💥Join UPSC 2027,2028 Mentorship (August Batch) + XFactor Notes & Microthemes PDF
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Federal System

  • Explained: SC Verdict on Abrogation of Article 370

    Article 370

    Central Idea

    • A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court on Monday unanimously upheld the power of the President to abrogate Article 370 in August 2019, leading to the reorganisation of the full-fledged State of Jammu and Kashmir to two Union Territories and denuding it of its special privileges.

    Key Issues and Court’s Findings

    [A] On the Sovereignty of Jammu and Kashmir:

    • Petitioners’ Claim: They argued that J&K retained an element of sovereignty when it acceded to India in 1947, different from other princely states.
    • Court’s Examination: The Court noted that J&K was listed as a Part III state in the Indian Constitution and Section 3 of J&K’s Constitution declared it an integral part of India.
    • Final Ruling: The Court held that J&K did not retain sovereignty, and the process of integration was ongoing, culminating in the Presidential declaration under Article 370(3).

    [B] Whether Article 370 is Temporary or Permanent:

    • Arguments Presented: Petitioners argued for Article 370’s permanence, while others viewed it as temporary.
    • Court’s Opinion: Both CJI Chandrachud and Justice Kaul concurred that Article 370 was a temporary provision.

    [C] Legality of Abrogating Article 370:

    • Abrogation Process: On August 5, 2019, President Ram Nath Kovind issued CO 272, amending Article 367 and redefining “Constituent Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir” as the “Legislative Assembly of Jammu and Kashmir.”
    • Court’s Upholding: The Court upheld this process, with CJI Chandrachud stating that post-dissolution of J&K’s Constituent Assembly, the President could have unilaterally abrogated Article 370.

    [D] Actions Under President’s Rule:

    • Challenge to Union’s Actions: The challenge was to the extent of powers appropriated under Article 356 (President’s rule).
    • Reference to Bommai Ruling: The Court, citing the 1994 Bommai ruling, stated that actions under the President’s rule must not be mala fide or irrational.

    Upholding Centre’s (Union) Supremacy

    • Parliament’s Unilateral Actions: The Court’s interpretation suggests Parliament can change a state’s status under the President’s rule.
    • Article 3 Reference: The President referred the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Bill, 2019, to Parliament for its views, as the state was under President’s rule.
    • Validity of Executive Orders: The Court applied Bommai ruling standards to validate the executive orders, emphasizing the need for proof of mala fides to challenge the actions.

    Conclusion

    • J&K’s Integral Status Affirmed: The Court conclusively ruled that J&K has always been an integral part of India.
    • Temporary Nature of Article 370: The ruling clarifies that Article 370 was a temporary provision.
    • Expansion of Union Powers: The judgment potentially expands the Union’s powers under President’s rule, affecting the federal balance.
    • Constitutional Precedent: This ruling sets a significant precedent in interpreting Union and state powers, reflecting on the dynamics of Indian federalism.

  • Karan Singh’s Proclamation of 1949

    karan singh

    Central Idea

    • On December 11, the Supreme Court upheld the abrogation of Article 370, affirming that Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) did not retain sovereignty after joining the Union of India.
    • CJI D Y Chandrachud, writing for himself and Justices B R Gavai and Surya Kant, cited a 1949 proclamation by Yuvraj Karan Singh (successor of J&K titular Maharaja) as a key factor in this decision.

    Karan Singh’s 1949 Proclamation

    • Repeal of the Government of India Act, 1935: The proclamation declared the repeal of the Government of India Act, 1935, which previously governed J&K’s constitutional relationship with India.
    • Adoption of the Indian Constitution: It stated that the Indian Constitution would govern J&K’s relationship with the Union of India and abrogate inconsistent constitutional provisions in the state.

    Reason behind the Proclamation

    • Karan Singh’s Perspective: Speaking to The Indian Express, Karan Singh, aged 92, explained that the proclamation was necessary to eliminate ambiguity regarding J&K’s integration with India.
    • Instrument of Accession’s Ambiguity: He noted that while his father, Hari Singh, signed the Instrument of Accession like other rulers, J&K retained a measure of autonomy, leading to questions about its complete integration.

