Indian Democracy: Challenge of Churning
amidst
Chaos
UPSC GENERAL STUDIES: PAPER II
Table of Content
Introduction
Other Names of Parliamentary System
of Government
What really is a democracy? What
are the prerequisites of a successful democracy?
Characteristics of a Liberal
Democracy
Merits of the Parliamentary
System of Government
Demerits of the PS of Government
Reasons for Adopting PS of
Government
Tackling the Negative Perception
of our Democratic
Evaluate the democracy, i.e.
India
Bibliography
Authors’ Note
Introduction
Modern
democratic governments are classified into parliamentary and presidential on
the basis of nature of relationship between the executive and the legislative
organs of the government. The parliamentary system (PS)
of government is the one in which the executive
is responsible to the legislature for its acts and policies. In the
presidential system, the executive is constitutionally independent of the
legislature and is not responsible to the latter for its acts and policies to
the latter.
The Constitution of India provides for a parliamentary
system of government, both at the Centre and in the states. Article 74 and 75 deal with the PS at the Centre and Articles
163 and 164 in the states.
Other Names of PS of Government:
Cabinet Government: Name coined by Sir Ivor Jennings; because the cabinet is the nucleus of power in PS.
Responsible Government: As the cabinet (i.e. the real
executive) is accountable to the parliament and stays in office so long as it
enjoys the latter’s confidence.
Westminster Model of Government: After the location of the British parliament, where the PS
originated.
Prime Ministerial Government: In recent periods, the PM’s position has become more
important vis a vis the cabinet. PM has come to play a dominant role in the politico-administrative system.
Hence many analysts have described the PS of government as Prime Ministerial
Government.
What really is a democracy? What are the prerequisites
of a
successful democracy?
Democracy
is not merely a form of government but a way of life and order of society. It is a way of social and economic relations and above all a belief system.
It is based
on the ideals of dignity, of equality of citizens, liberty, fraternity, justice
and a responsible govt.
Prerequisites
of a successful democracy can be classified under three heads – social,
economic, political:
Social:
- Equality of status
- Equality before law
- Equality of Opportunity
- Educationally and culturally developed
citizenry
- Absence of all kinds of discrimination
Economic:
- Fulfillment of basic minimum needs
- Absence of widespread of inequalities
- Justifiable distribution of resources
- Equal pay equal work
- Protection against exploitation
- Equal opportunities for gainful employment
Political:
- Rule of law
- Equal opportunities for participation in
political affairs
- Guaranteed and protected rights
- Govt by the people or their representatives
- Free and fair elections
- Respect for dissent and opposition
Some of the Characteristics of a Liberal
Democracy are as
follows:
As
Ramchandra Guha has put it, the devices of democracy can be distinguished into
hardware and software. By ‘hardware’ he mean the political features by which
we may recognize whether a society is democratic or not.
Government
is formed by elected representatives and is accountable to the citizenry: This means not just being accountable on paper, but in actual
functioning.
Multi-Party System: Having multiple parties is only the beginning. A system which engenders
multitude of opinion, of policy options is what
a multi-party system should lead to.
Open &
periodic elections for power based on Adult Franchise: This is an important, and definitely not the principal element of a
democracy. If periodic, free and fair elections continue to take place in the
absence of other elements, India will be reduced to what Ramchandra Guha has called an ‘Elections only democracy’.
Pressure
groups also operate in the system:
Pressure groups of all hues, representing not just the elite, but also the vulnerable and downtrodden, must exist and exist
functionally.
Civil
liberties such as various freedoms are guaranteed: This tenet must be respected not just in letter but also in spirit and
must be reflected in the functioning of the legislature, the executive and the
judiciary.
Separation
of powers: Various organs have powers
which are written in the Constitution. They must use these powers to deliver
upon the ideals and goals of our Preamble.
Checks and Balances: Finally, when all of the above tenets are observed, there will be a
system of healthy checks and balances upon the functioning of each and every
organ of governance.
Writings on
democracy, whether scholarly or popular, focus on the processes and
institutions by which citizens are free to move and to speak their mind, by
which they choose and replace their leaders, and by which they are governed (or
misgoverned) in-between elections.
However,
little attention has been paid to democracy’s
‘software’, which are its cultural and emotional
aspects. Crucial here are:
(i) The pluralism of faith, that is to say, the freedom to
worship any god of your choice (or no god at all)
(ii) The pluralism of language, that is, the freedom to speak,
write, think, learn, and (if necessary) govern in the language of your choice
(iii) The pluralism of culture more generally, that is, the
freedom to dress, eat, sing, cohabitate, etc. according to the dictates of
group tradition or individual conscience.
