Search results for: “”

Separation of power in the USA

The United States Constitution has a more rigid separation of powers than the Constitutions of other democracies. In the United States Constitution, Article 1 Section I gives Congress only those “legislative powers herein granted” and proceeds to list those permissible actions in Article I Section 8, while Section 9 lists actions that are prohibited for Congress.

The vesting clause in Article II places no limits on the Executive branch, simply stating that, “The Executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.

The Supreme Court holds “The judicial Power” according to Article III, and it established the implication of Judicial review in Marbury v. Madison. Checks and balances allow for a system based regulation that allows one branch to limit another, such as the power of Congress to alter the composition and jurisdiction of the federal courts. The following are illustrations where there are checks and balances:

1. The lawmaking power of the Congress is checked by the President through its veto power, which in turn maybe overturn by the legislature
2. The Congress may refuse to give its concurrence to an amnesty proclaimed by the President and the Senate to a treaty he has concluded
3. The President may nullify a conviction in a criminal case by pardoning the offender
4. The Congress may limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and that of inferior courts and even abolish the latter tribunals
5. The Judiciary in general has the power to declare invalid an act done by the Congress, the President and his subordinates, or the Constitutional Commissions.

Separation of power in England

Although the doctrine of separation of power plays a role in the United Kingdom’s constitutional doctrine, the UK constitution is often described as having “a weak separation of powers”. For example, in the United Kingdom, the executive forms a subset of the legislature, as did—to a lesser extent—the judiciary until the establishment of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom.

The Prime Minister, the Chief Executive, sits as a member of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, either as a peer in the House of Lords or as an elected member of the House of Commons (by convention, and as a result of the supremacy of the Lower House, the Prime Minister now sits in the House of Commons) and can effectively be removed from office by a simple majority vote.

Furthermore, while the courts in the United Kingdom are undoubtedly amongst the most independent in the world, the Law Lords, who were the final arbiters of judicial disputes in the UK sat simultaneously in the House of Lords, the upper house of the legislature, although this arrangement ceased in 2009 when the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom came into existence.

Until 2005, the Lord Chancellor fused the Legislature, Executive and Judiciary, as he was the ex officio Speaker of the House of Lords, a Government Minister who sat in Cabinet and was head of the Lord Chancellor’s Department which administered the courts, the justice system and appointed judges, and was the head of the Judiciary in England and Wales and sat as a judge on the Judicial Committee of the House of Lords, the highest domestic court in the entire United Kingdom, and the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, the senior tribunal court for parts of the Commonwealth.

The Lord Chancellor also had certain other judicial positions, including being a judge in the Court of Appeal and President of the Chancery Division. The Lord Chancellor combines other aspects of the constitution, including having certain ecclesiastical functions of the established state church, making certain church appointments, nominations and sitting as one of the thirty-three Church Commissioners. These functions remain intact and unaffected by the Constitutional Reform Act.

In 2005, the Constitutional Reform Act separated the powers with Legislative functions going to an elected Lord Speaker and the Judicial functions going to the Lord Chief Justice. The Lord Chancellor’s Department was replaced with a Ministry of Justice and the Lord Chancellor currently serves in the position of Secretary of State for Justice.

Some other countries

The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act, 1900 clearly demarcates the boundaries of the three organs and therefore provides for a very rigid separation of powers.

Similarly, the French Constitution also provides for separation of powers and divides the national government into the executive, legislative and judicial branch.

The debate about the doctrine of separation of powers, and exactly what it involves in regard to Indian governance, is as old as the Constitution itself. Apart from the directive principles laid down in Part-IV of the constitution which provides for separation of judiciary from the executive, the constitutional scheme does not provide any formalistic division of powers.

It appeared in various judgments handed down by the Supreme Court after the Constitution was adopted.

It is through these judicial pronouncements, passed from time to time, that the boundaries of applicability of the doctrine have been determined.

1. Re Delhi Laws Act case

In the Re Delhi Laws Act case, it was for the first time observed by the Supreme Court that except where the Constitution has vested power in a body, the principle that one organ should not perform functions that essentially belong to others is followed in India. By a majority of 5:2, the Court held that the theory of separation of powers though not part and parcel of our Constitution, in exceptional circumstances is evident in the provisions of the Constitution itself. As observed by Kania, C.J.:

“Although in the Constitution of India there is no express separation of powers, it is clear that a legislature is created by the constitution and detailed provisions are made for making that legislature pass laws. Does it not imply that unless it can be gathered from other provisions of the constitution, other bodies-executive or judicial-are not intended to discharge legislative functions?”

In essence, this judgment implied that all the three organs of the State, i.e., the Legislature, the Judiciary, and the Executive are bound by and subject to the provisions of the Constitution, which demarcates their respective powers, jurisdictions, responsibilities and relationship with one another. Also, that it can be assumed that none of the organs of the State, including the judiciary, would exceed its powers as laid down in the Constitution.

2. Kesavananda Bharti Case

In practice, from time to time, disputes continued to arise as to whether one organ of the State had exceeded the boundaries assigned to it under the Constitution.

This question of what amounts to an excess, was the basis for action in the landmark Kesavananda Bharti Case of 1973. The question placed before the Supreme Court in this case was in regard to the extent of the power of the legislature to amend the Constitution as provided for under the Constitution itself.

It was argued that Parliament was “supreme” and represented the sovereign will of the people. As such, if the people’s representatives in Parliament decided to change a particular law to curb individual freedom or limit the scope of judicial scrutiny, the judiciary had no right to question whether it was constitutional or not.

However, the Court did not allow this argument and instead found in favour of the appellant on the grounds that the doctrine of separation of powers was a part of the “basic structure” of our Constitution.

Thus, the doctrine of “separation of powers” is acknowledged as an integral part of the basic features of our Constitution. It is also agreed that all the three organs of the State, i.e., the Legislature, the Judiciary, and the Executive are bound by and subject to the provisions of the Constitution, which demarcates their respective powers, jurisdictions, responsibilities and relationship with one another.

It is assumed that none of the organs of the State, including the judiciary, would exceed its powers as laid down in the Constitution. It is also expected that in the overall interest of the country, even though their jurisdictions are separated and demarcated, all the institutions would work in harmony and co-operation to maximize the public good.

As per this ruling, there was no longer any need for ambiguity as the doctrine was expressly recognized as a part of the Indian Constitution, unalterable even by an Act of Parliament. Thus, the doctrine of separation of powers has been incorporated, in its essence, into the Indian laws.

3. Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain

However, it was after the landmark case of Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain that the place of this doctrine in the Indian context was made clearer. It was observed by Chandrachud J.:

“That in the Indian Constitution, there is separation of powers in a broad sense only. A rigid separation of powers as under the American Constitution or under the Australian Constitution does not apply to India.”

Other Cases

The doctrine of separation of powers was further expressly recognized to be a part of the Constitution in the case of Ram Jawaya Kapur v. State of Punjab, where the Court held that though the doctrine of separation of powers is not expressly mentioned in the Constitution it stands to be violated when the functions of one organ of Government are performed by another.

This means the Indian Constitution had not indeed recognized the doctrine of separation of powers in its absolute rigidity but the functions of different parts or branches of the Government have been sufficiently differentiated and consequently it can very well be said that our constitution does not contemplate assumption, by one organ or part of the state, of functions that essentially belongs to another.

In I.C. GolakNath v. State of Punjab, Supreme Court took the help of doctrine of basic structure as propounded in Kesvananda Bharati case and said that Ninth Schedule is violative of this doctrine and hence the Ninth Schedule was made amenable to judicial review which also forms part of the basic structure theory. It was observed:

“The Constitution brings into existence different constitutional entities, namely, the Union, the States and the Union Territories. It creates three major instruments of power, namely, the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary. It demarcates their jurisdiction minutely and expects them to exercise their respective powers without overstepping their limits. They should function within the spheres allotted to them.”

Checks and Balances

The concept of constitutional checks arose as an outgrowth of the classical theory of separation of powers. The purpose of this, and of the later development of checks and balances, was to ensure that governmental power would not be used in an abusive manner.

To prevent one branch from becoming supreme, protect the “opulent minority” from the majority, and to induce the branches to cooperate, government systems that employ a separation of powers need a way to balance each of the branches. Typically this was accomplished through a system of “checks and balances”, the origin of which, like separation of powers itself, is specifically credited to Montesquieu.

Under the system of checks and balances, one department is given certain powers by which it may definitely restrain the others from exceeding constitutional authority. It may object or resist any encroachment upon its authority, or it may question, if necessary any act or acts which unlawfully interferes with its sphere of jurisdiction and authority.

The Indian Constitution provides for a scheme of checks and balances between the three organs of government namely, the legislature, the executive and the judiciary, against any potential abuse of power.

For example,

• The judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts in the States are appointed by the executive i.e. the President acting on the advice of the Prime Minister and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. But they may be removed from office only if they are impeached by Parliament. This measure helps the judiciary to function without any fear of the executive.
• Similarly, the executive is responsible to Parliament in its day to day functioning. While the President appoints the leader of the majority party or a person who he believes commands a majority in the Lok Sabha (House of the People or the Lower House) a government is duty bound to lay down power if the House adopts a motion expressing no confidence in the government.
• Similarly, the judiciary keeps a check on the laws made by Parliament and actions taken by Executives, whether they conform to the constitution or not, using the tool of Judicial Review.

Judicial Review

There is, however, one facet in any democratic constitution which cannot be wished away, and that is, the necessity to have machinery by which an authority is brought into existence to decide on the interpretation of constitutional provisions, or as to what the Constitution says and means and to resolve disputes, with finality, between the Central Government and the States, or between the three organs of the State inter se. In every such democratic Constitution it is the apex court of the country, which is conferred such jurisdiction and powers.

Article 144 of the Constitution declares that all authorities, civil and judicial, shall come to the aid of the Supreme Court. Article 141 is to the effect that the law declared by the Supreme Court is binding on all courts within the territory of India. Articles 129 and 142(2) expressly confer the power of contempt on the Supreme Court of India and Article 215 correspondingly confers such power on the High Courts of the country. This, history has shown, is the most potent weapon in the hands of the superior courts to compel obedience to its will.

It is only the fear of being sent to jail, which makes the clients and lawyers to be disciplined and respectful to the judges and to faithfully carry out their judgments and orders.

It is therefore clear that the founding fathers did not allow the Indian Supreme Court to go the way of the US Supreme Court where a belligerent President could turn around and say, “the judge has made his decision, let him now enforce it.”

Judicial review is a powerful weapon to restrain unconstitutional exercise of power by the legislature and executive.

However, the only check on judicial power is the self-imposed discipline of judicial restraint. Therefore this doctrine cannot be liberally applied to any modern government, because neither the powers can be kept in water tight compartments nor can any government can run on strict separation of powers.

• In Suman Gupta v. State of Jammu and Kashmir, the respective State Government reserved certain seats in medical colleges for the students residing in the particular state on reciprocal basis, this policy of state was challenged on the ground that it discriminate among the students on the ground of place of birth.

The Supreme Court rejected the policy on the ground of discrimination but meanwhile the students who are the beneficiaries of this policy had completed their substantial education, and now it is not in the interests of justice to cancelled their admission, therefore here Supreme Court applied the doctrine of prospective overruling and held that the government must not apply the impugned policy from next academic year.

Therefore, by using the doctrine of prospective overruling in the above to cases, the Supreme Court maintained the balance between judiciary and other organs of the government. It can also be maintained by using the self-restraint by the judges.

• In Divisional Manager, Aravali Golf Club v. Chander Hass and Another, the Supreme Court warned the High Court for its over activism.

The Supreme Court held that since there was no sectioned post of tractor driver against which the respondents could be regularized as tractor driver, the direction of the first appellate court and the single judge to create the post of tractor driver and regularizing he services was completely beyond their jurisdiction. The court cannot direct the creation of post.

Creation and sanction of post is a prerogative of the executive or legislative authorities and the court cannot arrogate to itself this purely executive or legislative function, and direct creation of posts in any organization. The court further said that the creation of a post is an executive or legislative function and it involves economic factors. Hence, the courts cannot take upon themselves the power of creation of post.

• Similarly, in Madhu Holmagi v. Union of India, wherein one advocate filed a public interest litigation challenging the “Agreement 123” i.e. Indo-US nuclear treaty proposed to be entered by the Indian government, petitioner contended that court must have to scrutinize the all documents relating to the agreement 123 and must have to prevent the Indian government from entering in to the nuclear deal.

In this case, court dismissed the petition and also imposed a cost of Rs. 5000 on the petitioner stating that it is an abuse of court proceeding. Because the question raised by the petitioner is a question of policy decision, which is to be decided by the parliament and not by the judiciary.