    Supreme Court’s Findings

    • Essence of the Judgment: The Court stated that J&K did not retain any form of sovereignty upon joining India.
    • Significance of the 1949 Proclamation: The Court highlighted that Karan Singh’s proclamation superseded all constitutional provisions inconsistent with the Indian Constitution, effectively surrendering J&K’s sovereignty.

    Alignment with the Centre’s Argument

    • Centre’s Stance: The Union government argued that the 1949 proclamation acknowledged the supremacy of the Indian Constitution and surrendered sovereignty to it, where the sovereign is ‘We the people of India’.
    • Court’s Agreement: The Supreme Court’s ruling aligns with this argument, affirming the complete integration of J&K into India.

    Conclusion

    • The Supreme Court’s decision clarifies the constitutional status of J&K post the abrogation of Article 370, confirming its full integration into the Indian Union without any retained sovereignty.
    • The ruling underscores the historical context of J&K’s accession and the role of the 1949 proclamation in shaping its constitutional relationship with India.

  • Expulsion of MP from Lok Sabha

    MP expulsion mahua moitra

    Central Idea: Expulsion of Mahua Moitra

    • A Member of Parliament from West Bengal was expelled from the Lok Sabha over allegations of a cash-for-query scandal.
    • Her expulsion highlights the importance of maintaining strict ethical standards and parliamentary etiquette in legislative proceedings.

    Parliamentary Etiquette and Rules

    • Expected Conduct of MPs: MPs must adhere to rules of parliamentary etiquette, such as not interrupting speeches, maintaining silence, and avoiding obstruction during debates.
    • Updated Rules for Modern Protests: In 1989, rules were updated to include prohibitions against shouting slogans, displaying placards, tearing documents, and using electronic devices for protest in the House.
    • Rajya Sabha’s Similar Rules: The Rajya Sabha, like the Lok Sabha, has similar rules to ensure smooth conduct of proceedings.

    Power of Suspension in Parliament

    • Presiding Officer’s Authority: The presiding officer of each House can direct an MP to withdraw from the chamber for disorderly conduct, resulting in absence for the day.
    • Naming and Suspension Process: MPs obstructing House business can be “named” by the presiding officer, leading to a possible suspension motion by the Parliamentary Affairs Minister.
    • Duration of Suspension: Suspensions can last until the end of the session.

    Legal Recourse: Approaching the Supreme Court

    • Option for Judicial Review: The expelled MP has the option to challenge the expulsion in the Supreme Court, as explained by former Lok Sabha Secretary General P D T Achary.
    • Constitutional Provisions: Article 122 of the Constitution provides immunity to parliamentary proceedings from judicial scrutiny based on procedural irregularity.
    • Scope for Judicial Review: Despite this immunity, the Supreme Court in the 2007 Raja Ram Pal case clarified that judicial review is possible in cases of substantive or gross illegality.

    The Raja Ram Pal Case (2007)

    • Case Background: Raja Ram Pal, a BSP leader, was among 12 MPs expelled in the 2005 cash-for-query scam.
    • Supreme Court’s Stance: The Court upheld the expulsion but noted that proceedings tainted by substantial illegality are open to judicial scrutiny.
    • Judicial Review of Parliamentary Actions: The Court affirmed its role in scrutinizing legislative actions that infringe on fundamental rights.

    Article 105 of the Constitution

    • Powers and Privileges of Parliament: Article 105 deals with the powers, privileges, and immunities of Parliament and its Members.
    • Judicial Scrutiny of Privilege Enforcement: The Court recognized that the enforcement of privilege by the legislature can be subject to judicial review, within certain constitutional limits.

    Grounds for Challenging Expulsion

    • Examining Privilege and Procedure: The court can scrutinize whether the privilege cited for expulsion existed and if proper procedures were followed.
    • Functioning of Committees: The roles of the Privileges Committee and Ethics Committee are distinct, focusing on investigating misconduct and ensuring dignity in the House.
    • Investigative Procedures: Proper investigative procedures, including the right to depose and cross-examine, are essential for fairness and truth-finding.

    Determining Offense and Punishment

    • Article 20 of the Constitution: This article stipulates that punishment requires an existing law defining the act as an offense.
    • Case-Specific Issues: In the case of the expelled MP, issues like sharing Parliament login-passwords and accepting money for questions are examined for rule violations.
    • Breach of Privilege and Inquiry: Accepting money for asking questions in Parliament is a breach of privilege warranting inquiry by the Privileges Committee.

