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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Polity

  • Lack of Quorum in Lok Sabha

    The Lok Sabha began a discussion on the general Budget but the House had to be adjourned before the scheduled time due to lack of quorum.

    What is Quorum?

    • Quorum is the minimum number of members of a deliberative assembly necessary to conduct the business of that assembly.
    • Article 100 of the Indian Constitution states that the quorum to constitute a meeting of either House of Parliament shall be one-tenth of the total number of members of that House.
    • This means that the quorum of Lok Sabha (Lower House) is 55 and that of Rajya Sabha (Upper House) is 25.

    Who decides the Quorum?

    • The quorum is usually decided at the beginning of the session and if it is not present when a vote is taken, the vote is invalid.
    • In the event of inadequate quorum, the Speaker or the Chairman can adjourn the House or suspend the sitting till the quorum is present.

    Challenging a Quorum

    • Furthermore, the quorum can be challenged by any member of the House.
    • In the event that the quorum is challenged, the Speaker or the Chairman can direct that a count of the members present be taken.
    • If the quorum is not present, the House is adjourned. However, if the quorum is present, the business of the House is resumed.

     

    Crack Prelims 2023! Talk to our Rankers

    (Click) FREE 1-to-1 on-call Mentorship by IAS-IPS officers | Discuss doubts, strategy, sources, and more

  • Existing income limit for OBCs Non-Creamy Layer is ‘sufficient’: Centre

    obc

    The existing income limit for determining the non-creamy layer (NCL) among Other Backward Classes (OBC) is considered sufficient and hence there is no proposal currently to revise the said income limit, informed the Centre.

    What is Non-Creamy Layer in OBCs?

    • Creamy Layer is a concept that sets a threshold within which OBC reservation benefits are applicable.
    • While there is a 27% quota for OBCs in government jobs and higher educational institutions, those falling within the “creamy layer” cannot get the benefits of this quota.

    Basis of Creamy Layer

    • It is based on the recommendation of the Second Backward Classes Commission (Mandal Commission).
    • The government in 1990 had notified 27% reservation for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBCs) in vacancies in civil posts and services that are to be filled on direct recruitment.
    • After this was challenged, the Supreme Court in the Indira Sawhney case (1992) upheld 27% reservation for OBCs, subject to exclusion of the creamy layer.

    How is it determined?

    • Following the order in Indra Sawhney, an expert committee headed by Justice (retired) R N Prasad was constituted for fixing the criteria for determining the creamy layer.
    • In 1993, the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) listed out various categories of people of certain rank/status/income whose children cannot avail the benefit of OBC reservation.
    1. For those not in government, the current threshold is an income of Rs 8 lakh per year.
    2. For children of government employees, the threshold is based on their parents’ rank and not income.
    3. For instance, an individual is considered to fall within the creamy layer if either of his or her parents is in a constitutional post; if either parent has been directly recruited in Group-A; or if both parents are in Group-B services.
    4. If the parents enter Group-A through promotion before the age of 40, their children will be in the creamy layer.
    5. Children of a Colonel or higher-ranked officer in the Army, and children of officers of similar ranks in the Navy and Air Force, too, come under the creamy layer.
    6. Income from salaries or agricultural land is not clubbed while determining the creamy layer (2004).

    What is happening now?

    • Many communities have raised questions about the pending proposal for revising the criteria.
    • They have asked whether the provision of a creamy layer for government services only for OBC candidates is rational and justified.
    • The National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC) has consistently maintained from as early as 2011 that the income limit should be raised to at least ₹10 lakh.

    Has it ever been revised?

    • Other than the income limit, the current definition of the creamy layer remains the same as the DoPT had spelled out in 1993 and 2004.
    • The income limit has been revised over the years.
    • No other orders for the definition of the creamy layer have been issued.
    • While the DoPT had stipulated that it would be revised every three years, the first revision since 1993 (Rs 1 lakh per year) happened only in 2004 (Rs 2.50 lakh), 2008 (Rs 4.50 lakh), 2013 (Rs 6 lakh), and 2017 (Rs 8 lakh).
    • It is now more than five years since the last revision.

    What is the current NCL limit?

    • Currently, an annual income of both parents of ₹8 lakh or more excludes OBCs from availing reservation.
    • It puts them in the creamy layer category, leaving benefits only for those earning less than that.