Indian state represents a contemporary approach in constitutionalising the doctrine of separation of powers. Essentially, there is no strict separation of powers under constitution, both in principle and practice.

In India, there are three distinct activities in the Government through which the will of the people are expressed. The legislative organ of the state makes laws, the executive forces them and the judiciary applies them to the specific cases arising out of the breach of law.

Each organ while performing its activities tends to interfere in the sphere of working of another functionary because a strict demarcation of functions is not possible in their dealings with the general public. Thus, even when acting in ambit of their own power, overlapping functions tend to appear amongst these organs. 

The question which is important here is that what should be the relation among these three organs of the state, i.e. whether there should be complete separation of powers or there should be coordination among them.

“So far as the courts are concerned, the application of the doctrine (the theory of separation of powers) may involve two propositions: namely,

a) that none of the three organs of Government, Legislative Executive and Judicial, can exercise any power which properly belongs to either of the other two;

b) that the legislature cannot delegate its powers.”

-Dr. D.D. Basu

Constitutional Position

Separation of Powers

The Constitution of India embraces the idea of separation of powers in an implied manner. Despite there being no express provision recognizing the doctrine of separation of powers in its absolute form, the Constitution does make the provisions for a reasonable separation of functions and powers between the three organs of Government.

By looking into the various provisions of the Constitution, it is evident that the Constitution intends that the powers of legislation shall be exercised exclusively by the legislature.

Similarly, the judicial powers can be said to vest with the judiciary. The judiciary is independent in its field and there can be no interference with its judicial functions either by the Executive or by the Legislature. Also, the executive powers of the Union and the State are vested in the President and the Governor respectively.

The Constitution of India lays down a functional separation of the organs of the State in the following manner:

• Article 50: State shall take steps to separate the judiciary from the executive. This is for the purpose of ensuring the independence of judiciary.
• Article 122 and 212: validity of proceedings in Parliament and the Legislatures cannot be called into question in any Court. This ensures the separation and immunity of the legislatures from judicial intervention on the allegation of procedural irregularity.
• Judicial conduct of a judge of the Supreme Court and the High Courts’ cannot be discussed in the Parliament and the State Legislature, according to Article 121 and 211 of the Constitution.
• Articles 53 and 154 respectively, provide that the executive power of the Union and the State shall be vested with the President and the Governor and they enjoy immunity from civil and criminal liability.
• Article 361: the President or the Governor shall not be answerable to any court for the exercise and performance of the powers and duties of his office.

Functional overlap

• The legislature besides exercising law-making powers exercises judicial powers in cases of breach of its privilege, impeachment of the President and the removal of the judges.
• The executive may further affect the functioning of the judiciary by making appointments to the office of Chief Justice and other judges.
• Legislature exercising judicial powers in the case of amending a law declared ultra vires by the Court and revalidating it.
• While discharging the function of disqualifying its members and impeachment of the judges, the legislature discharges the functions of the judiciary.
• Legislature can impose punishment for exceeding freedom of speech in the Parliament; this comes under the powers and privileges of the parliament. But while exercising such power it is always necessary that it should be in conformity with due process.
• The heads of each governmental ministry is a member of the legislature, thus making the executive an integral part of the legislature.
• The council of ministers on whose advice the President and the Governor acts are elected members of the legislature.
• Legislative power that is being vested with the legislature in certain circumstances can be exercised by the executive. If the President or the Governor, when the legislature or is not in session and is satisfied that circumstances exist that necessitate immediate action may promulgate ordinance which has the same force of the Act made by the Parliament or the State legislature.
• The Constitution permits, through Article 118 and Article 208, the Legislature at the Centre and in the States respectively, the authority to make rules for regulating their respective procedure and conduct of business subject to the provisions of this Constitution. The executive also exercises law making power under delegated legislation.
• The tribunals and other quasi-judicial bodies which are a part of the executive also discharge judicial functions. Administrative tribunals which are a part of the executive also discharge judicial functions.
• Higher administrative tribunals should always have a member of the judiciary. The higher judiciary is conferred with the power of supervising the functioning of subordinate courts. It also acts as a legislature while making laws regulating its conduct and rules regarding disposal of cases.

Besides the functional overlapping, the Indian system also lacks the separation of personnel amongst the three departments.

Applying the doctrines of constitutional limitation and trust in the Indian scenario, a system is created where none of the organs can usurp the functions or powers which are assigned to another organ by express or necessary provision, neither can they divest themselves of essential functions which belong to them as under the Constitution.

Further, the Constitution of India expressly provides for a system of checks and balances in order to prevent the arbitrary or capricious use of power derived from the said supreme document. Though such a system appears dilatory of the doctrine of separation of powers, it is essential in order to enable the just and equitable functioning of such a constitutional system. 

By giving such powers, a mechanism for the control over the exercise of constitutional powers by the respective organs is established. This clearly indicates that the Indian Constitution in its plan does not provide for a strict separation of powers.

Instead, it creates a system consisting of the three organs of Government and confers upon them both exclusive and overlapping powers and functions. Thus, there is no absolute separation of functions between the three organs of Government.

It is established in documents that dogma of separation of powers considers the idea that the governmental functions must be based on a tripartite division of legislature, executive and judiciary.

The three organs should be separate, distinct and independent in its own sphere so that one does not intrude the territory of the other.

Previous literature denoted that Aristotle who first perceived and saw that there is a specialization of function in each Constitution developed this doctrine. Later many theorists such as Montesquieu, John Locke and James Harrington described these functions as legislative, executive and judicial.

The model was first developed in ancient Greece.

Under this model, the state is divided into branches, each with separate and independent powers and areas of responsibility so that the powers of one branch are not in conflict with the powers associated with the other branches.

The typical division of branches is into a legislature, an executive, and a judiciary. It can be differentiated with the merging of powers in a parliamentary system where the executive and legislature are unified.

Theory of Separation of Powers

Theory of Separation of Powers is based on the concept and based on the idea of individual freedom. Cooley emphasizes the prominence of the doctrine of separation of powers as:

This arrangement gives each department a certain independence, which operates as a restraint upon such action of others as might encroach on the rights and liberties of the people, and makes it possible to establish and enforce guarantees against attempts at tyranny.

The modern design of the principle of separation of powers was elaborated in constitutional theory of John Locke (1632-1704), in his second treaties of Civil Government.