    Conclusion

    • Ongoing Debate and Implications: The case continues to spark debate on the limits of parliamentary privilege, the role of the judiciary, and the ethical standards expected of elected representatives.
    • Balancing Authority and Rights: The expulsion case underscores the delicate balance between parliamentary authority and the rights of its members.
    • Importance of Judicial Oversight: The potential for judicial review emphasizes the importance of legal oversight in maintaining democratic principles and fairness in legislative processes.

  • Supreme Court questions Governor’s Discretion on TN Bills

    Central Idea

    • The Supreme Court has taken notice of the Tamil Nadu government’s assertion that Governor R.N. Ravi lacks the “discretion” to withhold approval for the ten Bills “re-passed” by the State Legislative Assembly.
    • This legal matter revolves around the interpretation of Article 200 of the Constitution, which governs the Governor’s role in granting assent to Bills passed by the State Legislature.

    Article 200 of the Indian Constitution

     

    • It pertains to the “Assent to Bills.”
    • It outlines the procedure for the Governor of a state in India to give their assent to bills passed by the state legislature.
    • Article 200 states that when a bill is passed by the legislative assembly of a state (or in the case of a bicameral legislature, by the legislative assembly and legislative council), it shall be presented to the Governor for their assent.

    Governor’s Discretion: The Governor has the discretion to either:

    1. Give their assent to the bill, after which it becomes a law.
    2. Withhold their assent to the bill, in which case the bill does not become law.
    3. Return the bill (if it is not a money bill) to the legislature with a request for reconsideration, along with a specific message explaining the reasons for withholding assent.

    Reconsideration by the Legislature: If the Governor returns a bill for reconsideration, the legislature can then reconsider the bill, taking into account the Governor’s message. They may choose to make amendments to the bill or pass it again without any changes.

    Assent after Reconsideration: If the bill is passed again by the legislature, with or without amendments, and is presented to the Governor, the Governor is bound to give their assent to it. In other words, the Governor cannot withhold assent a second time.

     

    Governor’s Discretion

    • Article 200 Interpretation: The Tamil Nadu government argued that once Bills have been re-passed by the Assembly, they are treated similarly to Money Bills and cannot be rejected by the Governor.
    • Questioning the Process: The CJI questioned whether the Governor must send the Bills back to the Assembly for reconsideration after withholding assent.
    • Limiting Presidential Referral: The State also emphasized that the Governor cannot refer the reiterated Bills to the President after withholding assent.

    Background and Delay

    • Delayed Bills: The Bills in question were sent to the Governor’s office between January 2020 and April 2023, and the State accused the Governor of holding them indefinitely.
    • Special Session: The TN Assembly convened a special session to re-pass the Bills after the Governor withheld assent.
    • Governor’s Statement: The Governor returned the Bills with a simple statement: “I withhold consent,” prompting the Assembly to take action.

    Legal Perspectives

    • Governor’s Ceremonial Role: The State contends that the Governor’s role is primarily ceremonial and that he must act within the State Legislature’s framework.
    • Will of the People: The Bills passed by the Assembly represent the will of the people and should not be delayed or rejected without valid reasons.

    Supreme Court’s Response

    • Addressing Delay: The Supreme Court acknowledged the need to address whether there has been a delay in the Governor’s constitutional function.
    • Bill Status: The Attorney General mentioned that 182 Bills were presented to the Governor, with 152 approved, five withdrawn, and nine reserved for referral to the President.
    • Key Issue: The real issue in this case involves amendments to State universities’ legislations that affect the Governor’s powers to select Vice-Chancellors.

    Conclusion

    • The Supreme Court’s hearing on this matter raises critical questions about the Governor’s role in granting assent to Bills and the need to ensure timely decision-making in the best interest of the people and governance of the State.
    • The interpretation of Article 200 of the Constitution will play a pivotal role in this legal dispute.

  • Centre-State Disputes: Implications on India’s Economy

    Central Idea

    • In India, disputes between the Central and State governments regarding economic policies have a long history, but in recent years, they have escalated in both frequency and intensity, taking on the character of ‘persistent frictions’ within the federal system.
    • These disputes have significant implications for India’s economy and its federal structure.