     

    Crack Prelims 2023! Talk to our Rankers

    (Click) FREE 1-to-1 on-call Mentorship by IAS-IPS officers | Discuss doubts, strategy, sources, and more

  • 73rd establishment day of Supreme Court

    supreme court

    The Supreme Court of India is hosting its celebration of the 73rd anniversary of its establishment today.

    Why in news?

    • This year’s event is being aired on social media platforms and will witness Singapore’s Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, who is of Indian origin, as the chief guest.

    When was the Supreme Court founded?

    • On January 28, 1950, two days after India became a sovereign democratic republic, the Supreme Court of India came into being.
    • The first CJI of India was H. J. Kania.
    • The inauguration took place in the Chamber of Princes in the Parliament building which was the home to the Federal Court of India for 12 years preceding the Supreme Court’s establishment.
    • The Parliament House was to be the home of the Supreme Court for years that were to follow until the court acquired its own present building with lofty domes and its signature spacious colonnaded verandas in 1958.

    History of established

    • In 1861, the Indian High Courts Act 1861 was enacted to create high courts for various provinces and abolished Supreme Courts at Calcutta, Madras and Bombay and also the sadar adalats in presidency towns in their respective regions.
    • These new high courts had the distinction of being the highest courts for all cases till the creation of the Federal Court of India under the Government of India Act 1935.
    • The Federal Court had jurisdiction to solve disputes between provinces and federal states and hear appeals against judgment of the high courts.

    Premise of the Supreme Court

    • In 1958, when the court shifted its premises, the building was shaped to project the image of scales of justice, in the central wing.
    • In 1979, two new wings – the East wing and the West wing – were added to the complex. In all, there are 19 Courtrooms in the various wings of the building.
    • The Chief Justice’s Court is the largest of the Courts located at the Centre of the Central Wing.

     

    Crack Prelims 2023! Talk to our Rankers

    (Click) FREE 1-to-1 on-call Mentorship by IAS-IPS officers | Discuss doubts, strategy, sources, and more

  • Back in news: Collegium System

    collegium

    The Centre has told the Supreme Court that it would soon clear five names that were recommended by the collegium for appointment of judges in the apex court.

    What is Collegium System?

    • The Collegium of judges is the Indian Supreme Court’s invention.
    • It does not figure in the Constitution, which says judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts are appointed by the President and speaks of a process of consultation.
    • In effect, it is a system under which judges are appointed by an institution comprising judges.
    • After some judges were superseded in the appointment of the CJI in the 1970s, and attempts made subsequently to effect a mass transfer of High Court judges across the country.
    • Hence there was a perception that the independence of the judiciary was under threat. This resulted in a series of cases over the years.

    Evolution: The Judges Cases

    • First Judges Case (1981) ruled that the “consultation” with the CJI in the matter of appointments must be full and effective.
    • However, it rejected the idea that the CJI’s opinion, albeit carrying great weight, should have primacy.
    • Second Judges Case (1993) introduced the Collegium system, holding that “consultation” really meant “concurrence”.
    • It added that it was not the CJI’s individual opinion, but an institutional opinion formed in consultation with the two senior-most judges in the Supreme Court.
    • Third Judges Case (1998): On a Presidential Reference for its opinion, the Supreme Court, in the Third Judges Case (1998) expanded the Collegium to a five-member body, comprising the CJI and four of his senior-most colleagues.

    The procedure followed by the Collegium

    Appointment of CJI

    • The President of India appoints the CJI and the other SC judges.
    • As far as the CJI is concerned, the outgoing CJI recommends his successor.
    • In practice, it has been strictly by seniority ever since the supersession controversy of the 1970s.
    • The Union Law Minister forwards the recommendation to the PM who, in turn, advises the President.

    Other SC Judges

    • For other judges of the top court, the proposal is initiated by the CJI.
    • The CJI consults the rest of the Collegium members, as well as the senior-most judge of the court hailing from the High Court to which the recommended person belongs.
    • The consultees must record their opinions in writing and it should form part of the file.
    • The Collegium sends the recommendation to the Law Minister, who forwards it to the Prime Minister to advise the President.

    For High Courts

    • The CJs of High Courts are appointed as per the policy of having Chief Justices from outside the respective States. The Collegium takes the call on the elevation.
    • High Court judges are recommended by a Collegium comprising the CJI and two senior-most judges.
    • The proposal, however, is initiated by the Chief Justice of the High Court concerned in consultation with two senior-most colleagues.
    • The recommendation is sent to the Chief Minister, who advises the Governor to send the proposal to the Union Law Minister.