Major objectives of the doctrine of separation of powers

The main objective of the doctrine is to prevent the abuse of power within different spheres of government. In our constitutional democracy, public power is subject to constitutional control. Different spheres of government should act within their boundaries. The courts are the ultimate guardian of our constitution, they are duty bound to protect it whenever it is violated. Within the context of the doctrine of separation of powers the courts are duty bound to ensure that the exercise of power by other branches of government occurs within the constitutional context. The courts must also observe the limit of their own power.

Different researchers also rebound their views on the purpose of the doctrine. Montesquieu stated that

When the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or in the same body of magistrates there can be no liberty; because apprehensions may arise, lest the same monarch or senate should enact tyrannical laws, to execute them in a tyrannical manner.

Again, there is no liberty if the judicial power be not separated from the legislative and executive. Were it joined with the legislative, the life and liberty of the subject would be exposed to arbitrary control; for the judge would be then the legislator. Were joined to the executive power, the judge might behave with violence and oppression.

Definitions

The phrase ‘separation of powers’ is ‘one of the most confusing in the vocabulary of political and constitutional thought’. According to Geoffrey Marshall, the phrase has been used ‘with varying implication’ by historians and political scientists, this is because the concept manifests itself in so many ways. In understanding the concept of ‘separation of powers’ one has to take on board the three approaches i.e. Traditional (classical), Modern (contemporary) and Marxist-Leninist approaches.

Traditional (classical) approach

The traditional views are presented by Montesquieu who vigorously advocated for a “strict or pure or total or complete or absolute” separation of powers and personnel between three organs of the state i.e.; the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary. Power being diffused between three separate bodies exercising separate functions with no overlaps in function or personnel.

Montesquieu’s strict doctrine (Tripartite system)

• In every government there are three sorts of power i.e. legislature, executive and judiciary. The executive, makes peace or war, send or receives embassies, establishes the public security and provides against invasions. The legislature, prince and magistrate enact temporary or perpetual laws and amend or abrogate those that have been already enacted. The judiciary, punishes criminals, or determines the disputes that arise between individuals.
• Montesquieu warned his countrymen about the danger of vesting all state powers in one person or body of people.
• That concentrated power is dangerous and leads to despotism of government (tyranny).
• Legislature should not appoint members of the Executive [i.e. Parliament should not elect the President or the Prime Minister]; and for the same reason the Executive should not have a role in electing members of the Legislature. Neither the Executive nor the Legislature should appoint members of the Judiciary, for if they do the Judiciary will lose its independence. Again, judges should not appoint members of the Executive.
• That it is the people who should elect members of executive, legislature and judicial officers.
• State officials should not form part of or belong to two or more organs.
• He argued, if separate powers of government are placed in different hands, no individual or group of people can monopolize political powers (i.e. differentiation of functions). Thus, he was against absolute power residing in one person or body exercising executive, legislative and judicial powers.
• To him, the state will perish when the legislature power become more corrupted than the executive.
• He based this model on the Constitution of the Roman Republic and the British constitutional system. Montesquieu took the view that the Roman Republic had powers separated so that no one could usurp complete power.
• He (mistakenly) believed that the English constitution establishes functional separation between the legislature, executive and judicial powers. In England, the monarch exercises executive powers, legislative power are shared by hereditary nobility and the peoples’ elected representatives, judging powers vested in persons drawn from the body of the people.

Summary of doctrine

The Doctrine of Separation of powers includes the following distinct but overlapping aspects:

Modern (contemporary) approach

The doctrine of separation of powers has become an integral part of the governmental structure. But, the practical application of the doctrine differs to a great extent. In theory, the doctrine of separation of powers is supposed to have a threefold classification of functions and corresponding organs.

But because of the diverse and complex nature of a modern state, where the process of law making, administration and adjudication cannot be clearly demarcated or assigned to separate institutions, the application of this doctrine in strict sense is very difficult. This approach somehow departs or otherwise tries to refine Montesquieu’s strict doctrine of separation of powers.

Essentially, this approach point out practical difficulties in the application of Montesquieu’s strict doctrine and thus advocates for a ‘mixed government’ or ‘weak separation of powers’ with ‘checks and balances’ to prevent abuses.

Therefore, this concept insists that the primary functions of the state should be allocated clearly and that there should be checks to ensure that no institution encroaches significantly upon the function of the other.

To them, Montesquieu’s strict doctrine presents the following problems:-

• A complete separation of the three organs may lead to constitutional deadlock (disunity of powers). Thus, a complete separation of powers is neither possible nor desirable.
• Partial separation of powers is required to achieve a mixed and balanced constitutional structure.
• It would be impractical to expect each branch of government to raise its own finances.
• The theory is based on the assumption that all the three organs of the government are equality important, but in reality it is not so. In most cases, the executive is more powerful of the three branches of government.

Marxist-Leninist approach

Unlike the other two approaches, the Marxist-Leninist approach refutes the application of the doctrine by arguing that the theory of the separation of powers is “nothing but the profane industrial division of labour applied for purposes of simplification and control to the mechanism of the state”. 

In essence, Marxist-Leninist theory rejects the theory of the separation of powers because it ignores the class nature of society. The existence in a socialist state of state bodies with different jurisdiction means that a certain division of functions in exercising state power is essential while maintaining the unity of state power.

Why is the doctrine not appreciated?

The doctrine of separation of power in its true sense is very rigid and this is one of the reasons of why it is not accepted by a large number of countries in the world.

The main object as per Montesquieu in the Doctrine of Separation of Power is that there should be a government of law rather than having whims of the official. Also, another most important feature of the said doctrine is that there should be the independence of judiciary i.e. it should be free from the other organs of the State and if it is so then justice would be delivered properly. 

The judiciary is the scale through which one can measure the actual development of the State. If the judiciary is not independent, then it is the first step towards a tyrannical form of government i.e. power is concentrated in a single hand and if it is so then there is a very high chance of misuse of power.

Hence the Doctrine of Separation of Power does play a vital role in the creation of a fair government and also fair and proper justice is dispensed by the judiciary as there is independence of judiciary.

The doctrine of separation of powers has come a long way from its theoretical inception. Today, the doctrine in its absolute form is only recognized in letter as it is entirely unfeasible and impractical for usage in the operational practices of a government. With the passage of time, States have evolved from being minimal and non-interventionist to being welfare oriented by playing the multifarious roles of protector, arbiter, controller and provider to the people.

In its omnipresent role, the functions of the State have become diverse and its problems interdependent hence, any serious attempt to define and separate the functions would only cause inefficiency in the government.