    Current Context

    • Impact of Economic Reforms: Economic reforms since 1991 have relaxed many controls on investments, granting some autonomy to States. However, States still rely on the Centre for revenue receipts.
    • Shift from ‘Give and Take’ to Hardened Stance: Recent State resistance has transformed the cooperative Centre-State relationship into a more rigid and confrontational dynamic.

    Emerging Conflict Areas

    • Homogenization of Social Sector Policies: Conflicts arise over the homogenization of social sector policies, where States seek greater discretion, but central agencies push for uniformity.
    • Functioning of Regulatory Institutions: Differences emerge regarding the functioning of regulatory institutions, leading to conflicts over jurisdiction.
    • Powers of Central Agencies: Central agencies attempt to increase their influence, often imposing their preferences on States.

    Economic Consequences of Interference

    • Crowding Out State Investments: Centralization of planning and implementation limits States’ flexibility in infrastructure development. This has resulted in reduced State investments, particularly in projects like roads and bridges.
    • Fiscal Competition: Frictions with the Centre have spurred fiscal competition between States and the Centre. States compete with each other and with the Centre, leading to complexities in welfare provisioning.
    • Inefficiencies Due to Parallel Policies: Frictions have resulted in parallel policies, where either the Centre or States duplicate each other’s efforts. For example, some States have rolled back from the National Pension System (NPS) due to fiscal concerns.

    Inevitable Interdependence

    • Article 258A: The Centre relies on States for the implementation of many laws and policies, particularly in concurrent spheres.
    • Preserving Interdependence: In a large, diverse, developing society like India, interdependence between the Centre and States is inevitable and needs to be maintained.

    Conclusion

    • The growing Centre-State disputes in India’s federal system have far-reaching economic implications.
    • Balancing autonomy and cooperation between the Centre and States is essential for the nation’s economic growth and effective governance.

    Back2Basics:

    Centre-State Financial Relations

     

    Article 268 to 281 Distribution of taxes between the Central Government and States, specifying various taxes and their sharing.
    Article 282 Allows the Central Government to provide grants-in-aid to States for specific purposes, including welfare programs.
    Article 293 Regulates borrowing powers of States, requiring Presidential consent for external borrowing to ensure fiscal discipline.
    Article 280 Establishes the Finance Commission, which recommends tax revenue and grants distribution between the Centre and States.
    Goods and Services Tax (GST) Governed by the Constitution (One Hundred and First Amendment) Act, 2016, and associated laws, transforming taxation in India.
    Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management (FRBM) Act Guides fiscal discipline and management by setting fiscal targets for both Central and State Governments.
    Inter-State Council Established under Article 263

    Acts as a forum for dialogue between the Central Government and States on various issues.

     

  • Governors can’t sit on Bills passed by Assembly: Supreme Court

    governor

    Central Idea

    • In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court has asserted that a State Governor cannot obstruct crucial bills passed by a State Legislature.
    • The court delivered this verdict in response to a writ petition filed by the Punjab government.
    • The Punjab government approached the Supreme Court, challenging Governor Banwarilal Purohit’s decision to withhold some bills, alleging the legislative session’s illegitimacy.

    SC Ruling on Governors Bill Withholding

    • Court’s Warning: The court sternly warned the Governor that he was “playing with fire” and directed him to make a decision regarding these pending bills presented to him for assent.
    • Power of Elected Representatives: Emphasizing the supremacy of elected representatives in a parliamentary democracy, the court highlighted that real power resides with them.
    • Governor’s actual Role: The court underscored that the Governor’s role is that of a constitutional statesman guiding the government on constitutional matters.

    Governor’s Grounds for Delay

    • Governor’s Grounds: Governor Purohit contended that the Assembly session was “patently illegal” because the Speaker had adjourned the Budget Session sine die in March without proroguing it.
    • Special Assembly Sitting: He refused to consider the proposed laws passed in a special June sitting, arguing that they were in breach of Punjab Vidhan Sabha Rules.
    • Court’s Disagreement: The court disagreed with the Governor’s claims, stating that the Speaker acted within his rights in adjourning the House sine die.
    • Constitutional Validity: The court upheld the Speaker’s authority and stressed that it was not constitutionally valid for the Governor to question how the Speaker conducted the House’s affairs.