    Does the Collegium recommend transfers too?

    • Yes, the Collegium also recommends the transfer of Chief Justices and other judges.
    • Article 222 of the Constitution provides for the transfer of a judge from one High Court to another.
    • When a CJ is transferred, a replacement must also be simultaneously found for the High Court concerned. There can be an acting CJ in a High Court for not more than a month.
    • In matters of transfers, the opinion of the CJI “is determinative”, and the consent of the judge concerned is not required.
    • However, the CJI should take into account the views of the CJ of the High Court concerned and the views of one or more SC judges who are in a position to do so.
    • All transfers must be made in the public interest, that is, “for the betterment of the administration of justice”.

    Need for Collegium System

    • Collegium system increases secrecy: Ruma Pal, a former Judge of the Supreme Court of India, stated that this system is one of the best kept secret in the country. It kept secret within the four walls of the body for proper and effective functioning of the institution that makes the system opaque.
    • Political non-interference: The collegium system makes Judiciary independent from the politics. It separates the judiciary from the influence of executive and legislative. With the Govt’s influence judiciary can work without any fear and any sort of favour. This ensures the regulation of the doctrine of separation of power.
    • Ensures merit: The executive organ is not specialist or does not have the knowledge regarding the requirements of the Judge as comparative to the CJI. Collegium system ensures that the deserving one is sitting in the position of the Judge in Supreme Court.

    Loopholes in the Collegium system

    • Lack of Transparency: Opaqueness and a lack of transparency, and the scope for nepotism are cited often.
    • Judges appointing Judge: The attempt made to replace it with a ‘National Judicial Appointments Commission’ was struck down by the court in 2015 on the ground that it posed a threat to the independence of the judiciary.
    • Criteria: Some do not believe in full disclosure of reasons for transfers, as it may make lawyers in the destination court chary of the transferred judge.

    A critical assessment

    • No guidelines framework: This system does not provide any guidelines in selecting the candidates for the judge position of the Supreme Court because of which it leads to wide scope for the nepotism and favoritism.
    • No checks and balances: This system gives the immense power to Judiciary to appoint Judges, so the check on the excessive powers would not be ensured and misuse of powers can be done.
    • Judiciary is nowhere accountable: The collegium system is not accountable to any administrative body that may lead to wrong choice of the candidate while overlooking the right candidate.
    • Huge workload leaves no room: Already there are many cases pending in the Court, they are having limited time the power given to them for the appointment would lead to burden to Judiciary.
    Former Chief Justice of Australia, Sir Harry Gibbs, are worth-quoting:

    Judicial commissions, advisory Committees and procedures for consultation [with the Chief Justice] will be useless unless there exists, among the politicians of all parties, a realization that the interest of the community requires that neither political nor personal patronage nor a desire to placate any section of a society, should play any part in making judicial appointments.

    Some feasible measures that can be incorporated

    • Ensure non-vetoing representatives: To ensure the effectiveness of this mechanism the commission should be representative in nature comprising members of the executive, legislature, judiciary, legal profession and lay persons.
    • Info share in public domain: In addition, it should be ensured that the commission uses a system which is transparent and open to public scrutiny.

    Way ahead

    • In respect of appointments, there has been an acknowledgment that the “zone of consideration” must be expanded to avoid criticism that many appointees hail from families of retired judges.
    • The status of a proposed new memorandum of procedure, to infuse greater accountability, is also unclear.
    • Even the majority opinions admitted the need for transparency, now Collegiums’ resolutions are now posted online, but reasons are not given.

    Conclusion

    • All mechanisms for judicial appointment may have some advantages and disadvantages and therefore, no particular system can be treated as the best system.
    • Despite this, in order to maintain public confidence in the appointment system and to ensure judicial independence the commission system is perhaps a very effective mechanism for judicial appointment.

     

    Crack Prelims 2023! Talk to our Rankers

    (Click) FREE 1-to-1 on-call Mentorship by IAS-IPS officers | Discuss doubts, strategy, sources, and more

  • No bar on contesting two seats in one poll: Supreme Court

    The Supreme Court has refused to set aside a provision in the election law that allows candidates to contest polls from two constituencies simultaneously.