Merits of the PS of Government
Harmony between Legislature and Executive: The latter is a part of former, and both are
interdependent at work. Therefore there is less scope for disputes and
conflicts between two organs.
Responsible Government: Parliament
exercises control over the executive through instruments such as question hour, discussions, adjournment motion, no confidence
motion etc.
Prevents Despotism: Executive
authority is vested in a group of individuals and not in a single person; this dispersal of authority checks the dictatorial
tendencies of the executive; moreover the executive can be removed by a no confidence motion.
Wide Representation: Executive consists of a group of individuals. Hence it
is possible to provide representation to all sections and regions in the
government.
Demerits of the PS of Government
Unstable Government: A
no-confidence motion or political defection or evils of
multiparty coalition can make the government unstable. The government
headed by Morarji Desai, Charan Singh, VP Singh, Chandra Sekhar, Deve Gowda and
IK Gujral are some such examples.
No Continuity of Policies: PS
not conducive for the formulation and implementation of long term policies. This is due to the uncertainty
of tenure of government. The best example is 1977 Janata Government
reversing policies of previous Congress government, followed by 1980 Congress
Government reversing those of Janata.
Dictatorship of the Cabinet:
When the ruling party enjoys absolute majority in
the Parliament, the cabinet becomes autocratic and
exercises nearly unlimited powers.
Against Separation of Power: Cabinet acts as the leader of the legislature as well as the executive. Hence, the whole system of government goes
against the theory of separation of powers.
Governments by Amateurs: PS is not
conducive to administrative efficiency as the ministers
are not experts in their fields. The PM has a limited
choice in the selection of ministers; his choice is restricted to the
members of Parliament alone and does not extend to external talent. Moreover,
the ministers devote most of their time to parliamentary work, cabinet meetings
and party activities.
Reasons for Adopting PS of Government
A plea was
mode in favour of US Presidential System of government in the Constituent
Assembly. But the founding fathers preferred the British Parliamentary System
due to the following reasons:
Familiarity with the system: The constitution makers were somewhat familiar with PS as it had been in
operation in India during the British rule. KM Munshi argued
that our constitutional traditions have become
parliamentary; after this experience, why should we go back and buy a
novel experience.
Preference to more responsibility: Ambedkar opined thus in the Constituent
Assembly: A democratic executive must satisfy two conditions: stability and
responsibility. Unfortunately, it has not been possible so far to devise
a system which can ensure both in equal degree. The American
system gives more stability but less
responsibility. The British system, on
the other hand, gives more responsibility but less
stability. The Draft Constitution in recommending the PS of government
preferred more responsibility.
Need to Avoid Legislative-Executive Conflicts: The framers of the Constitution wanted to avoid the conflicts between
the legislature and the executive which are bound to occur in the presidential
system prevalent in the USA. They thought that an infant democracy could not
afford to take the risk of a perpetual cleavage, feud or conflict between these
two organs of the government.
Nature of Indian Society: India is one of the most
heterogeneous States and most complex plural
societies in the world. Hence, the founding fathers adopted the PS as it
offers greater scope for giving representation to
various sections, interests and regions in the government, this promotes
a national spirit among the people and build a united India.
Tackling the Negative Perception of our Democratic
Institutions
Why do we have doubts over efficacy of our
democracy? OR
How did the public perception of our democratic
institutions, parliament chief among them, come to be so negative?
For some
time now, Indian democracy has been corroded by what the sociologist André Béteille terms ‘the chronic
mistrust between government and opposition’.
(SOLUTION: Communication)
Parliament
meets rarely— when it does, it resembles a dusty akhara more than the stately chamber of
discussion it was meant to be.
(SOLUTION: Re-establish sanctity of Parliamentary
Proceedings)
In television studios, representatives of ruling and
opposition parties trade abuse. Calling the
former PM Manmohan Singh ‘Shikhandi’ to terming
the tenure of previous government as ‘Rome Raj’ to
calling the present PM Modi as ‘maut ke saudagar’
– instances abound.
(SOLUTION: Hammer out and follow a Code of Political
Conduct)
Courtesy in
debate, and civility in argument, is fundamental to what we valorize about
democracy. If these attributes go missing for a substantial period of time, public
will naturally have a negative perception of democracy and its institutions.
In between elections, the nation seems unable to
govern itself decisively, with a chaotic, gridlocked, dysfunctional parliament.
Suggest some reforms that can help Parliament function better.
While
India’s electoral democracy works, its parliament barely does. Much of this is
due to the obsolescence and unsuitability of many rules
and customs originally adopted from 19th century England and America,
which themselves have since amended their systems.