The modern day interpretation of the doctrine does not recognize the division of Government into three water-tight compartments but instead provides for crossing rights and duties in order to establish a system of checks and balances. The mere separation of powers between the three organs is not sufficient for the elimination of the dangers of arbitrary and capricious government.

Even after the distinguishing the functions, if an authority wielding public power, is provided an absolute and sole discretion within the body in the matters regarding its sphere of influence, there will be a resultant abuse of such power.

Therefore, a system of checks and balances is a practical necessity in order to achieve the desired ends of the doctrine of separation of powers. Such a system is not dilatory to the doctrine but necessary in order to strengthen its actual usage.

In conclusion, it is evident that governments in their actual operation do not opt for the strict separation of powers because it is undesirable and impracticable, however, implications of this concept can be seen in almost all the countries in its diluted form. The discrepancies between the plan and practice, if any, are based on these very grounds that the ideal plan is impractical for everyday use. 

India relies heavily upon the doctrine in order to regulate, check and control the exercise of power by the three organs of Government. Whether it is in theory or in practical usage, the Doctrine of Separation of Powers is essential for the effective functioning of a democracy.

Recognizing that e-Governance is playing an increasingly important role in modern governance, various agencies of the Government and civil society organizations have taken a large number of initiatives across the country.

Key models implemented in the country 

• Customs and Excise (Government of India)

1. 1. 98% of export and 90-95% of import documentation computerized.
   2. Electronic filing through ICEGATE.
   3. Service Tax returns electronically processed

• Indian Railways (Government of India)

1. 1. Anywhere to Anywhere reservation from Anywhere.
   2. Electronic Booking of tickets.
   3. Online Information of Railway reservation on Internet.

• Postal Department (Government of India)

1. 1. Direct e-credit of Monthly Income Scheme returns into the investors accounts
   2. Dematerialization of Savings Certificate (NSC) and Vikas Patras (KVP), offering full portability

• Passport / Visa (Government of India)

1. 1. 100% passport information computerized.
   2. All 33 Regional Passport Offices covered.
   3. Machine readable passports available.

• AP Online (State Government of Andhra Pradesh)

An Integrated Citizen Services Portal providing citizen centric services such as: Birth/Death Certificates, Property Registration, Driver’s License, Govt. Applications & Forms, Payment of taxes / utility bills etc.

• Bhoomi – Automation of Land Records (State Government of Karnataka)

Bhoomi (meaning land) is the project of on-line delivery and management of land records. It provides computerized Record of Rights Tenancy & Crops (RTC) – needed by farmer to obtain bank loans, settle land disputes etc. It has also ensured increased transparency and reliability, significant reduction in corruption, exploitation and oppression of farmers. This project has benefited more than 20 million rural land records covering 6.7 million farmers.

• CARD – Registration Project (State Government of Andhra Pradesh)

Computer Aided Administration of Registration Department (CARD) impacting more than 10 million citizens. The system ensures transparency in valuation of property and efficient document management system. The estimated saving of 70 million man-hours of citizen time valued at US$ 35 mil (investment in CARD – US$ 6million). Similar initiatives in other states like SARITA (State Government of Maharashtra), STAR (State Government of Tamil Nadu), etc. have further built upon this initiative.

• Gyandoot: Intranet in Tribal District of Dhar (State Government of Madhya Pradesh)

This project offers e-governance services including online registration of applications, rural e-mail facility, village auction site etc. It also provides services such as Information on Mandi (farm products market) rates, On-line public grievance redressal, caste & income certificates and Rural Market (Gaon ka Bazaar).

• LOKMITRA (State Government of Himachal Pradesh)

Offers e-governance services:

1. Online registration of applications,
2. Rural e-mail facility, village auction site etc.
3. Information on Mandi (farm products market) rates
4. On-line public grievance redressal
5. Sending and receiving information regarding land records, income certificates, caste certificates and other official documents.
6. Market rates of vegetables, fruits and other items

• e-Mitra – Integrated Citizen Services Center/ e-Kiosks (State Government of Rajasthan)

1. Implemented using a PPP (Public Private Partnership) model
2. Private partner paid by the government department / agency
3. G2C services like:
4. Payment of electricity, water, telephone bills
5. Payment of taxes
6. Ticket Reservations
7. Filing of Passport applications
8. Registration of birth/death
9. Payment by cash/cheque/ credit card

The above-mentioned models of e-Governance are only illustrative. 

Many of the State Governments have successfully implemented several such initiatives. This has positively impacted the quality of life of citizens.

Hence e-Governance affords an excellent opportunity for India to radically improve the quality of governance and thereby:

1. Allow for two-way communication between government and citizens not only for service delivery but also to receive opinions of citizens on policies and government performance
2. Provide greater access to excluded groups, who have few opportunities to interact with government and benefit from its services and schemes
3. Include all sections of the society in the mainstream of development
4. Enabling rural and traditionally marginalized segments of the population to gain fast and convenient access to services in their own neighbourhoods.

There are many challenges in implementing E-governance model in India as well as at global scale.

The actual challenge is how to develop and withstand successful e-governance projects and deliver state of the art e-services to inhabitants.

Unfortunately, it is not as easy to develop e-governance website in service delivery mechanism. Efficacious e-governance initiatives can never be taken in hurriedness. With reference to India, e-Governance should enable seamless access to information and seamless flow of information across the state and central government.

With reference to India, e-Governance should enable seamless access to information and seamless flow of information across the state and central government.

Security drawbacks

There are several security drawbacks of an E-Governance mechanism.

1. Spoofing: In this practice, the attacker attempts to gain the access of the E-Governance system by using fallacious identity either by stealth or by using false IP address. Once the access is gained, the assailant abuses the E-Governance system by elevation of the privileges.
2. Tampering of E-Governance system: As soon as the system is compromised and privileges are raised, the classified information of the E-Governance mechanism becomes very much susceptible to illegal adjustments.
3. Repudiation: Even the attacker can mount refutation attack during the E-Governance transaction, which is the ability of the user to reject its performed transaction.
4. Disclosure of E-Governance Information: In case of the compromised E-Governance system, the undesirable information disclosure can take place very easily.
5. Denial of Service: In this technique, attacker can perform Denial of Service (DoS) attack by flooding the E-Governance server with request to consume all of its resources so as to crash down the mechanism.
6. Elevation of privilege: Once an E-Governance system is compromised; the attacker pretending to be a low profile user attempts to escalate to the high profiles so as to access its privileges to initiate further damage to the system.
7. Cyber Crimes: Advancement of science and technology increase the rate of the cybercrime. It is a threat to the transactions accomplished between the Government and its Citizenry within the E-Governance methodology.