    What is the issue?

    • The petition had sought the court to declare Section 33(7) of the Representation of People Act invalid and ultra vires.
    • Like one-person-one-vote, one-candidate-one-constituency is the dictum of democracy, argued the petition.

    What did the SC say?

    • This is a policy matter and an issue concerning political democracy.
    • It is for the Parliament to take a call, CJI observed.

    Provision for contesting polls from two constituency

    • Under section 33 (7) of the RPA, 1951, a person is allowed to contest polls, whether a general election, more than one by-elections or biennial elections, from a maximum of two seats.
    • Before this law, candidates could run in any number of constituencies.
    • If candidates win both seats, they must vacate one within 10 days, triggering a by-election, as stated under section 70 of the Act.
    • Under the Constitution, an individual cannot simultaneously be a member of either House of Parliament (or a state legislature), or both Parliament and a state legislature, or represent more than one seat in a House.

    Issues with two polls provision

    • Issues with twin victories: There have been cases where a person contests election from two constituencies, and wins from both. In such a situation he vacates the seat in one of the two constituencies.
    • Expenses of bye-election: The consequence is that a by-election would be required from one constituency involving avoidable expenditure on the conduct of that bye-election.

    ECI supports one-candidate-one-constituency

    • The Election Commission had, in an affidavit in 2018, supported the petition.
    • It had informed the Supreme Court that it had proposed an amendment to Section 33(7) in July 2004.

    Way ahead

    • Heavy election deposits: A candidate should deposit an amount of ₹5 lakh for contesting in two constituencies in an Assembly election or ₹10 lakh in a general election.
    • Recurring election expenses: The amount would be used to cover the expenses for a by-election in the eventuality that he or she was victorious in both constituencies and had to relinquish one.

     

    Crack Prelims 2023! Talk to our Rankers

    (Click) FREE 1-to-1 on-call Mentorship by IAS-IPS officers | Discuss doubts, strategy, sources, and more

  • Is Judicial Majoritarianism justified?

    As the recent majority judgment of the Supreme Court on demonetization comes under criticism, the minority judgment by J. Nagarathna is being hailed for its challenge to the RBI’s institutional acquiescence (reluctant acceptance) to the Central government.

    What is Judicial Majoritarianism?

    • Numerical majorities are of particular importance to cases which involve a substantial interpretation of constitutional provisions.
    • The requirement for a majority consensus flows from Article 145(5) of the Constitution which states that no judgment in such cases can be delivered except with the concurrence of a majority.
    • It also provides for judges to freely deliver dissenting judgments or opinions.
    • In important cases, Constitutional Benches, consisting of five or more judges, are set up in consonance with Article 145(3) of the Constitution.
    • Such Benches usually consist of five, seven, nine, 11 or even 13 judges.

    Why in news?

    • Blind acceptance: This situation raises questions with respsect to our blind acceptance of numerical majority judgements.
    • Disregard for dissent: This flags issues in judicial decision-making and the constitutional disregard of analysis and appreciation of arguments and evidence in dissenting judgments.
    • Merits of dissent: Analysts now seek to challenge the weightage given to numerical majorities in judicial decisions by our Constitutional Courts as opposed to the merits in their reasoning.

    CASE STUDY: “Why Do Bare Majorities Rule on Courts?”

    • Jeremy Waldron has dealt with this concept at length in his work titled ‘Five to Four: Why Do Bare Majorities Rule on Courts?’.
    • He proffers that the arguments which are made in defense of judicial majoritarianism cannot explain or justify our adherence to majority decisions –

    1.      Efficiency through ease of decision-making;

    2.      Epistemic objectivity through majority adherence; and

    3.      Equality through fairness,

    • He questions why is it that the judges too have to resort to head counting in order to resolve disagreements amongst judges.

     

    Heart of the debate: Why do experts need to resort to ‘majority’?

    • Defiance of merit: A meritorious minority decision, irrespective of the impeccability of its reasoning receives little weightage in terms of its outcomes.
    • Complex situations: All judges on a particular Bench give their rulings on the same set of facts, laws, arguments and written submissions.
    • Nature of bias: Judicial hunches may be an outcome of subjective experiences, outlooks, perceptions, prejudices and biases.