    Court’s Disagreement with the Governor

    • House’s Autonomy: The court affirmed that each legislative house has the right to be the sole judge of the legality of its own proceedings.
    • Legitimate Session: It found that the June 19-20 legislative session adhered to Rule 16 of the Punjab Vidhan Sabha Rules, rejecting any doubts cast on its legitimacy.
    • Democratic Peril Warning: The court cautioned that any attempts to challenge the legislative session could pose a grave peril to democracy.

    Governor’s Role Defined

    • No Judgment on Prorogation: The court questioned the Governor’s right to sit in judgment on whether the session was prorogued and emphasized that the Speaker’s decisions on adjournments governed the House.
    • Avoiding Perpetual Session: While acknowledging the Speaker’s authority, the court cautioned against exploiting the sine die adjournment to perpetually avoid prorogation.

    Conclusion

    • The Supreme Court’s verdict reiterates the importance of upholding legislative proceedings and the authority of elected representatives.
    • It underscores that Governors should respect the autonomy of legislative houses and not obstruct the passage of bills based on perceived procedural violations.
    • This landmark decision ensures the preservation of democratic principles and the effective functioning of State Legislatures.

  • Regulating Political Funding: Rules around the world, India’s challenges

    Central Idea

    • Campaign financing plays a pivotal role in democratic societies, yet the approach to regulating it must be tailored to the nuances of each country’s political system.
    • As exemplified by the United States and India, where political dynamics vary significantly, it is imperative to adopt a framework that aligns with the prevailing political landscape.

    Tap to read more about Ceiling on Election Expenditures in India

    https://www.civilsdaily.com/news/election-campaign-funding-by-political-parties/

    Understanding Political Systems:

    • US Individual-Centric Elections: In the United States, elections revolve around individual candidates and their campaign machinery, even at the national presidential level.
    • India’s Party-Centric Politics: Conversely, India, akin to most parliamentary systems, places political parties at the core of electoral politics. Therefore, India’s campaign finance framework should primarily focus on parties rather than individual candidates.

    Key Aspects of an Effective Framework:

    A comprehensive campaign finance framework necessitates attention to four critical facets: regulating donations, imposing expenditure limits, public financing, and disclosure requirements.

    (A) Donations:

    • Regulation and Limitation: To prevent undue influence, some individuals or organizations, such as foreign entities, may be prohibited from making contributions.
    • Donation Limits: Donation limits are crucial to thwart the dominance of a few major donors, be they individuals, corporations, or civil society organizations. For instance, the US employs varying contribution limits based on donor types, while the UK relies on expenditure limits.

    (B) Expenditure Limits:

    • Balancing Political Competitiveness: Expenditure limits serve as a bulwark against a financial arms race among political parties, allowing them to focus on winning votes rather than fundraising.
    • Examples: In the UK, political parties are restricted from spending more than £30,000 per contested seat. However, the US’s expansive interpretation of the First Amendment has hindered efforts to impose expenditure limits.

    (C) Public Financing:

    • Two Approaches: Public funding can be allocated based on predetermined criteria, like Germany’s system that considers past votes, membership fees, and private donations. Alternatively, democracy vouchers, as seen in Seattle, USA, allow voters to allocate public funds to candidates of their choice.
    • Challenge: Public funding may complement private donations but does not fully address the task of regulating private money.

    (D) Disclosure Requirements:

    • Balancing Transparency and Anonymity: Disclosure nudges voters away from electing politicians involved in quid pro quo arrangements. However, mandatory disclosure isn’t always desirable, as it may deter donations by exposing donors to retaliation.
    • Anonymity’s Role: Anonymity can protect donors from retribution or extortion. Striking a balance between transparency and anonymity is a challenge faced by many jurisdictions.

    Chilean Experiment: Complete Anonymity?

    • Chile’s “Reserved Contributions”: Chile’s system aimed at “complete anonymity” allowed donors to contribute to political parties via the Electoral Service, which forwarded the sum without revealing the donor’s identity.
    • Coordination Challenges: Despite the intent for complete anonymity, coordination between donors and parties compromised the system’s efficacy.