Other challenges

• Funding

Funding is the foremost issue in e-Governance initiatives. The projects that are part of the e-governance initiatives need to be funded either through the Government sector or through the private sector.

For the private sector to step into the funding activity their commercial interests needs to be ensured. The projects can be built either on BOO (Built Own Operate) or BOOT (Built Own Operate Transfer) basis.

Also the Government interest of Value Addition in services also needs to be taken care of while transferring the services to private sector. Advertising, sharing of Government information etc could be a few revenue generators for the Government.

• Management of Change

The delivery of Government services through the electronic media including EDI, Internet and other IT based technologies would necessitate procedural and legal changes in the decision and delivery making processes.

It demands fundamental changes in Government decision management. The employees need to be delegated more authority. De- layering of the decision-making levels leads to re-engineering and appropriate sizing of the decision-making machinery.

These changes need not only be accepted by the Government and citizens but also be accepted by various interests groups like Employees unions. Under such circumstances bringing in a change will involve changing the mindsets of the people, and a complete Reengineering process needs to be carried out for the same.

This will involve training of the personnel at all levels, more so, at the lower rung of Government management organizations. There will also be a loss of vested interests and power amongst the legislature and the executive, which may lead, to resistance to change.

• Privacy

The privacy of the citizen also needs to be ensured while addressing the issues. Whenever a citizen gets into any transaction with a Government agency, he shells out lot of personal information, which can be misused by the private sector. Thus, the citizen should be ensured that the information flow would pass through reliable channels and seamless network.

• Authentication

Secured ways of transactions for the Government services are another issue of concern. The identity of citizens requesting services needs to be verified before they access or use the services .

Here digital signature will play an important role in delivery of such services. But the infrastructure needed to support them is very expensive and requires constant maintenance. Hence a pertinent need still survives, compelling the authorities to ensure the authenticity in their transactions thereby gaining absolute trust and confidence of the citizen.

• Interoperability

A major design issue for integrated service delivery sites is, how to capture data in a Web-based form and transfer it to an agency’s systems for processing and sharing that information in a common format. Infact the interoperation of various state Governments, the various ministries within a state Government is a critical issue. Further how the various islands of automation will be brought together and built into one is another key issue of e-Governance.

• Delivery of services

The ability of citizens to access these services is another major issue. Since the penetration of PCs and Internet is very low in the country, some framework needs to be worked out for delivery of the e-Services that would be accessible to the poorest of the poor.

What will be the Government’s network to deliver those services? Could we have something like a single stop shop of the Government? A proposed mechanism is delivery of the same through the Government Post Offices, for they already have the brick and mortar support and the most extensive network in the nation.

• Standardization

Defining the standards for the various Government services is another issue that needs to be addressed. The standards need to be worked out not only for the technologies involved but also for issues like naming of websites to creating E-Mail addresses.

• Technology Issues

A number of organizations, both in the Centre and the States, have taken commendable initiatives to develop hardware and software platforms to address the challenges offered by e-Governance. At the central level in particular, the C-DAC, CMC and a number of others are noteworthy.

The e-Governance initiative would have to address these Technology Issues/Objectives by identifying the appropriate hardware platforms and software application packages for cost-effective delivery of public services.

This knowledge repository should be widely available through appropriate Demo- Mechanisms. Offering a basket of these models to the State departments, both in the Center and the State, could be suitably customized as per location and work specific requirements.

• Use of local language

The access of information must be permitted in the language most comfortable to the public user, generally the local language. There already exist technologies such as GIST and language software by which transliteration from English into other languages can be made.

Requirements for implementing successful e-governance across the nation are

1. e-Governance framework across the nation with enough bandwidth to service a population of one billion.
2. Connectivity framework for making the services to reach rural areas of the country or development of alternative means of services such as e-governance kiosks in regional languages.
3. National Citizen Database which is the primary unit of data for all governance vertical and horizontal applications across the state and central governments.
4. E-governance and interoperability standards for the exchange of secure information with non-repudiation, across the state and central government departments seamlessly.
5. A secure delivery framework by means of virtual private network connecting across the state and central government departments.
6. Datacenters in centre and states to handle the departmental workflow automation, collaboration, interaction, exchange of information with authentication.

E-Governance is the use of information and communication technologies to support good governance.

It has the following main applications:

Government To Citizen (G2C)

G2C will aim at connecting citizens to government by talking to citizens and supporting accountability, by listening to citizens and supporting democracy, and by improving public services. It will involve better services to the citizens through single point delivery mechanism and will involve areas like:

• E-Citizen

Under e-citizen integrated service centers are created. The purpose of these centers is to provide various customer services. It offers services like issue of Certificates, Ration Cards, Passports, Payment of Bills and taxes etc. These centers will become one-stop Government Shops for delivery of all services.

• E-Transport

The transport aspects that can be easily e-governed include: Registration of motor vehicles, Issue of driving licenses, Issue of plying permissions (Permits), Tax and fee collection through Cash and Bank Challans and Control of Pollution.

• E-Medicine

It involves linking of various hospitals in different parts of the country, thus providing better medical services to the citizen.

• E-Education

E-Education constitutes various initiatives of educating the citizen and the Government with the various Information Technologies.

• E-Registration

E-Governing the registration and transfer of the properties and stamp duty to be paid thereon brings substantial reduction of paper work and reduces the duplicating of entries. Further the transparency in work increases and the overall time of process registration reduces.

Essentials for achievement:

1. Information for All: Keeping the citizen informed, providing him with details of Government activities. The citizen will act as a watchdog to the Government if the information is available to him. Certain interest groups like the journalists, the opposition will always keep an eye on the expenditure of the Government, status of which will be available online. The same will bring accountability amongst Civil Servants. The rationale is to increase the pressure on staff to perform well and to improve public understanding of the government.
2. Citizen Feedback: Citizen Feedback is a must for improving the Government Services. Unless the Government listens to its citizens, it will not be able to find out what he wants. Thus it is an effort to make the public sector decision responsive to citizens’ view or needs.
3. Improving services: World’s best companies have done it, Indian companies have copied them, Governments abroad have followed the suit, why can’t the Indian Government. The aim should be improving the services delivered to citizens on dimensions such as speed, quality, reliability, convenience and cost. Information Technology will have a big role to play in the same; the services can be delivered from 24-hour one-stop Government shops.