    Narrow margin: Some meritorious dissents in India

    Our Constitutional history is replete with such meritorious dissents-

    • The dissenting opinion of Justice H.R. Khanna in A.D.M. Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976) upholding the right to life and personal liberty even during situations of constitutional exceptionalism is a prime example.
    • Another example is the dissenting opinion of Justice Subba Rao in the Kharak Singh v. State of U.P. (1962) case upholding the right to privacy which received the judicial stamp of approval in the K.S. Puttaswamy v. UOI (2017) case.
    Do you know?

    The Kesavananda Bharati verdict (1973) was divided 7–6 majority. And 4 other judges to bench refused to sign the Judgment! It is almost like the Basic Structure Doctrine was rejected. It should have had an overwhelming majority.

     

    Way forward

    • Weightage-based assent in judgments: Ronald Dworkin proffers a system that may either give more weightage to the vote of senior judges given that they have more experience or to the junior judges as they may represent popular opinion better.
    • Doing away with headcounts: Such alternatives, however, can only be explored once we identify and question the premises and rationales which underlie head-counting in judicial decision-making.
    • Imbibe critical discourse: The absence of a critical discourse on judicial majoritarianism represents one of the most fundamental gaps in our existing knowledge regarding the functioning of our Supreme Court.
    • Cases to expert benches: As pending Constitutional Bench matters are listed for hearing and judgments are reserved, we must reflect upon the arguments of judicial majoritarianism on the basis of which these cases are to be decided.

    Conclusion

    • There is a need to reflect upon the concept of judicial majoritarianism.
    • The academic discourse on this aspect is still nascent and developing.

     

    Crack Prelims 2023! Talk to our Rankers

    (Click) FREE 1-to-1 on-call Mentorship by IAS-IPS officers | Discuss doubts, strategy, sources, and more

  • Who is a Puisne Judge, and what does the term mean?

    While recommending two names for appointment as judges of the Supreme Court, the Collegium headed by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud said that the collegium had taken into “consideration the seniority of Chief Justices and senior puisne Judges…”

    Who are Puisne Judge?

    • According to the dictionary, the word puisne has French origins, which means “later born” or younger.
    • It is pronounced / “puny”, the English word that means small or undersized.
    • Puisne is almost always used in the context of judges, and essentially denotes seniority of rank.
    • The term puisne judge is used in common law countries to refer to judges who are ranked lower in seniority, i.e., any judge other than the Chief Justice of that court.

    Now again, what is common law?

    • Common law is the body of law that is created by judges through their written opinions, rather than through statutes or constitutions (statutory law).
    • Common law, which is used interchangeably with ‘case law’, is based on judicial precedent.
    • The United Kingdom (UK) and the Commonwealth countries, including India, are common law countries.

    Legal reference to Puisne Judges

    In the Third Judges Case ruling in 1998, one of the two cases that led to the evolution of the collegium system, the Supreme Court clarified that-

    • The CJI must make a recommendation to appoint a Judge of the Supreme Court and to transfer a Chief Justice or puisne Judge of a High Court in consultation with the four seniormost puisne Judges of the Supreme Court.

    Is a “puisne judge” in India the same as in the UK?

    • In the UK, puisne judges are judges other than those holding distinct titles.
    • The Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 1877 defined a “puisne judge” as any judge of the High Court besides the Lord Chancellor, the Lord Chief Justice of England, and the Master of the Rolls.
    • In India, all judges have the same judicial powers.
    • As the seniormost judge of a court, the Chief Justice has an additional administrative role.
    • In India, there is a reference to a puisne judge only while considering the order of seniority for appointments, elevations to High Courts, etc., but it does not have a bearing on the exercise of a judge’s judicial power.

    What is the recent context?

    • The Supreme Court collegium recommended current Chief Justices of the Allahabad and Gujarat High Courts respectively, for appointment as judges of the Supreme Court.
    • While giving reasons for its recommendation, the collegium said that the decision was made taking “into consideration the seniority of Chief Justices and senior puisne Judges in their respective parent High Courts.
    • This was done because seniority is one of the several criteria that are considered while making appointments to the higher judiciary.

     

    Crack Prelims 2023! Talk to our Rankers

    (Click) FREE 1-to-1 on-call Mentorship by IAS-IPS officers | Discuss doubts, strategy, sources, and more

  • History, Significance of President’s Address

    president

    President Droupadi Murmu addressed the joint sitting of Parliament for the first time after assuming the position.

