GS Notes

17. Polity Notes 24

24 min read

Elaborate Notes

Parliamentary Committees

  • Need for Parliamentary Committees:

    • The modern legislature is tasked with a vast and complex range of functions, including law-making, financial control, and ensuring executive accountability. It is institutionally impractical for the Parliament, as a whole body, to deliberate on every issue in detail. As observed by political scientist Woodrow Wilson in his work Congressional Government (1885), “Congress in session is Congress on public exhibition, whilst Congress in its committee-rooms is Congress at work.” This sentiment is equally applicable to the Indian Parliament.
    • Discussions on the floor of the House are often influenced by partisan politics. Members are typically bound by the party whip, which can stifle objective and in-depth analysis of legislative proposals or government policies. Committees provide a more private, non-partisan, and conducive environment for detailed scrutiny, away from the public glare and political posturing.
    • The rise of ‘delegated legislation’ or ‘subordinate legislation’ has significantly increased the executive’s law-making power. The Parliament enacts a skeletal law, leaving the executive to fill in the details through rules and regulations. Committees, particularly the Committee on Subordinate Legislation, are crucial for overseeing this process and ensuring the executive does not overstep its authority.
    • There has been a discernible decline in the number of sitting days of Parliament over the decades. For instance, the first Lok Sabha (1952-57) met for an average of 135 days a year, which has fallen to an average of around 60-70 days in recent years. This reduction in time necessitates a mechanism for detailed legislative work, a role effectively filled by committees.

  • Classification of Parliamentary Committees:

    • Parliamentary Committees are broadly classified based on their nature and tenure. They draw their authority from Article 105 (privileges of MPs) and Article 118 (Parliament’s authority to make rules for regulating its procedure and conduct of business).
    • Standing Committees (Permanent): These are constituted every year or periodically and work on a continuous basis. Their work is of an ongoing nature.
      • Financial Committees: These are considered the most significant committees as they institutionalize financial accountability of the executive. They include the Public Accounts Committee, the Estimates Committee, and the Committee on Public Undertakings.
      • Departmentally Related Standing Committees (DRSCs): A major innovation introduced in 1993, these 24 committees (16 for Lok Sabha and 8 for Rajya Sabha) cover all government ministries and departments. Their functions include examining Demands for Grants, scrutinizing bills referred to them, and considering national policy documents.
      • Other Standing Committees: These are diverse and deal with the day-to-day business of the House (e.g., Business Advisory Committee), maintaining order and ethics (e.g., Committee of Privileges, Ethics Committee), and providing facilities to members (e.g., General Purposes Committee).
    • Ad-hoc Committees (Temporary): These are appointed for a specific purpose and cease to exist after completing their assigned task and submitting a report.
      • Inquiry Committees: These are constituted to investigate specific issues or incidents of national importance. A historical example is the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) constituted to inquire into the Bofors contract (1987) or the JPC on the 2G spectrum allocation case (2011).
      • Advisory Committees: These are typically Select or Joint Committees on Bills. When a Bill is introduced, it can be referred to such a committee for detailed examination and to elicit public opinion, after which the committee submits a report with its recommendations to the House.

Financial Committees

  • Public Accounts Committee (PAC):

    • Historical Context: The PAC is the oldest financial committee, first set up in 1921 under the provisions of the Government of India Act of 1919 (Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms). It was established to ensure executive accountability in financial matters.
    • Composition: It consists of 22 members (15 from Lok Sabha and 7 from Rajya Sabha). Members are elected annually by the members of their respective Houses through the principle of proportional representation by means of a single transferable vote, ensuring representation from all major parties.
    • Chairman: By a convention established in 1967, the Chairman of the PAC is appointed by the Speaker from amongst its members and is invariably from the main opposition party. This is a crucial democratic tradition to ensure unbiased scrutiny of the government’s financial dealings.
    • Functions: The primary function of the PAC is to examine the appropriation accounts and the audit reports of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) laid before the Parliament. The CAG is often described as the “friend, philosopher, and guide” of the PAC. The committee scrutinizes public expenditure not merely for technical irregularities but also from the perspective of economy, prudence, wisdom, and propriety. It seeks to uncover cases of waste, corruption, inefficiency, and nugatory expenditure. For instance, the PAC’s examination of CAG reports on the 2G Spectrum allocation and the Commonwealth Games brought significant public and political attention to the alleged irregularities.

