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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Federal System

  • Fifteenth Finance Commission

    Three years after it was constituted, the Fifteenth Finance Commission has finalised its report for fund devolution from the Centre to States for the five years from 2021-22 to 2025-26.

    Fifteenth Finance Commission

    • The Fifteenth Finance Commission (XV FC) was constituted on November 27, 2017.
    • It was constituted against the backdrop of the abolition of the Planning Commission and the distinction between Plan and non-Plan expenditure, and introduction of the Goods and Services Tax (GST).

     What is the Finance Commission?

    • The FC was established by the President of India in 1951 under Article 280 of the Indian Constitution.
    • It was formed to define the financial relations between the central government of India and the individual state governments.
    • The Finance Commission (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1951 additionally defines the terms of qualification, appointment and disqualification, the term, eligibility and powers of the Finance Commission.
    • As per the Constitution, the FC is appointed every five years and consists of a chairman and four other members.
    • Since the institution of the First FC, stark changes in the macroeconomic situation of the Indian economy have led to major changes in the FC’s recommendations over the years.

    Why in news now?

    • That report of the XV FC had pared the States’ share of the divisible tax pool from 42%, as recommended by the Fourteenth Finance Commission, to 41%, citing the creation of the UT of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh.
    • The Commission had then said that some of the key recommendations it was required to make would feature in its final report, including the viability of creating a separate defence and national security fund.
    • The panel is also expected to factor in unpaid GST compensation dues to States for this year while working out States’ revenue flow calculations for the years beyond 2022.

    Must read:

    [Burning Issue] 15th Finance Commission and its recommendations (Part I)

  • Outsiders can now buy land in Jammu and Kashmir

    People, as well as investors outside Jammu and Kashmir, can now purchase land in the Union Territory (UT) as the Centre has notified new land laws for the region.

    What is the new criterion?

    • Under the newly introduced J&K Development Act, the term “permanent resident of the State” as a criterion has been “omitted”, paving the way for investors outside J&K to invest in the UT.
    • Under the ‘transfer of land for the purpose of promotion of healthcare or education’, the government may now allow the transfer of land.
    • According to amendments made to “The Jammu & Kashmir Land Revenue Act, Samvat, 1996”, only agriculturists of J&K can purchase agricultural land.
    • No sale, gift, exchange, or mortgage of the land shall be valid in favour of a person who is not an agriculturist.
    • No land used for agriculture purposes shall be used for any non-agricultural purposes except with the permission of the district collector.
    • Under a new provision, an Army officer not below the rank of Corps Commander can declare an area as “Strategic Area” within a local area, only for direct operational and training requirements.

    Note: These laws do not apply to the UT of Ladakh. The Centre is likely to notify separate land laws for the UT of Ladakh soon.

    Criticisms of the move

    • Political parties have opposed the move citing the sale of the state.
    • With these new laws in place, tokenism of the domicile certificate has been done away with, as purchasing non-agricultural land has been made easier.

  • Govt. hikes poll expenditure ceiling by 10%

    The Law Ministry has increased the ceiling on poll expenditure for Assembly and Lok Sabha elections by 10% following a recommendation by the Election Commission in view of curbs imposed during the coronavirus pandemic.

    Try answering this question:

    Q.Ceiling on election expenses ends up being counterproductive and encourages candidates to under-report their expenditure. Critically analyse.

    New ceiling on poll expenditure

    • The ceiling on poll expenditure varies across States, with candidates in Assembly elections in bigger States like Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, and Tamil Nadu now allowed to spend up to ₹30.8 lakhs as against ₹28 lakhs earlier.
    • For a candidate contesting a Lok Sabha poll in these States, the revised ceiling on poll expenditure is now ₹77 lakhs instead of the earlier amount of ₹70 lakhs.
    • Goa, Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim and a few Union Territories, based on the size of their constituencies and population, have a lower ceiling on poll expenditure.
    • Here while the enhanced ceiling for a Lok Sabha candidate is now ₹59.4 lakhs those contesting an Assembly can spend up to ₹22 lakhs.

    How are such ceilings made?

    • Such changes are made by amending the Conduct of Elections Rules.
    • The last time the expenditure ceiling was enhanced was in 2014 just ahead of the Lok Sabha polls.

    What doesn’t account to Election expenditure?