    Mains PYQ: The President’s address is one of the most solemn occasions in the Parliamentary calendar. Discuss. Highlight its importance in Parliamentary Democracy. (250W)

    President’s Address: What is the history?

    • United Kingdom: The tradition of the monarch addressing the Parliament began in the 16th century.
    • United States: President Gorge Washington addressed Congress for the first time in 1790.

    President’s Address in India

    (A) Colonial period

    • GoI Act, 1919: In India, the practice of the President addressing Parliament was established after the promulgation of the Government of India Act in 1919.
    • Governor General’s address: This law gave the GG the right of addressing the Legislative Assembly and the Council of State.
    • No joint address: The law did not have a provision for a joint address but the Governor-General did address the Assembly and the Council together on multiple occasions.
    • During constituent assembly: Between 1947 and 1950, there was NO address to the Constituent Assembly (Legislative).

    (B) After the enactment of Constitution

    • After the Constitution came into force, President Rajendra Prasad (after taking over from Dr Sachchidananda Sinha) addressed members of Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha for the first time on January 31, 1950.
    • When the Constitution came into force, the President was required to address each session of Parliament. The Constitution gave the President and the Governor the power to address a sitting of the legislature.
    1. Article 87: It provides two special occasions on which the President addresses a joint sitting. The first is to address the opening session of a new legislature after a general election. The second is to address the first sitting of Parliament each year. A session of a new or continuing legislature cannot begin without fulfilling this requirement.
    2. Making it an annual affair: So during the provisional Parliament in 1950, President Prasad gave an address before every session. In 1951, the First Amendment to the Constitution changed this and made the President’s address an annual affair.

    What is the procedure and tradition?

    • Motion of Thanks: After the President’s address, the two Houses move a motion to thank the President for her speech.
    • Debate on the speech: This is an occasion for MPs in the two Houses to have a broad debate on governance in the country.
    • PM addresses the questions: The issues raised by MPs are then addressed by the Prime Minister, who also replies to the motion of thanks.
    • Unanimous voting: The motion is then put to vote and MPs can express their disagreement by moving amendments to the motion.
    • Scope for Amendment: Opposition MPs have been successful in getting amendments passed to the motion of thanks in Rajya Sabha on five occasions, including in 1980, 1989, 2001, 2015 and 2016.
    Do you know?

    The Motion of Thanks must be passed in Parliament. Otherwise, it amounts to the defeat of the government. It is one of the ways through which the Lok Sabha can also express a lack of confidence in the government.

    Content of the address

    • There is no set format for the President’s or Governor’s speech.
    • During the making of the Constitution, Prof K T Shah wanted the President’s address to be more specific.
    • He suggested that the language be changed to specify that the President shall inform Parliament “on the general state of the Union including financial proposals, and other particular issues of policy he deems suitable for such address”.
    • His proposal took inspiration from the US Constitution.
    • But the Constituent Assembly didn’t accept Prof Shah’s amendment.

    What is the government’s role?

    • Written by the government: The President’s speech is essentially the govt. viewpoint and is also written by the government itself.
    • Inputs from various ministries: Usually, in December, the Prime Minister’s Office asks the various ministries to start sending in their inputs for the speech.
    • Collation of information: The Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs sends a message, asking ministries to give information about any legislative proposals that need to be included in the President’s address. All this information is collated and shaped into a speech, which is then delivered to the President.
    • Role of Lok Sabha Secretariat: The address is an event, associated with ceremony and protocol, and the Lok Sabha Secretariat makes extensive arrangements for it.

    Significance of the address

    • Policy announcements: The President’s address serves as a platform for the government to make policy and legislative announcements.
    • Report card of the government: It highlights the government’s accomplishments from the previous year and sets the broad governance agenda for the coming year.

    What if the President disagrees with the text of the speech?

    Ans. It is CONSTITUTIONAL OBLIGATION on the President.

    • The President or Governor cannot refuse to perform the constitutional duty of delivering an address to the legislature.
    • But there can be situations when they deviate from the text of the speech prepared by the government.
    • So far, there have been no instances of a President doing so.

    Recent instances of defiance

    Ans. States vs. Governors

    • There have been occasions when a Governor skipped or changed a portion of the address to the Assembly.
    • Most recently, Tamil Nadu’s Governor made changes to the prepared speech he read out in the Assembly.
    • TN Chief Minister had to step in and move a resolution, which demanded that only the original speech given to the Governor be put in records.
    • In 2020, Kerala Governor, during his address to the Assembly, stopped before reading out his speech’s paragraph 18, which related to the Kerala government’s opposition to the Citizenship Amendment Bill.