  • Estimates Committee:

    • Historical Context: The committee was first constituted in 1950 on the recommendation of John Mathai, the then Finance Minister. It is a unique committee as all its 30 members are from the Lok Sabha, reinforcing the Lok Sabha’s primacy in financial matters.
    • Composition and Chairmanship: It consists of 30 members, all from the Lok Sabha, elected annually based on proportional representation. A minister cannot be a member. The Chairman is appointed by the Speaker from amongst its members and is, by convention, from the ruling party.
    • Functions: Often described as a ‘continuous economy committee’, its primary role is to examine the estimates included in the budget and suggest ‘economies’ in public expenditure. It suggests alternative policies to bring about efficiency and economy in administration. Unlike the PAC, which conducts a post-mortem of expenditure, the Estimates Committee’s role is prospective. However, a key limitation is that it can only examine the estimates after they have been voted on by the Parliament, not before. Its recommendations are advisory.

  • Committee on Public Undertakings (PSUs):

    • Historical Context: Following the Industrial Policy Resolution of 1956, the public sector expanded rapidly. To ensure parliamentary oversight over these PSUs, which involved massive public investment, this committee was created in 1964 on the recommendation of the Krishna Menon Committee.
    • Composition: It has 22 members (15 from Lok Sabha and 7 from Rajya Sabha), elected in the same manner as the PAC. A minister cannot be a member. The Chairman is appointed by the Speaker from its members.
    • Functions: The committee examines the reports and accounts of Public Sector Undertakings and also the reports of the CAG on them. It assesses whether the affairs of the PSUs are being managed in accordance with sound business principles and prudent commercial practices. It does not examine matters of major government policy or day-to-day administration of the undertakings.

Weaknesses of the Committee System

  • Advisory Nature: The recommendations of all parliamentary committees are purely advisory and not binding on the government. While the government is required to submit an ‘Action Taken Report’, it can reject the recommendations, which often happens with politically sensitive suggestions.
  • Lack of Public Debate: The reports of these committees are rarely discussed in detail on the floor of the House, limiting public awareness and pressure on the government to act.
  • Short Tenure: The one-year term for most committees is insufficient for members to develop the necessary expertise, especially in complex technical and financial matters. This leads to a lack of continuity and deep specialization.
  • Limited Technical Support: While the PAC is assisted by the CAG, other committees, like the Estimates Committee, lack similar expert institutional support, which limits the depth and quality of their scrutiny.
  • Post-Mortem Work: The work of the PAC, being based on CAG reports, is largely post-mortem. It examines expenditure that has already been incurred, making it difficult to prevent financial losses.
  • Policy Limitation: Committees are generally barred from questioning the fundamental policy laid down by the Parliament. Their scrutiny is confined to the implementation of that policy.
  • Executive Dominance: The executive can withhold information from committees by citing national security or taking shelter under archaic laws like the Official Secrets Act, 1923. Furthermore, the recent trend of not referring significant bills to committees undermines their role in legislative scrutiny. Data from PRS Legislative Research shows a steep decline in the percentage of bills referred to committees from 71% in the 15th Lok Sabha to just 25% in the 16th Lok Sabha and even lower in the 17th Lok Sabha.

Qualifications and Disqualification of Members of Parliament

  • Qualifications (Article 84):

    • Must be a citizen of India.
    • Must subscribe to an oath or affirmation before a person authorized by the Election Commission.
    • Must be not less than 30 years of age for Rajya Sabha and not less than 25 years of age for Lok Sabha.
    • Must possess other qualifications as prescribed by Parliament. The Representation of the People Act, 1951 requires that a candidate must be an elector for any parliamentary constituency.

  • Disqualifications (Article 102):

    • A person shall be disqualified if they:
      • Hold any office of profit under the Government of India or any state government (other than an office declared by Parliament by law not to disqualify its holder).
      • Are of unsound mind and stand so declared by a competent court.
      • Are an undischarged insolvent.
      • Are not a citizen of India or have voluntarily acquired the citizenship of a foreign state.
      • Are so disqualified under any law made by Parliament (e.g., RPA, 1951 or the Tenth Schedule - anti-defection law).
    • Disqualifications under the Representation of the People Act, 1951:
      • Conviction for certain offences resulting in imprisonment for two or more years. The Supreme Court in Lily Thomas v. Union of India (2013) struck down Section 8(4) of the RPA, which allowed convicted MPs to continue in office if they appealed within three months. Now, disqualification is immediate upon conviction.
      • Found guilty of corrupt practices in an election.
      • Failure to lodge an account of election expenses within the stipulated time.
      • Having an interest in government contracts or services.
      • Dismissal from government service for corruption or disloyalty.
    • Decision on Disqualification: On questions related to Article 102, the President’s decision is final, but he must obtain the opinion of the Election Commission of India. For disqualification under the Tenth Schedule (defection), the final deciding authority is the Presiding Officer of the House (Speaker/Chairman).

