The Indian Parliament, comprising the President and two houses—the Lok Sabha (House of the People) and the Rajya Sabha (Council of States)—plays crucial roles in legislative, financial, and oversight functions. Here’s an analysis of these functions and their procedures, along with a comparison to parliamentary control mechanisms in other countries:

Legislative Function:
Introduction and Passing of Bills:

Procedure: Bills can be introduced in either house of Parliament (except money bills, which must be introduced in the Lok Sabha). After introduction, bills undergo scrutiny in committees and debates on the floor.
Passage: Bills require approval from both houses and the assent of the President to become law. In case of disagreement between the houses, a joint sitting can be called, where decisions are taken by a majority vote.
Types of Bills:

Money Bills: Solely related to matters like taxation and government expenditure, these can only be introduced in the Lok Sabha.
Ordinary Bills: Cover various other legislative matters and can be introduced in either house.
Constitution Amendment Bills: Require special procedures, including approval by a two-thirds majority in each house and ratification by at least half of the state legislatures.
Financial Function:
Budget Debate and Approval:

Annual Budget: Presented by the Finance Minister, the budget undergoes detailed discussion and scrutiny by both houses, focusing on revenue and expenditure proposals.
Approval: The Lok Sabha must pass the budget before it can come into effect. The Rajya Sabha can suggest amendments but cannot reject it outright.
Financial Legislation:

Finance Bills: To give effect to the financial proposals of the government.
Appropriation Bills: Authorize expenditures from the Consolidated Fund of India.
Oversight Function:
Scrutiny of Executive Actions:

Question Hour: Members of Parliament (MPs) can ask questions of ministers, holding them accountable for their departments’ actions and policies.
Committees: Parliamentary committees like Public Accounts Committee (PAC), Estimates Committee, and Standing Committees examine executive actions and performance.
Debates and Resolutions:

MPs debate government policies and actions, providing a platform for scrutiny and critique.
Resolutions can be passed to express Parliament’s opinion on various issues.
Comparison with Other Countries:
United Kingdom (Westminster System):

Similarities: Both India and the UK have a bicameral legislature, with the House of Commons as the lower house and the House of Lords (Rajya Sabha equivalent) as the upper house.
Differences: The UK lacks a written constitution and has a more centralized structure of government compared to India’s federal structure.
United States (Congressional System):

Similarities: Both have a bicameral legislature (House of Representatives and Senate in the US), where bills must pass both houses and receive presidential assent.
Differences: The US has a stronger system of checks and balances between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches compared to India’s parliamentary system.
Australia (Bicameral Parliament):

Similarities: Both have a bicameral legislature (House of Representatives and Senate in Australia), with similar procedures for introducing and passing bills.
Differences: Australia’s Senate has more powers compared to the Rajya Sabha, particularly in terms of amending and blocking legislation.
Conclusion:
The Indian Parliament exercises significant legislative, financial, and oversight functions, crucial for democratic governance. Its procedures for introducing and passing bills, debating budgets, and scrutinizing executive actions are fundamental to ensuring accountability and effective governance. While parliamentary control mechanisms in India share similarities with other parliamentary systems, each country’s unique constitutional framework and political context shape the extent and operation of these mechanisms.

Answer: The ‘Me Too Movement’ in India was inspired by a global campaign against sexual harassment and assault directed at women. In 2018, women across the spectrum opened up and shared their stories about abuse by men in positions of power. The Movement gave a voice to many voiceless women in India and helped raise pertinent issues relating to the safety of women, especially in the workplace, such as:

• Calling out powerful perpetrators: Women named and shamed their abusers, most of whom held powerful positions. Despite the anticipated backlash, hate messages, and the taboo attached to being a victim, women in large numbers came out with their accounts of harassment and abuse. It was momentous and many alleged perpetrators had to resign from their position of power and even faced trials.
• Bringing workplace safety into public discourse: After decades of silence, sexual harassment at the workplace was acknowledged and talked about openly. The conversations that took place in whispers were suddenly loud and clear.
• Change in the work culture: The Movement led to a conversation about what inappropriate behavior and harassment comprise. It forced companies and institutions to introspect, and constitute the Internal Complaint Committee (ICC) and follow the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act) in its letter and spirit.
• Rise in complaints: The number of registered complaints under the POSH Act also spiked. It showed that women are now comfortable and aware of their rights to complain about sexual harassment.

Although the Me Too Movement empowered women to speak up, the impact was momentary. It did not result in a substantial structural change in the workplace culture or society in general, as it had the following limitations:

• Limited to social media outrage: One of the major flaws of the ‘Me Too Movement’ is that it stops at social media outrage, while the goal should be about changing a mindset and a culture that enables harassment. There was no attack on the patriarchal mindset that expects women not to push back or retaliate.
• Limited impact on women from smaller towns: The Movement was largely confined to the privileged sections and did not have much impact on people from smaller towns or financially weaker backgrounds. For instance, it did not talk about the daily wage workers or domestic workers because many of them are not on social media.
• Limited in scope: Many members from across the LGBTQ spectrum said that the Movement only recognized a heteronormative paradigm and that even after the judgment decriminalizing homosexuality under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, social stigma and potential exclusion by family members kept the Me Too Movement inaccessible to them.
• No structural changes: The Movement did not result in any major change or effective enforcement of the sexual harassment law by the government. For instance, Local Complaints Committees at the district level for workers from the unorganized sector are still non-functional in many states.