    • The expenditure incurred by leaders of a political party on account of travel by air or by any other means of transport for propagating programme of the political party is not considered to be the election expenditure.
    • Any expenditure which is done for service of the Government and discharge of official duty is also not considered to be election expenditure.

    Role of Election Commission

    • The EC imposes limits on campaign expenditure incurred by a candidate and not political parties.
    • However, it does not cover expenses incurred either by a party or the leader of a party for propagating the party’s programme.
    • Also, candidates must mandatorily file a true account of election expenses with the EC.
    • An incorrect account or expenditure beyond the ceiling can attract disqualification for up to three years as per Section 10A of The Representation of the People Act, 1951.

  • Assam-Mizoram Boundary Dispute

    The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has asked Assam and Mizoram to maintain peace and display “no aggressive posturing” after violent clashes took place at the border between the two States on Saturday night.

    Can you recall the chronology of reorganization of the entire North-East region?

    What is the issue?

    • Assam has had a boundary dispute with Mizoram for decades and several rounds of talks have been held since 1994-95 to solve the issue.
    • Till 1972, Mizoram was a part of Assam and acquired full statehood in 1987.
    • The 164.6 km-long border between the States runs along with Cachar, Hailakandi and Karimganj districts in Assam and Kolasib, Mamit and Aizawl districts in Mizoram.
    • There are several border areas where violence have been reported.

    How complex is this dispute?

    • In the Northeast’s complex boundary equations, showdowns between Assam and Mizoram residents are less frequent than they are.
    • The boundary between present-day Assam and Mizoram, 165 km long today, dates back to the colonial era when Mizoram was known as Lushai Hills, a district of Assam.
    • The dispute stems from a notification of 1875 that differentiated Lushai Hills from the plains of Cachar, and another of 1933 that demarcates a boundary between Lushai Hills and Manipur.
    • Mizoram believes the boundary should be demarcated on the basis of the 1875 notification, which is derived from the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation (BEFR) Act, 1873.
    • Mizo leaders have argued in the past argued against the demarcation notified in 1933 because Mizo society was not consulted.

    Other boundary disputes in North-East

    During British rule, Assam included present-day Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh and Meghalaya besides Mizoram, which became separate state one by one. Today, Assam has boundary problems with each of them.

    • Nagaland shares a 500-km boundary with Assam.
    • In two major incidents of violence in 1979 and 1985, at least 100 persons were killed. The boundary dispute is now in the Supreme Court
    • On the Assam-Arunachal Pradesh boundary (over 800 km), clashes were first reported in 1992, according to the same research paper.
    • Since then, there have been several accusations of illegal encroachment from both sides, and intermittent clashes. This boundary issue is being heard by the Supreme Court.
    • The 884-km Assam-Meghalaya boundary, too, witnesses flare-ups frequently. As per Meghalaya government statements, today there are 12 areas of dispute between the two states.

  • Federalism, now a partisan internal dialogue

    Against the backdrop of the ongoing tussle between the states and the Centre over the issue of GST compensation, the article analyses the evolution of federalism and power-sharing in India.

    GST and federalism

    • At the first sign of stress, the nation unified in a singular system of taxation (GST) turned into a policy of every-state-for-itself.
    • Evidence of seriously miscued revenue estimates without pragmatic tax rate, was accumulating at an alarming pace.
    • The Comptroller and Auditor-General of India (CAG) recently revealed how a cess meant to remedy shortfalls in GST yields, was retained in central government revenues, in violation of all applicable norms.
    • This revelation does little to build trust between the Centre and the States at a time when the States’ facing lack of resource and the central government is advising them to borrow.
    • Some states believe that the onus of borrowing should rest with the central government.

    Higher borrowing limit for states with conditions

    • The central government sanctioned a higher borrowing limit for States through the current year.
    • In the bargain, it imposed conditionalities:
    • 1) Enforcing a singular standard for the implementation of policies across a vast and diverse country.
    • 2) Improving India’s ranking as a place for “doing business”.
    • States will have unconditional access to borrowings equivalent to half a percentage point of their gross output.
    • But, subsequently, every tranche of a quarter point will be premised on progress in implementing the “one nation, one ration card” scheme, and improvements in the “ease of doing business”.