    Balancing Transparency and Anonymity in Political Finance

    • An Effective Approach: Many jurisdictions strike a balance by allowing anonymity for small donors while mandating disclosure for large donations.
    • Examples: In the UK, political parties must report donations exceeding £7,500 in a year, while the US and Germany set limits at $200 and €10,000, respectively.
    • Rationale: Small donors typically have less influence and are more vulnerable to partisan victimization, while large donors may engage in quid pro quo arrangements.

    Challenges in India’s Framework

    • Lack of Donation Limits: India has no limits on individual or corporate contributions, and the 2017 Finance Act removed official contribution limits.
    • Expenditure Limits: Parties can spend freely, albeit not on individual candidates.
    • Disclosure Requirements: Parties are only obligated to disclose donations exceeding ₹20,000, creating a loophole as they split large donations into smaller amounts.
    • Electoral Bonds: Since 2017, electoral bonds have allowed large donors to hide their contributions.

    Changing Dynamics in Indian Politics

    • Involvement of Third Parties: India has witnessed a surge in the engagement of political consultancies, campaign groups, and civil society organizations in political campaigns, mirroring trends seen in the US.
    • Need for Rethinking: The evolving political landscape necessitates a reevaluation of India’s 20th-century political funding framework.

    Conclusion

    • Crafting a campaign finance framework requires an astute understanding of a nation’s political system and its nuances.
    • By adapting strategies that regulate donations, impose expenditure limits, facilitate public financing, and balance transparency with anonymity, countries like India can ensure that their campaign finance frameworks evolve to meet the challenges of the modern political landscape.

  • CAG of India writes: As our democracy matures, my role is becoming more vital

    CAG

    Central idea

    The article highlights the pivotal role of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) in India’s democracy, emphasizing citizen engagement, social audits, and capacity building for local governance. It underscores challenges in finding skilled personnel and the imperative to ensure effective grassroots service delivery. The way forward involves an international center for local governance and online courses to address competency gaps.

    Key Highlights:

    • Role of CAG in Democracy: Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) ensures transparency, accountability, and financial integrity. Maintains separation of powers and promotes good governance through audit findings.
    • Citizen-Centric Approach: Emphasis on citizen engagement for better audit focus. Use of technology and digital solutions to enhance citizen involvement.
    • Social Audit and Local Governance: Introduction of social audit as a tool for citizen oversight. Empowering Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) and urban local bodies for grassroots participation.
    • Capacity Building and Online Courses: Collaboration with Institute of Chartered Accountants for online courses. Aiming to create a pool of competent accountants for local governance.

    Challenges:

    • Competent Accountants Shortage: Difficulty in finding skilled accountants for local governments, especially in remote areas.
    • Grassroots Service Delivery: Ensuring effective delivery of devolved functions at the grassroots level.
    • Capacity Building Imperatives: The article highlights the necessity for robust capacity-building initiatives to overcome challenges and strengthen local self-governance.

    Key Terms:

    • Devolved Functions: Functions transferred to local governments for implementation.
    • Audit Diwas: Day marking the commencement of registration for online courses on November 16, 2023.

    Key Phrases:

    • Citizen Oversight: Involving citizens in identifying high-risk areas for audit.
    • Social Audit: Facilitating citizen engagement through regular audits and follow-up actions.
    • Capacity Building: Strengthening local governance through training and online courses.

    Analysis:

    The article underscores the critical role of CAG in upholding democratic principles and the evolving strategies to enhance citizen engagement. It highlights challenges in local governance, emphasizing the need for skilled personnel and effective service delivery at the grassroots.

    Key Facts/Data:

    • The Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Audit of Scheme Rules was notified in 2011 to facilitate social audits.
    • The 73rd and 74th Constitutional amendments created a three-tier structure for rural self-governance.

    Way Forward:

    • International Centre for Local Governance: Establishing a center for excellence to enhance the capacity of local government auditors globally.
    • Online Courses: Introducing online courses to address the shortage of competent accountants for local bodies.

  • TN moves Supreme Court against Governor over Bill withholds

    tn governor

    Central Idea

    • The Tamil Nadu state government has taken its concerns to the Supreme Court regarding the prolonged delay in the approval of Bills and Government orders by the Governor.