Despite its limitations, the Movement has set the ball rolling and brought about awareness regarding sexual harassment at the workplace. The need of the hour is to sensitize people about sexual crimes, especially young men. Further, corporations need to conduct sessions and keep their Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) in order.

Answer: The concept of a Citizen’s Charter enshrines the trust between the service provider and its users. A Citizen’s Charter outlines the service commitment of organizations or service providers towards providing quality, high-standard services, including mechanisms for grievance redressal. Ethical principles on which the Citizen’s Charter is formulated are:

• Quality: It focuses on improving the quality of services by setting adequate standards. It also specifies what to expect and how to act if the standards are not met.
• Choice: Wherever possible, it encourages access and promotion of choice.
• Value: It aims at gaining value for the taxpayers’ money.
• Accountability: It envisages accountability of the concerned individuals and organizations.
• Transparency: There is transparency with regard to rules, procedures, schemes, and grievances.

The purpose of a Citizen’s Charter as outlined by the Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances (DARPG) are as follows:

• Citizen-friendly system: To construct a systematic effort to focus on the commitment of an organization towards its citizens.
• Ensuring accountability: To provide a system of enforcement to monitor the developments and ensure that they are in compliance with the rules.
• Empowering the citizens: This is done by encouraging the members of the public to express their views freely on the difficulties faced by them in getting their work done in public offices and in availing public services.

The Citizen’s Charter has increased the participation of the common man in the efficient working of an organization by making the citizens aware of the aims and goals of the organization. Further, it has helped in reducing corruption by ensuring transparency and accountability and has also led to a citizen-friendly system in order to promote good governance. However, there have been certain shortcomings with respect to its effective implementation, such as:

• Lack of a consultative process: It has become a “one size fits all” document without regular consultation with all the stakeholders.
• Non-sensitized and untrained staff: Commitments of the Charter cannot be expected to be delivered by a workforce that is unaware of the spirit and content of the Charter.
• Inadequate publicity of the Charters: In most departments, the Charter has not been given the required publicity.
• Bureaucratic hurdles: Frequent transfers and reshuffling of the concerned officers at the crucial stages of formulation/implementation of the Citizen’s Charter hamper the progress of the initiative.
• Unrealistic standards: This has created an unfavorable impression on the users as the high standards that are set in the Charter have not been met.

A Citizen’s Charter essentially focuses on the rights of the public and the obligations of the public servants. Redesigning, re-engineering, and restructuring the Charter by providing wider consultation and awareness generation through customer surveys and customer Councils, including an external review process, involving and empowering frontline employees and their capacity building through training and building on new skills will be required to make it more dynamic and citizen-friendly.

Answer: Law and order is a state subject under the Constitution of India and the police have a primary role to uphold and enforce laws, investigate crimes, and ensure security for people in the country. Ineffective policing and a constant call for police reforms highlight the various problems in the work culture of the police in the country and how the police personnel are increasingly finding it difficult to maintain a work-life balance. The various issues pertaining to the work culture of the police are as follows:

• The issue of indecision and risk aversion: Indecision is a form of rational self-preservation that is exercised by police officials from the various legal and extra-legal risks to their person, careers, and reputation. These risks originate from problems of organizational design, institutional norms, and other political factors, which include political interference, penal transfers, promotions, and legal over-monitoring and inquiries.
• The issue of inefficiency:
  • The police force in most states is overburdened. Heavy workloads and extended shifts often affect their work-life balance.
  • The police officials are not adequately trained, they lack technical expertise, and tools to counter/monitor/investigate the cases, in the wake of advancement in the acts of crimes.
  • Promotion is tenure-based and politically motivated. There is a poor incentive for working hard. Also, compared to the private sector, the pay scale is low.
• The issue of lack of empathy:
  • Compassion fatigue is an undesirable consequence in professions where individuals are constantly dealing with vulnerability, tensions, crime, and exhaustion.
  • Insensitive handling of women and other vulnerable communities-related cases takes place because proper sensitization and regular training in human rights are not being provided.

In this regard, the state governments have adopted some of the institutional reforms as directed by the Supreme Court in the Prakash Singh case. However, further improvements are required:

• To ensure that the state government does not exercise unwarranted pressure on the police, the dominance of government and police officials in the State Security Commission must be discouraged.
• Transfers, postings, promotions, and other service-related matters of police officers must be done through a merit-based transparent process.
• Police Complaints Authority (PCA) must be empowered to inquire into and monitor the public complaints against police officers in cases of serious misconduct, including custodial death, grievous hurt, or rape in police custody, within an appropriate time period.
• In order to encourage specialization and upgrade overall performance, there should be a gradual separation of investigative and law and order functions of the police.
• SMART i.e., strict and sensitive, modern and mobile, alert and accountable, reliable and responsive, and tech-savvy and trained police force should be created.

A happy and ethical work environment often sets the tone for the efficient functioning of its personnel. Today’s challenges not only need an advanced, well-trained, and modern police force but also a sensitive and empathetic unit.