    Federalism in India

    • Aside from the contents and definitions sections, the word “federal” occurs in only one operational article of the Indian Constitution, in reference to the apex judicial body created in colonial times.
    • When this body was transformed into the Supreme Court at the moment the Constitution came into force, the word seemingly lost all operative value.
    • The distribution of powers and responsibilities between various tiers of the governmental system, was achieved without explicit recognition of federalism as a governing principle.
    • In actual operational terms, the relationship of Centre and States followed different paradigms through various phases of politics.
    •  At the time of Independence, the distribution of powers between Centre and States was transformed into an internal discussion of the Congress.

    Evolution of power-sharing and politics

    • The “Congress system”, as the political scientist Rajni Kothari called it, was seen at one time to have sufficient internal flexibility and resilience to absorb all factional pressures.
    • The first challenge came from the cultural terrain, compelling a reluctant national leadership to accept linguistic reorganisation of States.
    • And then, as ambitions of nation-building through rapid industrialisation resulted in the possibility of a non-Congress politics.
    • The Congress lost power in a number of key States in 1967.
    • The polity moved into a new phase when politics was about “waves” at the national or state level either in favour of, or against the Congress.
    • From 1989 onwards, politics settled into another distinct phase, when outcomes at the national level were the resultant of very separate State-level results.

    Conclusion

    Though federal structure could not be free from Centre-State power struggle, that struggle should not come into the development of the nation. In this context, it is the responsibility of the Centre to address the issues facing the state amid pandemic.

  • The federalism test

    The GST has been hailed as the grand bargain and the success story of the federalism. But the economic disruption caused by the pandemic has put it to test. The article deals with the issue of GST compensation.

    Compensating the loss of GST revenue: 2 options

    • In the 41st meeting of the GST Council, the Union government had presented the states with two options.
    • The Centre had estimated the states’ total loss of GST revenue at Rs 3 lakh crore, of which, Rs 65,000 crore was expected to accrue from the compensation cess.
    • Of the remaining Rs 2.35 lakh crore, the loss due to the pandemic was estimated at Rs 1.28 lakh crore.
    • The first option was to provide states a special window to borrow Rs 97,000 crore from the RBI, which was later revised to Rs 1.1 lakh crore.
    • Under this option, both the interest payments and the repayments would be made from future collections of the compensation cess.
    • In the second option, the entire shortfall of Rs 2.35 lakh crore could be borrowed from the market and the states would have to bear the interest costs, but the repayments would be adjusted against future collections of the cess.
    • 10 states have rejected both the options and have stated that it is the Centre’s responsibility to compensate the states, and therefore, it should borrow.

    Commitment of the Centre

    • The minutes of the 7th and 8th GST Council meeting show that most of the states wanted the Centre to commit on paying compensation from the Consolidated Fund of India (CFI).
    • On that demand the Union Finance Minister had stated that in case the amount in the GST compensation fund falls short of the compensation payable in any bi-monthly period, the GST Council shall decide the mode of raising additional resources including borrowing from the market which could be repaid by the collection of cess in the sixth year or further subsequent years.
    • Thus, there was a clear commitment of the Centre on the issue of compensation and the method of recouping the loss.

    Impact on the Centre-State relations

    • The payment of compensation has plunged the Union-state relationship to a new low.
    • First, not recognising the Centre’s commitment will make states wary of any future reforms involving an agreement with the Centre.
    • Second, giving selective press statements to pressurise the states into accepting one or the other option does not infuse confidence.
    • Third, there was a statement by the Union finance ministry officials that the GST Council does not have jurisdiction over-borrowing and borrowing is an individual state and Centre’s decision under Article 293 of the Constitution.
    • If so, why were the two borrowing options presented to the states in the meeting of the Council?

    Way forward

    • It is the Centre’s commitment to find the compensation mechanism and borrowing is one of the options — that must be discussed in the Council.
    • Furthermore, if the commitment of the Centre is recognised as admitted by the finance minister in the 7th GST council meeting, the Centre should take the responsibility to borrow.
    • Both interest payments and repayment of the principal liability can be met from future collections from the cess.

    Conclusion

    This issue is of immense significance for the future of Centre-state relations. But pressuring states on the basis of political strength will have adverse consequences for the country’s federal structure.

  • Legal challenges the Farm Acts could face

    Farm Acts passed by the Parliament could face the legal hurdle in the court when challenged on its constitutional basis. This article explains the issue.

