Parliament & State legislatures

Model Answer

Introduction

Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committees (DRPSCs) are vital instruments for maintaining parliamentary control over the executive in India. They play a significant role in ensuring accountability and checks and balances by examining government policies, legislation, and administration.

Functions of DRPSCs

• Scrutinizing Demands for Grants: DRPSCs examine budget proposals and scrutinize the expenditures of various ministries, ensuring financial accountability.
• Reviewing Legislation: They assess proposed legislation and suggest amendments, refining the law-making process.
• Investigating Policy Matters: DRPSCs delve into specific issues referred by Parliament, providing in-depth analysis and recommendations.
• Ensuring Accountability: They hold the executive accountable by requiring explanations and justifications for their actions.

Effectiveness of DRPSCs

• Financial Accountability: By examining demands for grants and expenditures, DRPSCs ensure public funds are utilized efficiently. For instance, their scrutiny can prevent misuse of resources.
• Refining Legislation: Their review process helps avoid hasty decisions, contributing to well-considered laws. An example is the Standing Committee on Finance’s recommendations on the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (2016), which led to significant amendments being incorporated into the final legislation.
• Policy Investigation: DRPSCs tackle critical national issues. The 31st report of the Standing Committee on Information Technology (2018-19) addressed data security and privacy, recommending enhancements to the data protection framework.

Challenges and Limitations

Despite their effectiveness, DRPSCs face several challenges:

• Limited Resources: Time and resource constraints may hinder comprehensive scrutiny.
• Lack of Expertise: Members may lack specialized knowledge, affecting the quality of recommendations.
• Partisan Politics: Political affiliations can overshadow objective deliberations.
• Non-binding Recommendations: Recommendations made by DRPSCs are not mandatory, allowing the government to accept or reject them at will.

Conclusion

To enhance the effectiveness of DRPSCs and inspire greater reverence for parliamentary control, it is essential to address these challenges. Strengthening their operational framework will lead to a more robust system of oversight, ultimately reinforcing the integrity of parliamentary democracy in India.

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.

Model Answer

Introduction

The Parliamentary Committee system is a vital mechanism in the legislative functioning of Indian democracy. It consists of various committees categorized into Standing and Ad Hoc Committees, each playing a crucial role in investigating and analyzing legislative proposals, budgets, and government activities.

Structure of the Parliamentary Committee System

1. Standing Committees

These are permanent committees established to work continuously on matters allocated to them. For instance, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) reviews the annual audit reports of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG).

2. Ad Hoc Committees

Formed to address specific issues, these committees exist for a limited duration. A recent example is the Joint Parliamentary Committee set up to scrutinize the Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019.

3. Departmentally Related Standing Committees (DRSCs)

These committees scrutinize the demands for grants from various ministries, playing a critical role in examining bills and government policies related to their respective ministries.

4. Financial Committees

Financial committees, such as the Estimates Committee and the PAC, delve into financial matters, presenting detailed reports that help in the effective oversight of government expenditure.

Role of Financial Committees in Institutionalization

1. Scrutiny of Government Expenditure

Financial committees play a crucial role in scrutinizing government expenditures. For example, the PAC’s report on the 2G spectrum allocation brought significant irregularities to light, ensuring accountability.

2. Expert Consultations

These committees often consult experts to enhance their understanding of complex issues. During the formulation of the GST Bill, various economists and industry experts were consulted, ensuring a comprehensive tax system.

3. Cross-Party Deliberations

Financial committees facilitate cross-party discussions, promoting cooperative approaches. The consensus-building during GST discussions in the Rajya Sabha is a testament to this collaborative spirit.

4. Accountability and Transparency

Reports from financial committees have increased accountability and transparency in government actions. The PAC’s detailed report on the Rafale deal underscored the commitment to transparency.

5. Focused Discussions

Committees enable focused discussions, allowing for in-depth exploration of issues. The Joint Parliamentary Committee’s deliberations on the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (2016) exemplify this.

Conclusion

The Parliamentary Committee system is essential for enhancing the efficiency, accountability, and inclusivity of the legislative process in India. Financial committees have significantly contributed to the institutionalization of the Indian Parliament by ensuring scrutiny, transparency, and expert involvement. Addressing existing challenges will further strengthen their role in upholding the democratic ethos of the Indian Parliament.

Model Answer

Introduction

Urban Local Bodies (ULBs), which include Municipalities and Municipal Corporations, were established to enhance governance in urban areas through the 74th Constitutional Amendment Act of 1992. Despite this, states in India appear hesitant to empower ULBs functionally and financially.

Reluctance to Empower ULBs Functionally

1. Decentralization Challenges

Despite the constitutional provisions, many states are reluctant to delegate substantial powers to ULBs, undermining grassroots democracy. This is evident in various states where local governance remains heavily centralized.

2. Manpower Shortages

ULBs often lack skilled personnel, which hampers their operational effectiveness. For instance, smaller cities face a shortage of qualified professionals to handle complex urban planning tasks, resulting in mismanagement.

3. Bureaucratic Control

In several states, bureaucratic oversight stifles local initiative. For example, in Lucknow, bureaucrat-led committees frequently override decisions made by ULBs, leading to ineffective governance.

4. Limited Role in City Planning

Although ULBs are intended to lead city planning, state agencies often take precedence. In Bengaluru, crucial planning initiatives are frequently conducted by state bodies, sidelining municipal corporations.

5. Lack of Autonomy in Service Delivery

Key services like water supply and waste management are often controlled by state governments. In Delhi, overlapping authorities have led to fragmented service delivery, adversely affecting urban management.

Reluctance to Empower ULBs Financially

1. Dependence on Grants

Most ULBs rely heavily on state and central grants, experiencing financial challenges when these funds are delayed. This reliance limits their operational flexibility

2. Financial Mismanagement

Many ULBs face allegations of financial irregularities. The recent corruption case in the Municipal Corporation of Gurugram (2022) highlights this issue.

3. Lack of State Finance Commissions

Few states have established State Finance Commissions to ensure equitable financial distribution, resulting in dysfunctional financial management for ULBs.

4. Property Tax Control

States often hesitate to empower ULBs over property tax reforms, limiting their financial autonomy. For instance, in Karnataka, ULBs have restricted authority in setting property tax rates.

5. Limited Access to Bond Markets

While some ULBs, like Pune, have successfully raised funds through bond markets, many states do not encourage this financial avenue, restricting capital acquisition for development.

6. User Charges and PPP Reluctance

States are often reluctant to allow ULBs to adjust user charges, negatively impacting their revenue. Additionally, there is a broader hesitance to adopt Public-Private Partnerships for urban projects, inhibiting innovative financial solutions.

Conclusion

The vision of decentralized urban governance, as outlined in the 74th Constitutional Amendment Act, remains unfulfilled due to states’ reluctance to fully empower ULBs. Addressing these issues is essential for creating self-reliant and efficient urban local bodies, paving the way for sustainable urban development in India.