Importance of Rajya Sabha (Council of States)

  • Rationale for Bicameralism: India’s adoption of a bicameral legislature was influenced by the British model and the federal structure of the nation. The Rajya Sabha was envisaged by the Constituent Assembly as a chamber for “sober second thought” to prevent hasty legislation and to represent the interests of the states at the Union level.
  • Equal Powers with Lok Sabha: The Rajya Sabha enjoys co-equal status with the Lok Sabha in several key areas, reflecting its importance as a federal and revising chamber:
    • Ordinary Bills: An ordinary bill must be passed by both Houses to become law. A deadlock between the two Houses is resolved by a joint sitting (Article 108), but this provision does not apply to Money Bills or Constitution Amendment Bills.
    • Constitutional Amendment Bills: Under Article 368, a constitutional amendment bill must be passed by both Houses separately with a special majority. There is no provision for a joint sitting, giving the Rajya Sabha an absolute veto over constitutional amendments.
    • Election and Impeachment of President: Members of the Rajya Sabha participate in the election of the President (Article 54) and in the process of his impeachment (Article 61).
    • Removal of Vice-President: While a resolution for the removal of the Vice-President can only be initiated in the Rajya Sabha, it must also be agreed to by the Lok Sabha with a simple majority.
    • Approval of Proclamations: All proclamations of Emergency (National, State, or Financial) must be approved by both Houses of Parliament.
    • Consideration of Reports: Both Houses consider the reports of constitutional bodies like the UPSC, Finance Commission, and CAG.

Prelims Pointers

  • Public Accounts Committee (PAC):

    • Established: 1921, under the Government of India Act, 1919.
    • Members: 22 (15 from Lok Sabha + 7 from Rajya Sabha).
    • Term: 1 year.
    • Chairman: Appointed by the Speaker, from the opposition party (convention since 1967).
    • Function: Examines CAG reports on appropriation accounts.
    • The CAG acts as its ‘friend, philosopher and guide’.

  • Estimates Committee:

    • Established: 1950, on the recommendation of John Mathai.
    • Members: 30 (All from Lok Sabha).
    • Term: 1 year.
    • Chairman: Appointed by the Speaker, from the ruling party.
    • Also known as the ‘continuous economy committee’.
    • A minister cannot be a member.

  • Committee on Public Undertakings (PSUs):

    • Established: 1964, on the recommendation of the Krishna Menon Committee.
    • Members: 22 (15 from Lok Sabha + 7 from Rajya Sabha).
    • Term: 1 year.
    • Function: Examines reports and accounts of PSUs.

  • Constitutional Articles:

    • Article 79: Constitution of Parliament (President, Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha).
    • Article 84: Qualification for membership of Parliament.
    • Article 102: Disqualifications for membership.
    • Article 105: Powers, privileges, etc., of the Houses of Parliament.
    • Article 118: Rules of procedure for Parliament.

  • Constitutional Amendments:

    • 42nd Amendment (1976): Froze Lok Sabha seats based on the 1971 census until the year 2000.
    • 84th Amendment (2001): Extended the freeze on Lok Sabha seats until 2026.
    • 104th Amendment (2020): Extended reservation for SCs/STs in legislatures for 10 years; discontinued the nomination of Anglo-Indians to Lok Sabha and State Assemblies.

  • Representation of the People Act, 1951:

    • Lays down conditions for disqualification, including conviction for an offense with imprisonment of 2 or more years.
    • The Supreme Court in Lily Thomas v. Union of India (2013) ruled that disqualification is immediate upon conviction.

  • Rajya Sabha Special Powers:

    • Article 249: Can authorize Parliament to make a law on a subject in the State List.
    • Article 312: Can recommend the creation of a new All-India Service.

