        • Increasing complexity of governance requiring technical expertise which individual MPs may lack.
        • Dominance of the executive in a strong majority government.
        • Rising populism and focus on electoral politics over policy deliberation.
      • Way Forward: Suggest reforms like those recommended by the Law Commission and NCRWC, such as limiting the whip’s applicability to only crucial votes like no-confidence motions and money bills.
      • Conclusion: Conclude that while the Anti-Defection Law was enacted with a noble intent, its broad application has indeed been a major factor in diminishing the role of the individual MP, thereby impacting the quality of parliamentary discourse.

  5. ‘The parliamentary committee system is a major instrument of legislative control over the executive in India.’ Comment. (Analytical question based on topic)

    • Answer Outline:
      • Introduction: Define parliamentary committees and their role as “mini-parliaments” that enable detailed scrutiny of government actions.
      • How Committees Exercise Control:
        • Financial Control: Detail the roles of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) in examining the CAG report, the Estimates Committee in scrutinizing government expenditure, and the Committee on Public Undertakings.
        • Legislative Scrutiny: Explain how Departmentally-Related Standing Committees (DRSCs) examine bills, solicit expert and public opinion, and suggest amendments, leading to better legislation.
        • Administrative Oversight: Describe the role of committees like the Committee on Government Assurances and the Committee on Subordinate Legislation in ensuring that the executive fulfills its promises and does not overstep its delegated powers.
      • Limitations and Challenges:
        • Recommendations of the committees are advisory and not binding on the government.
        • The trend of bypassing committees for important legislation weakens their control.
        • Lack of technical expertise and research support for committee members.
      • Conclusion: Conclude that despite their limitations, the parliamentary committee system remains one of the most potent and effective tools for ensuring detailed executive accountability, and strengthening it is crucial for a healthy parliamentary democracy.

Graph View