    Background

    • Recently, Parliament passed three acts related to agriculture. These Acts are-
    • 1) The Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Act, 2020.
    • 2) The Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Act, 2020.
    • 3) The Essential Commodities (Amendment) Act, 2020.
    • This has led to the question: Does the Union government have the authority to legislate on what are rightfully the affairs of States?

    Why agriculture is considered as States’ prerogative

    • Agriculture is a State subject in the Constitution, listed as Entry 14 in the State List (List II).
    • Entry 26 in the State List refers to “trade and commerce within the State”.
    • Entry 27 in the State List refers to “production, supply and distribution of goods”.
    • Entry 28 refers to “markets and fairs”.
    • For these reasons, intra-State marketing in agriculture was always considered a legislative prerogative of States.

    What was the legal basis used by the Parliament to pass the Farm Acts

    • The central government invoked Entry 33 in the Concurrent List (List III).
    • Entry 26 and 27 in List II are listed as “subject to the provisions of Entry 33 of List III”.

    Entry 33 in List III: Trade and commerce in, and the production, supply and distribution of, — (a) the products of any industry where the control of such industry by the Union is declared by Parliament by law to be expedient in the public interest, and imported goods of the same kind as such products; (b) foodstuffs, including edible oilseeds and oils; (c) cattle fodder, including oilcakes and other concentrates; (d) raw cotton, whether ginned or unginned, and cotton seed; and (e) raw jute.

    Historical background of  “Entry 33” of Concurrent List

    • Entry 33, in its present form, was inserted in List III through the Constitution (Third Amendment) Act, 1954 after heated constitutional debates.
    • The contention of the dissent was the following:
    • As per Article 369 in the original version of the Constitution, the responsibility of agricultural trade and commerce within a State was temporarily entrusted to the Union government for a period of five years beginning from 1950.
    • The 1954 Amendment attempted to change this into a permanent feature in the Constitution.
    • According to dissident “if matters enumerated in Article 369 in were placed in List III, State autonomy would be rendered illusory and State powers and rights would be progressively pulverised…”.
    • While another dissident argued that “passage of the Bill would transform the Indian Constitution into a “unitary Constitution” instead of a “federal Constitution” and reduce “all the States’ powers into municipal powers”.
    • Notwithstanding the strong dissenting voices, the Bill was passed.

    Let’s look into the related Supreme Court Judgments

    • In many of its judgments after 1954, the Supreme Court of India has upheld the legislative powers of States in intra-State agricultural marketing.
    • Most notable was the ruling of the five-judge Constitution Bench in I.T.C. Limited vs. Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC) and Others, 2002.
    • The Tobacco Board Act, 1975 had brought the development of the tobacco industry under the Centre.
    • However, Bihar’s APMC Act continued to list tobacco as an agricultural produce.
    • In this case, the question was if the APMC in Monghyr could charge a levy on ITC for the purchase of unprocessed tobacco leaves from growers.
    • An earlier judgment had held that the State APMC Act will be repugnant to the Central Act, and hence was ultra vires.
    • But the Constitution Bench upheld the validity of the State APMC Act, and ruled that market fees can be charged from ITC under the State APMC Act.

    Consider the question “Examine the validity of legal basis used by the Parliament to pass the Farm Acts. Why it could face the legal challenge?”

    Conclusion

    It was unwise on the part of the Centre to use Entry 33 in List III to push the Farm Bills. Such adventurism weakens the spirit of federal cooperation that India needs in this hour of crisis. Second, agriculture is exclusively a State subject.

    Back2Basics: Read more about 3 Agricultural Acts passed by the Parliament here-

    [Burning Issue] Agricultural Reform Bills, 2020

     

  • Explained: Farm Acts and federalism

    The President has finally given assent to the controversial farm Bills passed by Parliament last week. Amid protests by farmers’ organisations across the country, questions are being raised about the anti-federal nature of these ‘Acts’.

    Here we shall only discuss its constitutionality and federal nature. Tap to read more about the theme at:

    What is the question over the constitutionality of these laws?