    Why it is so cherished in democracy?

    • Parliament as a unit: The President’s address is one of the most solemn occasions in the Parliamentary calendar. It is the only occasion in the year when the entire Parliament, i.e. the President, Lok Sabha, and Rajya Sabha come together.
    • Ceremonial event: The event is associated with ceremony and protocol. The Lok Sabha Secretariat prepares extensively for this annual event.
    • Grandeur: In the past, it used to get 150 yards of red baize cloth from the President’s house for the ceremonial procession.

     

    Crack Prelims 2023! Talk to our Rankers

    (Click) FREE 1-to-1 on-call Mentorship by IAS-IPS officers | Discuss doubts, strategy, sources, and more

  • Vishakhapatnam is Andhra Pradesh’s new Capital

    vishakha

    Visakhapatnam will be the new capital of Andhra Pradesh, announced the Chief Minister.

    AP’s move for three capitals

    • AP had introduced a ‘Three Capitals Act’ titled Andhra Pradesh Decentralisation and Inclusive Development of All Regions Act, 2020.
    • Thus, it was decided that:
    1. Amaravati was to be the Legislative capital
    2. Visakhapatnam the Executive capital and
    3. Kurnool the Judicial capital
    • However, the Andhra Pradesh High Court repealed this Act citing that the legislature has no competence to enact any law for shifting the three organs of the capital.

    Concerns raised by AP government

    • AP contended that the judgement was in violation of the basic structure of the Constitution as the HC cannot hold that the State does not have the powers to decide on its capital.
    • The judgement was against the doctrine of separation of powers as it sought to preempt the legislature from taking up the issue (of three capitals).
    • Further, it is argued that under the federal structure of the Constitution, every State has an inherent right to determine where it should carry out its capital functions from.

    Reasons for AP’s consideration

    (1) Viable option of Visakhapatnam

    • Vizag always had been the biggest city, after Hyderabad, even in the combined State.
    • It has all the settings to become a good living space.

    (2) Sri Krishna panel recommendations

    • The advantages and qualities of Visakhapatnam to become the capital was elaborately deliberated by the Sri Krishna Committee to study the alternatives for a new capital for the State of Andhra Pradesh.
    • Coming to suggestion for the alternative capital, the Committee primarily took up three things for consideration — creation of single city or super city in greenfield location, expanding existing cities and distributed development.

    (3) Decentralisation

    • This idea was elaborately described in the Sri Bagh pact.
    • The pact clearly defined decentralisation, for the benefit of all three main regions such as Coastal AP, Godavari and Krishna districts and Rayalaseema.

    Major practical problems

    • Continuum of work: The government argues that the Assembly meets only after gaps of several months, and government Ministers, officers, and staff can simply go to Amaravati when required.
    • Logistics nightmare: coordinating between seats of legislature and executive in separate cities will be easier said than done.
    • Time and costs of travel: The distances in Andhra Pradesh are not inconsiderable. Executive capital Visakhapatnam is 700 km from judicial capital Kurnool, and 400 km from legislative capital Amaravati.

    Examples of multi-capital states in India

    • Among Indian states, Maharashtra has two capitals– Mumbai and Nagpur (which holds the winter session of the state assembly).
    • Himachal Pradesh has capitals at Shimla and Dharamshala (winter).
    • The former state of Jammu & Kashmir had Srinagar and Jammu (winter) as capitals where Darbar Move is carried out.

     

    Crack Prelims 2023! Talk to our Rankers

    (Click) FREE 1-to-1 on-call Mentorship by IAS-IPS officers | Discuss doubts, strategy, sources, and more

  • SC to hear plea against Electoral Bonds Scheme

    bond

    The Supreme Court is scheduled to examine whether petitions challenging the validity of electoral bonds scheme need to be referred to a Constitution Bench.

    What is a Constitution Bench?