Mains Insights

1. Parliamentary Committees: The Unsung Mini-Legislatures

  • Cause-Effect Relationship: The increasing complexity of governance and the decline in the quality and quantity of parliamentary floor debates (cause) have elevated the importance of committees as the primary site for detailed legislative and financial scrutiny (effect). They function as mini-legislatures where cross-party consensus can be built.
  • Debate: The advisory nature of committee recommendations is a major point of debate. While making them binding could infringe upon the executive’s domain and the supremacy of the Parliament as a whole, their routine rejection by the government undermines the very purpose of these committees and weakens accountability.
  • Historiographical Viewpoint: The evolution of the committee system reflects the changing nature of Indian democracy. Initially modelled on the British system, it has adapted with Indian innovations like the DRSCs in 1993. However, scholars like M.R. Madhavan (PRS Legislative Research) argue that the recent executive tendency to bypass committees for crucial legislation represents a significant erosion of parliamentary oversight, shifting power decisively towards the executive.

2. The Challenge of Ensuring Executive Accountability

  • Effectiveness vs. Reality: While financial committees like the PAC are powerful tools on paper, their effectiveness is constrained by several factors: post-mortem nature of their work, limited expertise of members, and executive secrecy. The PAC’s work is effective only as long as the executive is willing to cooperate and the media and civil society use its findings to create public pressure.
  • Structural Flaws: The one-year tenure is a structural impediment to developing specialization. A longer term of at least two or three years, as suggested by experts, could enhance the quality of scrutiny. The lack of independent research support for most committees (barring CAG’s support to PAC) makes them overly reliant on information provided by the very ministries they are supposed to scrutinize.

3. Disqualification of Legislators: Upholding Probity in Public Life

  • Judicial Intervention: The judiciary has played a pivotal role in strengthening the provisions for disqualification to curb the criminalization of politics. The landmark judgment in Lily Thomas v. Union of India (2013) plugged a major loophole in the RPA, 1951, demonstrating the judiciary’s role in enforcing constitutional morality.
  • The Office of Profit Debate: The concept of ‘office of profit’ remains a contentious issue, often leading to political controversies. The underlying principle is to uphold the constitutional separation of powers and prevent legislators from being susceptible to executive influence. The Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1959, which exempts certain offices, is often amended, leading to debates about its misuse.
  • Role of Presiding Officer (Anti-Defection): The role of the Speaker/Chairman in deciding disqualification cases under the Tenth Schedule has been a subject of intense debate regarding partiality and delays. The Supreme Court’s suggestion in Keisham Meghachandra Singh v. The Hon’ble Speaker Manipur Legislative Assembly (2020) to create an independent tribunal to decide defection cases highlights the need for reform to ensure impartiality.

4. Rajya Sabha: A Mere ‘Second Chamber’ or an Essential ‘Federal Chamber’?

  • Federalism vs. Politics: While the Rajya Sabha was designed to represent the states, its character has changed over time. The abolition of the ‘domicile’ requirement in 2003 and the prevalence of party whips mean that members often vote along party lines rather than representing state interests, diluting its federal character.
  • Revising and Delaying Chamber: The Rajya Sabha’s role as a revising chamber is crucial. It provides a platform for more detailed and dispassionate debate, away from the populist pressures that often influence the directly elected Lok Sabha. Its power to delay (but not block) Money Bills and its equal power in passing Ordinary and Constitutional Amendment Bills ensure a crucial check on hasty legislation from the lower house.
  • Contemporary Relevance: In an era of coalition politics or when the ruling party in the Lok Sabha lacks a majority in the Rajya Sabha, the upper house becomes a vital forum for negotiation, compromise, and legislative accountability. Its special powers under Articles 249 and 312 further underscore its unique position in the Indian federal structure.

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. This committee’s specific mandate is to oversee delegated legislation and ensure the executive does not exceed the authority granted by Parliament.

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

    1. The Constitution of India classifies the ministers into four ranks viz. Cabinet Minister, Minister of State with Independent Charge, Minister of State and Deputy Minister.
    2. The total number of ministers in the Union Government, including the Prime Minister, shall not exceed 15 percent of the total number of members in the Lok Sabha. Which of the statements given above is/are correct? (a) 1 only (b) 2 only (c) Both 1 and 2 (d) Neither 1 nor 2 Answer: (b) 2 only. Statement 1 is incorrect; the Constitution does not classify ministers into ranks; this is a convention. Statement 2 is correct, as this provision was added by the 91st Constitutional Amendment Act, 2003 (Article 75(1A)).

  3. Rajya Sabha has equal powers with Lok Sabha in: (UPSC CSE 2020) (a) the matter of creating new All India Services (b) amending the Constitution (c) the removal of the government (d) making cut motions Answer: (b) amending the Constitution. For creating All India Services (Art 312), Rajya Sabha has a special power. Removal of government (no-confidence motion) and making cut motions are exclusive powers of the Lok Sabha. Constitutional Amendment Bills require passage in both houses with a special majority.