Consumer To Government (C2G)

C2G mainly constitutes the areas where the citizen interacts with the Government. It includes areas like election when citizens vote for the Government; Census where he provides information about himself to the Government; taxation where he is paying taxes to the Government.

• E-Democracy

The e-democracy is an effort to change the role of citizen from passive information giving to active citizen involvement. In an e-democracy the Government informs the citizen, represents the citizen, encourages the citizen to vote, consults the citizen and engages the citizen in the Governance.

Taking the citizens input about the various government policies by organizing an e-debate will further strengthen the e-democracy. The concept of e-debate is similar to chat over the Internet, wherein not only the citizens but also the political leaders contesting the elections participate.

The citizens give their feedback about the various policies of the parties and particularly the manifesto of the party. The initiative will further strengthen the process by enhancing the representative role, improving accessibility of citizens to their elected members and developing the capacity of elected representatives to engage in e-government.

Elected members will also be provided with access to the local authority’s Intranet and e-mail systems so that they become available online for decision making and people can easily access them.

Essentials for achievement:

• Citizen Participation: For achievement of the above initiative the citizen has to participate in the Government Business and therefore spreading awareness becomes the responsibility of the State.

The elections should not be fought on the principle of what one party or other has to offer. But they should be fought on the principle of what the citizens require.

Market research programs should be carried out using the Information Systems to determine the needs of the citizens. GIS could be used as a tool to find out potential gaps in the services offered.

Government To Government (G2G)

This can also be referred as e-Administration. It involves improving government processes by cutting costs, managing performance, making strategic connections within government, and creating empowerment. It involves networking all Government offices so as to produce synergy among them. The major areas are:

• E-Secretariat

Secretariat which is the seat of power has a lot of valuable information regarding the functioning of the State. The cross-linking of various departments and exchange of information amongst various components simplifies the process of Governance.

• E-Police

E-Police will help to build citizen confidence.

There will be two databases: one, of police personnel and the other of criminals.

The database of personnel will have the records of their current and previous postings. This will help to track policemen specialized in certain geographical regions and skills. For example, we want to look for a forensic expert. The database within seconds gives the list of all forensic experts. The same database will keep a track of their details like service record, family background etc which will also be helpful in intelligent posting and promotion of personnel.

The second database will be of criminals. This database has to be upgraded to national database for its total utility. By just typing the name of a criminal a police officer will be able to know the details of his past activities, including his modus operandi and the area of operation. Further, a database like this will help tap the criminals easily as all the police stations will have simultaneous access to their record.

The module also includes G2C activities like online filing of FIR’s, finding the case status of an FIR etc. Creating a database of Lost and Found can assist further lost and found of valuables and individuals.

• E-Court

The pending court cases in India have brought the legal system to a halt. Not only are the consumers asking for changes in the administration, but also the system will collapse if it continues in this manner.

Information Technology can transform the system and bring in the court cases to a level of zero dependency. Creating a database of cases can do the same.

In fact such a system will help to avoid all the appeals to High Courts and Supreme Court, for the Judges can consider the appeals from an intranet wherein the case remains in the same district court but the Higher Court gives their decision online based on the recorded facts of the case.

Such a step will not only help the citizens but will also reduce the backlog of cases. Further the use of IT in the areas like recording of court proceedings, high resolution remote video to identify fraudulent documents, live fingerprints scanning and verification, remote probation monitoring, electronic entry of reports and paper work will further speed up the court proceedings.

• State Wide Networks

This involves linking all the departments of the Government with various district headquarters and the state capital, facilitating the flow of information between the various state departments and its constituents. Here various blocks are linked to district Headquarters, district headquarters to State Headquarters and State Headquarters to the National Capital.

Essentials for achievement:

1. Cutting Expenditure: With proper process control the input output ratio can be improved. The same can be achieved by cutting financial time costs. Cutting Government expenditure will lead to saving and accountability.
2. Organize around outcomes, not tasks: This principle suggests that a single person should perform all the steps in a process and that the person’s job be designed around the outcome or objective rather than a single task. Say, for example, a citizen applies for a permit – it becomes the duty of the receiving authority that the citizen gets the same, rather than moving around to get it done.
3. Managing process performance: planning, monitoring and controlling the performance of process resources (human, financial and other). Informatisation supports this by providing information about process performance and performance standards. The rationale is to make more efficient or effective use of process resources.
4. Establish a network: Treat geographically dispersed resources as though they were centralized. Government can use databases, telecommunications networks, and standardized processing systems to get the benefits of scale and coordination, while maintaining the benefits of flexibility and service. Strategic connections in Government should be established like central-to-local, ministry-to-ministry, executive-to-legislature, and decision maker-to-data store.
5. Delegate and Empower: Put the decision point where the work is performed, and build control into the process.

Thus, for overall Government Process Reengineering (GPR) to succeed the decision making should pass on to the people who do the actual work, from the people who are just monitoring it. People engaged in actual activities should be empowered to make decisions at the required focal point and hence to delegate such activities on their own so that the process itself can have built in controls. This will not only speed up the process but will cut cost as well.

Government To Business (G2B)

• E-Taxation

This constitutes the various services that a business house needs to get from the Government, which includes getting licenses etc. In a similar scenario, it can also flow from a business house to the Government as in the case of procurements, from such business houses by the Government. This will become a B2G service.

Essentials for achievement:

1. Standards: Standards for Electronic Transactions or E-Commerce needs to be built. The standards will also include standards on content etc.
2. Payment Mechanism: A secure payment mechanism needs to be built to enable payments over the electronic medium.
3. PKI: PKI or Public key Infrastructure is required for secure and authentic transactions.

Government To NGO (G2N)

• E-Society

Building interactions beyond the government boundaries by developing communities, building government partnerships and civil society.

It involves building various associations or interest groups that will ensure the betterment of the society. Such initiatives deal particularly with the relationship between government and citizens: either as voters/stakeholders from whom the public sector derives its legitimacy, or as customers who consume public services.

Essentials for Achievement:

1. Publishing: Delivering data to citizens. This involves open access to Government Information. The citizen has a right over Government information and its activities.
2. Interaction: Delivering data to citizens and receiving data from citizens. This involves taking feedback from the citizens and interacting with the interest groups.