    • These are some of the questions that will be raised in the petitions challenging the constitutionality of the Acts.
    • As per Union of India v H.S.Dhillon (1972), the constitutionality of parliamentary laws can be challenged only on two grounds — that the subject is in the State List, or that it violates fundamental rights.
    • As per Ram Krishna Dalmia v Justice S R Tendolkar (1958) and other judgments, the Supreme Court will begin hearings after presuming the constitutionality of these laws.
    • The bills (now Acts as they have got the President’s assent) do not mention, in the Statement of Objects & Reasons, the constitutional provisions under which Parliament has the power to legislate on the subjects covered.

    Where does the question of federalism come in?

    What is federalism, first?

    • Federalism is the system of government in which sovereignty is constitutionally divided between a central governing authority and constituent political units.
    • It is based upon democratic rules and institutions in which the power to govern is shared between national and state governments, creating a federation.
    • It essentially means both the Centre and states have the freedom to operate in their allotted spheres of power, in coordination with each other.

    Try this PYQ:

    Q.Which of the following federal principles are not found in Indian federation?

    1. Bifurcation of the judiciary between the Federal and State Governments
    2. Equality of representation of the states in the upper house of the Federal Legislature
    3. The Union cannot be destroyed by any state seceding from the Union at its will
    4. Federal Government can redraw the map of the Indian Union by forming new States

    Select the correct answer using the codes given below:

    a) 1, 2 and 3

    b) 2, 3 and 4

    c) 1 and 2

    d) 3 and 4

    Federalism in India

    • The Seventh Schedule of the Constitution contains three lists that distribute power between the Centre and states.
    • There are 97 subjects in the Union List, on which Parliament has exclusive power to legislate (Article 246); the State List has 66 items on which states alone can legislate.
    • The Concurrent List has 47 subjects on which both the Centre and states can legislate, but in case of a conflict, the law made by Parliament prevails (Article 254).
    • Parliament can legislate on an item in the State List under certain specific circumstances laid down in the Constitution.

    Concretization of the idea

    • Federalism, like constitutionalism and separation of powers, is not mentioned in the Constitution. But it is the very essence of our constitutional scheme.
    • In the State of West Bengal v Union of India (1962), the Supreme Court held that the Indian Constitution is not federal.
    • But in SR Bommai v Union of India (1994), a nine-judge Bench held federalism as part of the basic structure of the Constitution.
    • Neither the relative importance of the legislative entries in Schedule VII, Lists I and II of the Constitution, nor the fiscal control by the Union per se is decisive to conclude the Constitution is unitary.
    • The respective legislative powers are traceable to Articles 245 to 254… The State qua the Constitution is federal in structure and independent in its exercise of legislative and executive power,” it said.

    Where is agriculture in the scheme of legislative powers?

    Terms relating to agriculture occur at 15 places in the Seventh Schedule.

    1. Entries 82, 86, 87, and 88 in the Union List mention taxes and duties on income and assets, specifically excluding those in respect of agriculture.
    2. In the State List, eight entries contain terms relating to agriculture: Entry 14 (agricultural education and research, pests, plant diseases); 18 (rights in or over land, land tenures, rents, transfer agricultural land, agricultural loans, etc.); 28 (markets and fairs); 30 (agricultural indebtedness); 45 (land revenue, land records, etc.); 46 (taxes on agricultural income); 47 (succession of agricultural land); and 48 (estate duty in respect of agricultural land).
    3. In the Concurrent List, Entry 6 mentions the transfer of property other than agricultural land; 7 is about various contracts not relating to agricultural land; and 41 deals with evacuee property, including agricultural land.
    • It is clear that the Union List and Concurrent List put matters relating to agriculture outside Parliament’s jurisdiction, and give state legislatures exclusive power.
    • No entry in respect of agriculture in the State List is subject to any entry in the Union or Concurrent Lists.

    What about Entry 27 of the State List that is subject to Entry 33 of List III (Concurrent)?

    • Entry 33 of the Concurrent List mentions trade and commerce, production, supply and distribution of domestic and imported products of an industry over which Parliament has control in the public interest.
    • This includes foodstuffs, including oilseeds and oils; cattle fodder; raw cotton and jute.
    • The Centre could, therefore, argue that it is within its powers to pass laws on contract farming and intra- and inter-state trade, and prohibit states from imposing fees/cesses outside APMC areas.
    • However, like education, farming is an occupation, not trade or commerce.
    • If foodstuffs are considered synonymous with agriculture, then all the powers of states in respect of agriculture, listed so elaborately in the Constitution, shall become redundant.

    So what happens in case of legislation that covers entries in two Lists?