  4. Consider the following statements regarding the Public Accounts Committee: (Based on common question patterns)

    1. It consists of 15 members from Lok Sabha and 7 from Rajya Sabha.
    2. A minister can be elected as a member of the committee.
    3. The term of office of the members of the Committee is five years. Which of the statements given above is/are correct? (a) 1 only (b) 1 and 2 only (c) 2 and 3 only (d) 1, 2 and 3 Answer: (a) 1 only. Statement 2 is incorrect; a minister cannot be a member of any financial committee. Statement 3 is incorrect; the term of office is one year.

  5. Which of the following is not a feature of the Estimates Committee? (Based on common question patterns) (a) All its members are from the Lok Sabha. (b) It is also known as the ‘Continuous Economy Committee’. (c) The Chairman of the committee is from the main opposition party. (d) It examines the budget estimates only after they have been voted by the Parliament. Answer: (c) The Chairman of the committee is from the main opposition party. This is a feature of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC). The Chairman of the Estimates Committee is appointed by the Speaker and is conventionally from the ruling party.

Mains

  1. “The role of the Rajya Sabha as a second chamber has been a subject of debate. To what extent has the Rajya Sabha contributed to strengthening Indian democracy?” (UPSC CSE 2020 pattern) Answer Framework:

    • Introduction: Briefly introduce the rationale behind a bicameral legislature in a federal and diverse country like India, mentioning its intended roles as a revising chamber and a council of states.
    • Contributions to Strengthening Democracy:
      • Revising Chamber: Mention instances where Rajya Sabha has prevented hasty legislation, improved bills by suggesting amendments, and provided a platform for deeper debate.
      • Federal Role: Discuss its special powers under Art 249 and Art 312 to protect states’ interests, though its effectiveness in this role can be debated.
      • Voice for a Wider Spectrum: It accommodates experts and eminent personalities through nominations, enriching the quality of parliamentary debates (e.g., Dr. Manmohan Singh, Jairam Ramesh before they became ministers).
      • Check on Executive Dominance: Acts as a check on the government, especially when the ruling party has a brute majority in Lok Sabha but not in Rajya Sabha.
    • Challenges and Criticisms:
      • Dilution of federal character (abolition of domicile rule).
      • Used as a backdoor entry for politicians who lose Lok Sabha elections.
      • Can cause legislative gridlock and obstruct the mandate of a popularly elected government.
    • Conclusion: Conclude that despite criticisms, the Rajya Sabha has played a crucial, though sometimes imperfect, role in ensuring legislative scrutiny, representing federal interests, and preventing executive overreach, thereby contributing significantly to the maturity of Indian democracy.

  2. “The committee system is the ‘workshop’ of the Parliament.” In light of this statement, critically evaluate the functioning of Parliamentary Committees in India. (UPSC CSE 2019 pattern) Answer Framework:

    • Introduction: Explain the statement by highlighting that the real, detailed work of Parliament (scrutiny, analysis) happens in committees, away from the public glare of the main House.
    • Significance and Positive Aspects:
      • Detailed Scrutiny: Discuss how committees examine legislation (DRSCs), finances (PAC, Estimates Committee), and policies in a non-partisan manner.
      • Ensuring Accountability: Explain how they hold the executive accountable by summoning officials and demanding explanations. The PAC’s work based on CAG reports is a prime example.
      • Expertise and Specialization: Committees allow MPs to develop expertise in specific areas of governance.
    • Critical Evaluation (Challenges and Weaknesses):
      • Advisory Recommendations: Their recommendations are not binding, limiting their impact.
      • Declining Reference of Bills: The trend of not sending bills to committees undermines legislative scrutiny. Provide recent data.
      • Post-Mortem Nature: PAC’s work is after the fact.
      • Short Tenure and Partisanship: One-year tenure limits specialization, and political considerations can sometimes seep into their functioning.
      • Lack of Resources: Inadequate research support and reliance on ministry-provided data.
    • Conclusion: Conclude by reiterating their indispensable role while suggesting reforms like longer tenures, mandatory reference of all bills, and making Action Taken Reports subject to a House debate to enhance their effectiveness.

