Indian Polity

Model Answer

Introduction

In India’s parliamentary democracy, the Parliament plays a pivotal role in ensuring the accountability of the executive. This relationship is essential for maintaining transparency and governance through various mechanisms that allow Parliament to scrutinize the actions and policies of the executive.

Body

Mechanisms for Accountability

1. Question Hour:
   • Members of Parliament (MPs) can ask questions to ministers regarding their ministry’s functioning. For instance, during the Question Hour in August 2021, MPs questioned the government on its COVID-19 response, including vaccination strategies and economic measures.
2. Parliamentary Committees:
   • Committees like the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) review budget allocations and policy implementations. In 2010, the PAC scrutinized the 2G Spectrum Scam, prompting significant political ramifications.
3. No-confidence Motion:
   • If the Lok Sabha majority votes for a no-confidence motion, the government must resign. A notable example occurred in 1999 when the Atal Bihari Vajpayee-led government fell by just one vote.
4. Adjournment and Calling Attention Motions:
   • These motions enable MPs to raise urgent matters. In 2019, opposition MPs used a calling attention motion in the Rajya Sabha to discuss air pollution and climate change.
5. Debates and Discussions:
   • Parliament debates various issues, allowing MPs to express their views. The extensive discussions on the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019, highlighted diverse opinions and concerns.

Limitations on Accountability

Despite these mechanisms, certain factors limit Parliament’s effectiveness:

• Frequent Disruptions: Continuous disruptions in sessions can hinder thorough scrutiny of executive actions.
• Party Discipline: Ruling party MPs may hesitate to criticize their government, weakening accountability.
• Weak Opposition: A fragmented opposition may lack the strength to challenge the executive effectively.
• Bypassing Parliament: The executive may issue ordinances or executive orders, circumventing parliamentary oversight.

Conclusion

While the Indian Parliament possesses various mechanisms to ensure executive accountability, challenges such as disruptions, party discipline, and a weak opposition can impede its effectiveness. Addressing these issues is vital for fostering a robust environment for oversight and constructive debate, ultimately enhancing accountability within the executive branch.

Model Answer

Introduction

The Governor, as the constitutional head of a state in India, wields specific legislative powers designed to address urgent issues when the State Legislature is not in session. Understanding these powers and the legality of their exercise is crucial for maintaining democratic governance.

Essential Conditions for Exercise of Legislative Powers by the Governor

1. Ordinance-Making Power

Under Article 213 of the Constitution, the Governor can promulgate ordinances when the State Legislature is not in session and immediate action is required.

• Requirement: Such ordinances must be placed before the State Legislature once it reconvenes. They automatically cease to operate after six weeks from the date of reassembly unless approved by the Legislature.

2. Discretionary Powers

The Governor possesses discretionary powers in specific situations, such as when no party has a clear majority in the State Legislature or during a constitutional crisis.

• Function: In these cases, the Governor can decide on the best course of action to ensure the stability and smooth functioning of the state government

Legality of Re-Promulgation of Ordinances

Re-promulgation of ordinances without placing them before the Legislature contravenes the spirit of the Constitution, which emphasizes legislative oversight and democratic governance.

• In the landmark case of D.C. Wadhwa v. State of Bihar (1987), the Supreme Court ruled that re-promulgating ordinances without legislative approval is unconstitutional.
  • Observation: The Court noted that ordinance-making is a temporary measure and should not serve as a substitute for legislative authority.
• The 2017 judgment in Krishna Kumar Singh v. State of Bihar reaffirmed this stance, declaring that such actions constitute a “fraud on the Constitution.”
  • Conclusion: The Court emphasized that the Governor’s ordinance-making power should be exercised judiciously and only in emergencies when the Legislature is not in session.

Conclusion

Maintaining a balance between the Governor’s legislative powers and the necessity for legislative scrutiny is vital for upholding the spirit of the Constitution and preserving India’s democratic framework. The judicial precedents underscore the importance of legislative oversight in the exercise of these powers.