    • In cases such as State of Rajasthan v G Chawla (1959), courts have used the doctrine of “pith and substance” to determine the character of legislation that overlaps between entries.
    • The constitutionality of legislation is upheld if it is largely covered by one list and touches upon the other list only incidentally.
    • But the two new farm Acts go beyond that — they impinge on entries in the State List.
    • In interpreting the lists, the Supreme Court in State of Bihar v Kameshwar Singh (1952) invoked the doctrine of colourable legislation, which means you cannot do indirectly what you cannot do directly.

    What is the Doctrine of Colorable Legislation?

    • This doctrine refers to the question of competency of the legislature while enacting a provision of law.
    • If a legislature is prohibited from doing something, it may not be permitted to do this under the guise or pretence of doing something while acting within its lawful jurisdiction and this prohibition is an implied result of the maxim “what cannot be done directly, cannot be done indirectly”
    • This doctrine is a tool used to determine the legislative competence of laws enacted by various legislatures.
    • Therefore, it is a means to implement the separation of powers and impose judicial accountability.

  • Explained: Suspension of Members of Parliament

    Recently eight Rajya Sabha MPs were suspended for unruly behaviour in the House.

    Try this PYQ:

    Q.Consider the following statements:

    1. Speaker of the legislative assembly shall vacate his/her office of he/she ceases to be a member of the assembly
    2. Whenever the legislative assembly is dissolved the speaker shall vacate his/her office immediately

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct? (CSP 2018)

    a) 1 only

    b) 2 only

    c) Both 1 and 2

    d) Neither 1 not 2

    What is the reason for suspending an MP?

    • The general principle is that it is the role and duty of the Presiding Officer — Speaker of Lok Sabha and Chairman of Rajya Sabha — to maintain order so that the House can function smoothly.
    • In order to ensure that proceedings are conducted in the proper manner, the Speaker/Chairman is empowered to force a Member to withdraw from the House.

    What are the rules under which the Presiding Officer acts?

    • Rule Number 373 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business provides for the suspension of MPs by the Speaker of the House.
    • To deal with more recalcitrant Members, the Speaker make take recourse to Rules 374 and 374A.
    • Rule 374 says: The Speaker may, if deems it necessary, name a Member who disregards the authority of the Chair or abuses the rules of the House by persistently and wilfully obstructing the business thereof.
    • Rule 374A was incorporated in the Rule Book on December 5, 2001. The intention was to skirt around the necessity of moving and adopting a motion for suspension.

    Procedure in Rajya Sabha

    It’s largely similar, with one important difference.

    • Like the Speaker in Lok Sabha, the Chairman of Rajya Sabha is empowered under Rule Number 255 of its Rule Book to “direct any Member whose conduct is in his opinion grossly disorderly to withdraw immediately” from the House.
    • Unlike the Speaker, however, the Rajya Sabha Chairman does not have the power to suspend a Member. The House may, by another motion, terminate the suspension.
    • The Chairman may “name a Member who disregards the authority of the Chair or abuses the rules of the Council by persistently and wilfully obstructing” business.
    • In such a situation, the House may adopt a motion suspending the Member from the service of the House for a period not exceeding the remainder of the session.

    Is suspending an MP a decent practice?

    • It is a strong action, but it is not uncommon. In general, a balance has to be struck.
    • There can be no question that the enforcement of the supreme authority of the Presiding Officer is essential for smooth conduct of proceedings.
    • However, it must be remembered that the job of the Presiding Officer is to run the House, not to lord over it.

    Alternatives to suspension

    • The solution to unruly behaviour has to be long-term and consistent with democratic values.
    • A previous Speaker had ordered that television cameras be focussed on the demonstrating members so that people could see for themselves how their representatives were behaving in the House.

    Present situation

    • In the present case, however, the Opposition has accused the Chairman of stopping the telecast of the proceedings in Rajya Sabha.
    • What cannot be denied is that Speaker’s/Chairman’s actions are often dictated more by expediency and the stand of the party that they belong to, rather than by the Rules and principles.
    • So, the ruling party of the day invariably insists on the maintenance of discipline, just as the Opposition insists on its right to protest. And their positions change when their roles flip.

  • Roles, functions and limitations of Parliamentary Committees

    The government pushed through two crucial agriculture Bills in Rajya Sabha, rejecting Opposition demands to refer them to a Select Committee of Rajya Sabha.