    TN Petition to the Supreme Court

    • Constitutional Challenge: The TN government has filed a Writ Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
    • Objective: The petition seeks a declaration that the Governor’s inaction, omission, and delay in assenting to Bills and considering Government orders forwarded by the Tamil Nadu State Legislature is unconstitutional, illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, and a misuse of power.
    • Impact on Administration: The Governor’s delay in signing remission orders, day-to-day files, appointment orders, and granting approvals for prosecution is causing severe disruptions in the state administration.

    Article 32 of Indian Constitution

    • Article 32 grants individuals the right to move to the Supreme Court of India for the enforcement of their fundamental rights.
    • It is considered a fundamental right in itself and is often referred to as the “Right to Constitutional Remedies.”

    What are the Discretionary Powers of the Governor?

    The Constitution makes it clear that if any question arises whether a matter falls within the governor’s discretion or not, the decision of the governor is final and the validity of anything done by him cannot be called in question on the ground that he ought or ought not to have acted in his discretion.

    Constitutional Discretion:

    • Reservation of a bill for the consideration of the President (Article 200).
    • Recommendation for the imposition of the President’s Rule (Article 356) in the state.
    • While exercising his functions as the administrator of an adjoining union territory (in case of additional charge).
    • Determining the amount payable by the Government of Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram to an autonomous Tribal District Council as royalty accruing from licenses for mineral exploration.
    • Seeking information from the chief minister with regard to the administrative and legislative matters of the state.

    Situational Discretion:

    • Appointment of chief minister when no party has a clear-cut majority in the state legislative assembly or when the chief minister in office dies suddenly and there is no obvious successor.
    • Dismissal of the council of ministers when it cannot prove the confidence of the state legislative assembly.
    • Dissolution of the state legislative assembly if the council of ministers has lost its majority.

    Can the Governor withhold His Assent to a Bill in Exercise of His Discretionary Powers?

    • While a plain reading of Article 200 suggests that the Governor can withhold his assent, experts question whether he can do so only on the advice of the Council of Ministers.
    • The Constitution provides that the Governor can exercise his executive powers only on the advice of the Council of Ministers under Article 154.
    • The larger question is why a Governor should be allowed to withhold assent when the Bill is passed by the Assembly.

    Rationale behind Governor’s Power

    • Checks and Balances: Delay in approval allows the Governor to scrutinize bills and orders more thoroughly, ensuring that they are in line with the constitution and the interests of the state.
    • Prevention of Hasty Decisions: It prevents hasty or ill-considered legislation from being passed, which might have unintended negative consequences.
    • Protection of Minority Rights: The Governor can act as a safeguard against the majority’s potentially oppressive decisions, protecting the rights and interests of minority groups.
    • Aid to Parliamentary Democracy: The delay provides time for public debate, expert opinions, and stakeholder consultations, which are essential aspects of parliamentary democracy.
    • Conflict Resolution: In situations where there are disputes between the state government and the center or between various state institutions, the Governor’s involvement can facilitate resolution.

    Issues with the delays

    • Delay in Decision-Making: The Governor’s failure to take a decision on the Bills passed by the legislature leads to a delay in decision-making, which affects the effective functioning of the state government.
    • Delay in Implementation of Policies and Laws: When the Governor fails to make a decision on a Bill passed by the assembly, it delays the implementation of policies and laws.
    • Undermines the Democratic Process: The Governor, who is appointed by the Centre, can use his powers to delay or reject Bills passed by state assemblies for political reasons, which undermines the democratic process.
    • Public Perception: The public often views pending Bills with the Governor as a sign of inefficiency or even corruption in the state government, which can damage the government’s reputation.
    • Constitutional Ambiguity: There is ambiguity in the Constitution regarding the Governor’s power to withhold assent.
    • Lack of Accountability: When the Governor withholds assent, he does not provide any reason for his decision.

    Recent Instances of Withholding Assent

    • Chhattisgarh (2020): The Chhattisgarh Governor withheld assent to a bill amending the Chhattisgarh Lokayukta Act, 2001.
    • Tamil Nadu (2021): The Tamil Nadu Governor reserved a bill exempting state students from NEET medical entrance exams for the President’s consideration after a significant delay.
    • Kerala (2023): Kerala’s Governor signed five bills into law but withheld assent to six others, citing concerns about their constitutionality and legality.