Re-modelling the Rajya Sabha
The Rajya
Sabha is partly modelled on the US Senate to
represent India’s states, and resembles it by its members having six-year terms
and being elected indirectly by rotation, one-third of them every two years.
Thus, Rajya
Sabha membership is effectively a party nomination.
And since India does not have direct elections to RS, it is essentially a patronage position doled out by party leaders.
The issue of checks and balances between legislative
chambers in bicameral systems has been dealt with in one of two ways by other
democracies. The US took the route of retaining the Senate’s powers, but making
it directly elected in order to better reflect the
public mood, albeit by rotation over six years.
In UK the
powers of the House of Lords, which is not elected but nominated, were amended
so that it can no longer block legislation passed
by the Commons. It can only delay it by a year. India now needs to consider
similar constitutional amendments.
Anti-Defection Stranglehold
India’s
1985 Anti Defection Act, enacted to prevent the then-prevalent switching of
party affiliation by legislators, has had the unintended
consequence of making it impossible to disobey
party leaderships’ whips on virtually every issue in parliament.
Together,
these have had the effect of giving disproportionate
clout to the leaderships of parties who may not have the popular
mandate. Their lingering “unelected” presence in the Rajya Sabha gives enormous
leverage against the public will to just a few individuals. This is untenable
in the long run.
Formal system for deciding the agenda of the House:
There are
other structural impediments in both chambers of India’s parliament that also
need reassessment. These include the lack of specific,
numbers-based rules to decide the agenda for discussions, motions, and
votes. Today, such a rule exists only for the “nuclear option” of a
no-confidence motion against the government, which requires 50 Lok Sabha MPs’
signatures. All other matters are essentially decided by consensus, which has
become nearly impossible to achieve. Thus, even routine agenda items can rarely
be agreed on, leading to frequent protests and disruptions that have made
parliament a byword for unruliness and gridlock.
Increased communication between leaders from various
parties.
More of
that can only be good.
Evaluate the democracy, i.e. India
India, as a
democracy, has witnessed both success and failures during
last more than six decades of its existence.
India is
not only the biggest democracy in the world—815 million
of its 1.29 billion population are eligible to vote—but also the most diverse.
It has 36 states and union territories, many of them the size and population of
large European countries. Its people speak 22 major languages, and perhaps a
hundred more, which are not officially recognised, as well as hundreds of
dialects. Despite this apparent unwieldiness, India has
defied naysayers who doubted the country could hold together at all, let
alone as a democracy. Today no one seriously questions that the modern Indian
republic has grown deep democratic roots and traditions.
Quality of
life has improved and major breakthroughs have been achieved in S&T.
The diverse races and ethnolingual groups have
been unified without destroying their identities. Above all a vast multi-religious, multi-ethnic
and multicultural country has been kept united.
However,
Indian society is far from being in line with
the lofty doctrines of liberty, equality, fraternity,
social justice, secularism and rule of law.
- Still about 1/3rd of its population lives in
abject poverty
- More than 60% of the population does not have
access to basic sanitation.
- Weaker sections were made conscious of their
position of exploitation and discrimination but were not given a participatory
role in the socio-economic development of the country by the political parties.
This led to the alienation of people from the political system in general and elections
in particular. Consequently PP started mobilizing people on the basis of
identities like caste, language, region, religion etc. As such elections have
become an instrument of self-promotion, rather than change.
- The politicization of crime and criminalization
of politics is posing a serious challenge to the Indian democracy.
But there
is reason to remain optimistic that our vibrant
democracy can find a solution to the above problems. Women,
the rural poor and the oppressed have increasingly come to believe that better,
more humane life is possible, they have woken up to the political power that
they have inherited in the Constitution. India’s democratic political
system, despite many weaknesses, provides them the framework in which to
exercise that power. The power of the people in
a democracy is the ‘liberating
deluge’ that can surely sweep away the accumulated dirt of the ages.
This is, of course, all the more reason for the preservation and deepening of
democracy in India.
Bibliography
Book:
Indian
Polity for Civil Services Examination by M. Laxmikant
Articles:
Are we becoming
an Election only Democracy? (Ram Guha)
Degrading
Democracy (Ram Guha)
Democracy
and Violence (Ram Guha)
India’s
Parliament is Paralyzed by 19th Century Rules (Jay Panda)
Authors' Note: Naturally this is just one among the many posts on democracy that will follow in the future. There are so many dimensions from which a question can emerge, that it is practically impossible to cover all of them in one post. Please feel free to share your suggestions on this post as well as for the topics that can be covered in the future. We try to avoid typos, but surely some may still have crept in. Feel free to point them out. Thank you for reading.