    • The constitution bench is the name given to the benches of the Supreme Court of India.
    • The Chief Justice of India has the power to constitute a Constitution Bench and refer cases to it.
    • Constitution benches are set up when the following circumstances exist:
    1. Interpretation of the Constitution: Article 145(3) provides for the constitution of at least five judges of the court which sit to decide any case “involving a substantial question of law as to the interpretation” of the Constitution of India.
    2. President of India seeking SC’s opinion: When the President has sought the Supreme Court’s opinion on a question of fact or law under Article 143 of the Constitution. Article 143 of the Constitution provides for Advisory jurisdiction to the SC. As per the provision, the President has the power to address questions to the apex Court, that he deems important for public welfare.
    3. Conflicting Judgments: When two or more three-judge benches of the Supreme Court have delivered conflicting judgments on the same point of law, necessitating a definite understanding and interpretation of the law by a larger bench.
    • The Constitution benches are set up on ad hoc basis as and when the above-mentioned conditions exist.
    • Constitution benches have decided many of India’s best-known and most important Supreme Court cases, such as:
    1. K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (Preventive detention)
    2. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (Basic structure doctrine) and
    3. Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Union of India (OBC reservations) etc.

     

    What are Electoral Bonds?

    • Electoral bonds are banking instruments that can be purchased by any citizen or company to make donations to political parties, without the donor’s identity being disclosed.
    • It is like a promissory note that can be bought by any Indian citizen or company incorporated in India from select branches of State Bank of India.
    • The citizen or corporate can then donate the same to any eligible political party of his/her choice.
    • An individual or party will be allowed to purchase these bonds digitally or through cheque.

    About the scheme

    • A citizen of India or a body incorporated in India will be eligible to purchase the bond
    • Such bonds can be purchased for any value in multiples of ₹1,000, ₹10,000, ₹10 lakh, and ₹1 crore from any of the specified branches of the State Bank of India
    • The purchaser will be allowed to buy electoral bonds only on due fulfillment of all the extant KYC norms and by making payment from a bank account
    • The bonds will have a life of 15 days (15 days time has been prescribed for the bonds to ensure that they do not become a parallel currency).
    • Donors who contribute less than ₹20,000 to political parties through purchase of electoral bonds need not provide their identity details, such as Permanent Account Number (PAN).

    Objective of the scheme

    • Transparency in political funding: To ensure that the funds being collected by the political parties is accounted money or clean money.

    Who can redeem such bonds?

    • The Electoral Bonds shall be encashed by an eligible Political Party only through a Bank account with the Authorized Bank.
    • Only the Political Parties registered under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (43 of 1951) and which secured not less than one per cent of the votes polled in the last General Election to the Lok Sabha or the State Legislative Assembly, shall be eligible to receive the Electoral Bonds.

    Restrictions that are done away

    • Earlier, no foreign company could donate to any political party under the Companies Act
    • A firm could donate a maximum of 7.5 percent of its average three-year net profit as political donations according to Section 182 of the Companies Act.
    • As per the same section of the Act, companies had to disclose details of their political donations in their annual statement of accounts.
    • The government moved an amendment in the Finance Bill to ensure that this proviso would not be applicable to companies in case of electoral bonds.
    • Thus, Indian, foreign and even shell companies can now donate to political parties without having to inform anyone of the contribution.

    Issues with the Scheme

    • Opaque funding: While the identity of the donor is captured, it is not revealed to the party or public. So transparency is not enhanced for the voter.
    • No IT break: Also income tax breaks may not be available for donations through electoral bonds. This pushes the donor to choose between remaining anonymous and saving on taxes.
    • No anonymity for donors: The privacy of the donor is compromised as the bank will know their identity.
    • Differential benefits: These bonds will help any party that is in power because the government can know who donated what money and to whom.
    • Unlimited donations: The electoral bonds scheme and amendments in the Finance Act of 2017 allows for “unlimited donations from individuals and foreign companies to political parties without any record of the sources of funding”.

    Way ahead

    • The worries over the electoral bond scheme, however, go beyond its patent unconstitutionality.
    • The concern about the possibility of misuse of funds is very pertinent.
    • The EC has been demanding that a law be passed to make political parties liable to get their accounts audited by an auditor from a panel suggested by the CAG or EC. This should get prominence.
    • Another feasible option is to establish a National Election Fund to which all donations could be directed.
    • This would take care of the imaginary fear of political reprisal of the donors.

    Crack Prelims 2023! Talk to our Rankers

    (Click) FREE 1-to-1 on-call Mentorship by IAS-IPS officers | Discuss doubts, strategy, sources, and more