    Mains Marks Enhancer: Supreme Court’s Stance and Commission Recommendations

    • Nabam Rebia and Bamang Felix vs Dy.Speaker (2016): The SC clarified that a Governor’s discretion under Article 200 is limited to deciding whether a bill should be reserved for the President’s consideration. The Court emphasized that actions or inactions by the Governor regarding bill assent can be subject to judicial review.
    • Punchhi Commission (2010): This commission recommended the establishment of a time limit within which the Governor should decide on granting assent or reserving a bill for the President’s consideration.
    • National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC): NCRWC proposed a four-month time limit for the Governor to decide on a bill’s fate. It also suggested the removal of the Governor’s power to withhold assent except in cases explicitly stipulated in the Constitution.

    Conclusion

    • The dispute between the government and the Governor underscores the importance of timely decision-making to ensure the effective functioning of the state administration.

  • LS Ethics Committee: Its’ Constitution, Members

    Central Idea

    • The Lok Sabha Ethics Committee, set up over two decades ago, plays a pivotal role in overseeing the conduct of members and addressing cases of misconduct.
    • While it predominantly handles relatively minor offenses, its significance in maintaining ethical standards in Parliament cannot be understated.

    History of Ethics Committees

    • Origin in 1996: The concept of ethics panels for the two Houses of Parliament was first proposed during a Presiding Officers’ Conference in Delhi in 1996.
    • Rajya Sabha’s Pioneering Committee: Vice President K R Narayanan, who served as Rajya Sabha Chairman, established the Ethics Committee for the Upper House on March 4, 1997. It officially commenced its duties in May of the same year.
    • Lok Sabha’s Journey: Lok Sabha’s Ethics Committee journey was delayed initially. A study group within the House Committee of Privileges recommended its formation in 1997 after studying legislative ethics practices worldwide. However, it only became a permanent fixture in the Lok Sabha in 2015, following its ad hoc establishment in 2000.

    Procedure for Complaints

    • Complaint Origins: Any person can file a complaint against a Member of Parliament (MP) through another Lok Sabha MP. The complaint must be accompanied by evidence of alleged misconduct and an affidavit confirming its authenticity. MPs can also lodge complaints without the need for an affidavit.
    • Speaker’s Role: The Speaker can refer any complaint against an MP to the Ethics Committee.
    • Prima Facie Inquiry: The Committee conducts a preliminary inquiry to determine if a complaint warrants further examination. It proceeds to evaluate and make recommendations after this stage.
    • Report Presentation: The Committee presents its findings to the Speaker, who seeks the House’s input on whether to consider the report. A half-hour discussion on the report can also be scheduled.

    Privileges Committee Comparison

    • Overlapping Responsibilities: The Ethics Committee and the Privileges Committee occasionally deal with similar cases. More serious allegations typically go to the Privileges Committee.
    • Privileges Committee’s Mandate: The Privileges Committee safeguards the “freedom, authority, and dignity of Parliament.” It can address breaches of privilege by MPs or non-MPs that undermine the House’s authority and dignity.
    • Ethics Committee’s Scope: The Ethics Committee primarily focuses on cases of misconduct involving MPs.

    2005 Cash-for-Query Case

    • Expulsion of MPs: In 2005, a significant episode unfolded when both Houses expelled 10 Lok Sabha MPs and one Rajya Sabha MP implicated in the cash-for-query scandal. They were accused of accepting money to raise questions in Parliament.
    • Bansal Committee’s Report: The Lok Sabha took action based on the report of a special committee led by Chandigarh MP P K Bansal. In contrast, Rajya Sabha entrusted the House Ethics Committee with investigating the matter.
    • Evidence in the 2005 Case: Former Lok Sabha Secretary General P D T Achary noted that the 2005 case was backed by substantial evidence from a sting operation. Establishing a money trail could be the challenge in the recent Bengal MP case.

    Conclusion

    • The Lok Sabha Ethics Committee, although historically ad hoc and relatively recent in its permanent establishment, plays a critical role in upholding the ethical standards of India’s parliamentary members.
    • It serves as a guardian of parliamentary ethics, ensuring that members adhere to the highest moral standards while fulfilling their legislative responsibilities.
    • The Committee’s work, while often overshadowed, is integral to maintaining the integrity of the Lok Sabha.