E-Governance implemented by the government of India allows for government transparency.

Government transparency is significant because it allows the public to be informed about what the government is working on as well as the policies they are trying to implement. It encourages accountability in all government dealings, in recent times many Indian states have come up with various e-Governance patterns to expedite smooth functioning in their daily administrative activities.

Though extreme efforts have been made to develop infrastructure and internal information handling by government officials as well as public services, the diffusion of technologies in moving towards e-governance have been slow.

There are some reasons for sluggishness

1. Lack of IT Literacy and awareness regarding benefits of e-governance: There is lack of awareness regarding benefits of e-governance projects. The administrative structure is not geared for maintaining, storing and retrieving the governance information electronically. The general tendency is to obtain the data from the files as and when required instead of using Document Management and workflow technologies.
2. Underutilization of existing ICT infrastructure: Second reason is that the computers in the department are used for word processing only, resulting in the underutilization of the computers in terms of their use in data mining for supporting management decisions. The time gap between the procurement of the hardware and development of the custom applications is so large that by the time application is ready for use, the hardware becomes out-dated.
3. Attitude of Government Departments: Government officials have different attitude as compared to private sectors. Conventionally the government executives have derived their sustenance from the fact that they are important repositories of government data. Thus any effort to implement DMS and workflow technologies or bringing out the change in the system is met with resistance from the government servants.
4. Lack of coordination between Government Department and Solution developers: Designing of any application requires a very close interaction between the government department and the agency developing the solutions. Currently, the users in govt. departments do not make efforts to design the solution architecture. Subsequently, the solution developed and implemented does not address the requirements of an e-governance project and hence does not get implemented.
5. Resistance to re-engineering of departmental processes: Many experts have stated that in order to implement e-governance projects successfully, executives must make efforts in restructuring in administrative processes, redefining of administrative procedures and formats which finds the resistance in almost all the departments at all the levels. Moreover, there is lack of expertise of departmental MIS executives in exploiting data mining techniques, updating and collection of real time content onto website. Therefore the content as is collected or maintained by various e-governance portals is unreliable or full of gaps. In such a situation, it is difficult for any e-governance solution to accomplish its anticipated results.
6. Lack of Infrastructure for sustaining e-governance projects on national level: In Indian scenario, Infrastructure to support e-governance initiatives does not exist within government departments. The frustrating fact is that the government departments are not prepared to be in a position to project the clear requirements nor are there any guidelines for involving private sector.

The infrastructure creation is not guided by a constant national policy, but is dependent on the needs of individual officers championing a few projects. Therefore, the required networking and communication equipment is either non-existent in government departments, or if it exists at all, it does not serve any concrete purpose as far as the requirement of e-governance project is concerned. The use of connectivity options provided by govt. agencies are used in a very limited manner for data transmission purpose between various locations.

Most state governments have established the IT task force and have their IT policies in place. Although policies may have supercilious goals, much seems to have happened only in automation and computerization. The disadvantage is that these IT policy documents are not made based upon the requirements and intrinsic capabilities of the state but are based on the surveys and strategies used by other nations or other states.

Interaction between various stakeholders

E-Governance enables interaction between different stakeholders in governance.

1. G2G (Government to Government): In this interaction, Information and Communications Technology is used to reorganize the governmental processes involved in the functioning of government entities as well as to increase the flow of information and services within and between different entities.

Gregory (2007) indicated that G2G is the online communications between government organizations, departments and agencies based on a super-government database.

This kind of interaction happen horizontally such as between different government agencies as well as between different functional areas within an organisation, or vertical such as between national, provincial and local government agencies as well as between different levels within an organisation. Main intent of this interaction is to increase efficiency, performance, and output.

2. G2C (Government to Citizens): G2C maintains the relationship between government and citizens. It allows citizens to access government information and services promptly, conveniently, from everywhere, by use of multiple channels. Government-to-Citizens (G2C) model have been designed to facilitate citizen interaction with the government. In this situation, an interface is generated between the government and peoples that enables the citizens to benefit from efficient delivery of array of public services.

This expands the availability and accessibility of public services on the one hand and improves the quality of services on the other. In G2C model, clienteles have instant and convenient access to government information and services from everywhere anytime, via the use of multiple channels.

Additionally, to make certain transactions, such as certifications, paying governmental fees, and applying for benefits, the ability of G2C initiatives to overcome possible time and geographic obstacles may connect citizens who may not otherwise come into contact with one another and may in turn facilitate and increase citizen participation in government (Seifert, 2003).

3. G2B (Government to Business): In this type of interaction, e-Governance tools are used to help the business organizations that provide goods and services to seamlessly interact with the government. G2B can bring significant efficiencies to both governments and businesses. G2B include various services exchanged between government and the business sectors that include distribution of policies, memos, rules and regulations.

Business services offered include obtaining current business information, new regulations, downloading application forms, lodging taxes , renewing licenses, registering businesses, obtaining permits, and many others (Pascual, 2003). The major aim of this interaction is to cut red tape, save time, reduce operational costs and to create a more transparent business environment when dealing with the government.

4. G2E (Government to Employees): G2E denotes to the relationship between government and its employees only. The aim of this relationship is to serve employees and offer some online services such as applying online for an annual leave, checking the balance of leave, and reviewing salary payment records, among other things (Seifert, 2003).

In this case, Government is major employer and it has to interact with its employees on a regular basis. This interaction is a two-way process between the organisation and the employee. Use of ICT tools helps in making these interactions fast and efficient on the one hand and increase satisfaction levels of employees on the other.

Action Plan

A tentative action plan is presented to help implement the e-governance initiatives as under:

E-Governance Action Plan in India: Government officials in India have realized that e-governance is vital technology for economic progress of country in highly competitive environment. It requires an increased participation from citizens. Providing services online is no longer going to remain optional for local and central government as demand for providing services @ internet speed has been coming from the citizens. 

In this period of accountability and performance measurement, government will face huge pressure to make the services more accessible to their inhabitants. The pressure comes directly from the new legislatures and govt. policies to implement high-end technologies in governing the nations; but also indirectly and perhaps more intensely from citizens.

E-governance is about more than streamlining processes and improving services. It plays major role in transforming Governments and renovating the way citizens participate in democracy.

For governments, the more overt inspiration to shift from manual processes to IT-enabled processes to increase efficiency in administration and service delivery, the will be visible to all. This change can be conceived as a valuable investment with huge returns. Some of the recent e-governance projects are implemented by various state governments.