    Try this PYQ:

    With reference to the Parliament of India which of the following Parliamentary Committees scrutinizes and reports to the House whether the powers to make regulations, rules, sub-rules, bylaws, etc. conferred by the Constitution or delegated by the Parliament are being properly exercised by the Executive within the scope of such delegation?(CSP 2018)

    (a) Committee on Government Assurances

    (b) Committee on Subordinate Legislation

    (c) Rules Committee

    (d) Business Advisory Committee

    What is a Parliamentary Committee?

    • It means a Committee which is appointed or elected by the House or nominated by the Speaker and which works under the direction of the Speaker and presents its report to the House or to the Speaker and the Secretariat for which is provided by the Lok Sabha Secretariat.

    By their nature, Parliamentary Committees are of two kinds: Standing Committees and Ad hoc Committees.

    1. Standing Committees are permanent and regular committees which are constituted from time to time in pursuance of the provisions of an Act of Parliament or Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha. The work of these Committees is of continuous nature. The Financial Committees, DRSCs and some other Committees come under the category of Standing Committees.
    2. Ad hoc Committees are appointed for a specific purpose and they cease to exist when they finish the task assigned to them and submit a report. The principal Ad hoc Committees are the Select and Joint Committees on Bills. Railway Convention Committee, Joint Committee on Food Management in Parliament House Complex etc also come under the category of ad hoc Committees.

    Why need Parliamentary Committee?

    • Parliament scrutinizes legislative proposals (Bills) in two ways. The first is by discussing it on the floor of the two Houses.
    • This is a legislative requirement; all Bills have to be taken up for debate.
    • The time spent debating the bills can vary. They can be passed in a matter of minutes, or debate and voting on them can run late into the night.
    • Since Parliament meets for 70 to 80 days in a year, there is not enough time to discuss every Bill in detail on the floor of the House.

    Its role in the passage of a Bill

    • The debate in the house is mostly political and does not go into the technical details of a legislative proposal.
    • The second mechanism is by referring a Bill to a parliamentary committee. It takes care of the legislative infirmity of debate on the floor of the House.
    • However, referring to Bills to parliamentary committees is not mandatory.

    And what is a Select Committee?

    • India’s Parliament has multiple types of committees.
    • They can be differentiated on the basis of their work, their membership and the length of their tenure. First are committees that examine bills, budgets and policies of ministries.
    • These are called departmentally related Standing Committees. There are 24 such committees and between them, they focus on the working of different ministries.
    • Each committee has 31 MPs, 21 from Lok Sabha and 10 from Rajya Sabha.
    • The main purpose is to ensure the accountability of Government to Parliament through a more detailed consideration of measures in these committees.
    • The purpose is not to weaken or criticize the administration but to strengthen by investing in with more meaningful parliamentary support.

    When does a committee examine a Bill?

    • Bills are not automatically sent to committees for examination. There are three broad paths by which a Bill can reach a committee.
    • The first is when the minister piloting the Bill recommends to the House that his Bill be examined by a Select Committee of the House or a joint committee of both Houses.
    • Last year Electronics and IT Minister moved a motion in Lok Sabha referring the Personal Data Protection Bill to a Joint Committee.
    • If the minister makes no such motion, it is up to the presiding officer of the House to decide whether to send a Bill to a departmentally related Standing Committee.

    What happens when a bill goes to a Committee?

    • Sending a Bill to any committee results in two things.
    • First, the committee undertakes a detailed examination of the Bill. It invites comments and suggestions from experts, stakeholders and citizens.
    • The government also appears before the committee to present its viewpoint.
    • All this results in a report that makes suggestions for strengthening the Bill. While the committee is deliberating on a Bill, there is a pause in its legislative journey.
    • It can only progress in Parliament after the committee has submitted its report. Usually, parliamentary committees are supposed to submit their reports in three months, but sometimes it can take longer.

    What happens after the report?

    • The report of the committee is of a recommendatory nature. The government can choose to accept or reject its recommendations.
    • Very often the government incorporates suggestions made by committees. Select Committees and JPCs have an added advantage.
    • In their report, they can also include their version of the Bill. If they do so, the minister in charge of that particular Bill can move for the committee’s version of the Bill to be discussed and passed in the House.