  3. To what extent, in your view, the Parliament is able to ensure accountability of the executive in India? (UPSC CSE 2021) Answer Framework:

    • Introduction: State that parliamentary accountability of the executive is the bedrock of India’s political system. Mention the various tools Parliament uses for this purpose.
    • Mechanisms for Ensuring Accountability:
      • Legislative Control: Scrutiny of bills, especially through committees.
      • Financial Control: The budget process, cut motions, and the work of financial committees (PAC, EC).
      • Deliberative Control: Question Hour, Zero Hour, adjournment motions, debates.
      • Ultimate Control: The motion of no-confidence.
    • Limitations and Challenges:
      • Dominance of the Executive: The party whip system and brute majorities often reduce the Parliament to a rubber stamp.
      • Decline in Sitting Days: Reduced time for debates and discussions.
      • Guillotine: Passing of Demands for Grants without discussion.
      • Weaknesses of the Committee System: As discussed above (advisory, lack of resources, etc.).
      • Ordinance Raj: Frequent use of ordinances bypasses immediate parliamentary scrutiny.
    • Conclusion: Conclude that while the constitutional framework provides robust mechanisms for ensuring accountability, their effectiveness in practice is often diminished by executive dominance, procedural shortcomings, and a decline in parliamentary culture. Strengthening the committee system and ensuring more deliberative time are crucial for reinvigorating parliamentary oversight.

  4. Discuss the grounds for disqualification of a Member of Parliament under the Representation of the People Act, 1951. How has the judiciary strengthened these provisions? Answer Framework:

    • Introduction: Briefly state that while the Constitution lays down basic disqualification criteria, the RPA, 1951 provides detailed statutory grounds to ensure probity and fair play in elections.
    • Grounds under RPA, 1951:
      • Corrupt Practices: Bribery, undue influence, promoting enmity.
      • Criminal Convictions: Conviction for an offense leading to imprisonment of two or more years.
      • Electoral Offences: Failure to lodge election expenses.
      • Conflict of Interest: Interest in government contracts.
      • Dismissal from Service: Dismissal for corruption or disloyalty.
    • Role of Judiciary in Strengthening the Provisions:
      • Union of India v. Association for Democratic Reforms (2002): Made it mandatory for candidates to disclose criminal antecedents, assets, and educational qualifications, empowering voters.
      • Lily Thomas v. Union of India (2013): Struck down Section 8(4) of the RPA, which gave a three-month window to convicted MPs to appeal. This led to the immediate disqualification of convicted legislators, a significant step against the criminalization of politics.
      • Abhiram Singh v. C.D. Commachen (2017): Broadened the interpretation of “corrupt practice” to hold that an appeal for votes on the grounds of religion, race, caste, community, or language of the candidate is a corrupt practice.
    • Conclusion: Conclude that the judiciary has acted as a crucial watchdog, progressively strengthening the legal framework through landmark interpretations to cleanse the electoral process and uphold the integrity of the legislature.

  5. The parliamentary committee system in India is a vital instrument for ensuring detailed scrutiny and executive accountability. However, its effectiveness is hampered by several structural and procedural challenges. Suggest measures for reform. (UPSC CSE 2022 Pattern) Answer Framework:

    • Introduction: Briefly establish the importance of parliamentary committees as the primary forums for detailed, non-partisan work that is not possible on the floor of the House.
    • Challenges Hampering Effectiveness:
      • Structural: Short one-year tenure, lack of dedicated research staff, limited technical expertise among members.
      • Procedural: Recommendations being merely advisory, infrequent discussion of reports in Parliament, declining trend of referring bills to committees.
      • Executive Attitude: Reluctance to share information (citing Official Secrets Act), routine rejection of recommendations, and bypassing committees on crucial legislation.
      • Capacity Issues: MPs have multiple responsibilities and often low attendance in committee meetings.
    • Measures for Reform:
      • Strengthening the System: Make it mandatory to refer all major bills and international treaties to committees (as suggested by NCRWC).
      • Enhancing Impact: A portion of Parliament’s session time should be dedicated to discussing committee reports. The government should be obligated to present a more robust ‘Action Taken Report’ with clear reasons for rejecting any recommendation.
      • Building Capacity: Extend the tenure of committees to at least 2-3 years to allow for specialization. Provide committees with dedicated, independent research staff.
      • Pre-Budget Scrutiny: The DRSCs should be empowered to examine Demands for Grants before they are discussed and voted on in the House.
      • Transparency: Committee proceedings could be partially televised or live-streamed to increase public engagement and pressure.
    • Conclusion: Sum up by stating that implementing these reforms is essential to transform the committee system from a mere advisory body to a powerful and effective instrument of parliamentary oversight, thereby strengthening Indian democracy.

Graph View