đŸ’„Join UPSC 2027,2028 Mentorship (July Batch) + XFactor Notes & Microthemes PDF
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Polity

  • President’s address in Parliament

    Many Opposition parties announced their decision to boycott the President’s address to the joint sitting of Parliament at the start of the Budget session in solidarity with the farmers protesting against the three farm laws.

    Try this PYQ:

    Q. The President’s address is one of the most solemn occasions in the Parliamentary calendar. Discuss. Highlight its importance in Parliamentary Democracy.

    President’s address

    • The Constitution gives the President the power to address either House or a joint sitting of the two Houses of Parliament.
    • Article 87 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.
    • When the Constitution came into force, the President was required to address each session of Parliament.

    In the UK, the history of the monarch addressing the Parliament goes back to the 16th century.  In the US, President Gorge Washington addressed Congress for the first time in 1790.

    History & precedent

    • In India, the practice of the President addressing Parliament can be traced back to the Government of India Act of 1919.
    • This law gave the Governor-General the right of addressing the Legislative Assembly and the Council of State.
    • 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.
    • There was no address by him to the Constituent Assembly (Legislative) from 1947 to 1950.
    • And after the Constitution came into force, President Rajendra Prasad addressed members of Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha for the first time on January 31, 1950.

    By the govt, about the govt

    • The President’s speech essentially highlights the government’s policy priorities and plans for the upcoming year. The address provides a broad framework of the government’s agenda and direction.
    • There is no set format for the President’s speech. The Constitution states that the President shall “inform Parliament of the cause of the summons”.

    How it is done in India?

    • The speech that the President reads is the viewpoint of the government and is written by it.
    • Usually, in December, the PM’s Office asks the various ministries to start sending in their inputs for the speech.
    • A message also goes out from the Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs asking ministries to send information about any legislative proposals that need to be included in the President’s address.
    • All this information is aggregated and shaped into a speech, which is then sent to the President. The government uses the President’s address to make policy and legislative announcements.

    Assembly debates on the matter

    • 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 amendment was inspired by the US Constitution, according to which the President gives to Congress information on the State of the Union, and recommend measures as he shall judge necessary.
    • But Shah’s amendment was rejected by the Constituent Assembly.
    • The address of the President follows a general structure in which it highlights the government’s accomplishments from the previous year and sets the broad governance agenda for the coming year.

    Notable addresses till date

    • In 1985 President Giani Zail Singh announced that PM Rajiv Gandhi’s government intended to introduce a new national education policy and the anti-defection law.
    • In 1996, PM Vajpayee’s 13-day government announced its intention of giving statehood to Uttaranchal and Vananchal (Jharkhand) and 33 percent reservation to women in legislatures.
    • During his second stint in 1999, Vajpayee’s government mooted the idea of a fixed term for Lok Sabha and State Vidhan Sabhas.
    • After the devastating tsunami of 2004, PM Manmohan Singh’s government used the President’s Address to announce the creation of a national law for disaster management.

    Procedure & tradition

    • In the days following the President’s address, a motion is moved in the two Houses thanking the President for his address.
    • This is an occasion for MPs in the two Houses to have a broad debate on governance in the country.
    • The PM replies to the motion of thanks in both Houses and responds to the issues raised by MPs.
    • The motion is then put to vote and MPs can express their disagreement by moving amendments to the motion.

    Role of the opposition

    • Opposition MPs have been successful in getting amendments passed to the motion of thanks in Rajya Sabha on five occasions (1980, 1989, 2001, 2015, 2016).
    • They have been less successful in Lok Sabha. For example in 2018, Lok Sabha MPs tabled 845 amendments of which 375 were moved and negated.

    Significance of the address

    • 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.
    • The event is associated with ceremony and protocol.
    • The Lok Sabha Secretariat prepares extensively for this annual event.
    • In the past, it used to get 150 yards of red baize cloth from the President’s house for the ceremonial procession.

  • The right of life and environment

    The article highlights how climate change impacts the constitutional values and promises by affecting the vulnerable disproportionately and suggest the distinctly Indian paradigm of development.

    How democratic values are threatened by climate change

    • Over the last seven decades, India has made distinct progress, but many core development challenges persist and we are yet to fulfill our constitutional promise.
    • Climate change will only exacerbate existing inequalities through a range of cascading and coinciding crises.
    • These words from the Preamble — justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity — serve as reminders of the daunting path to achieving social democracy, especially in a warming world.
    • B R Ambedkar had said that to maintain democracy not merely in form, but also in fact it was essential not to be content with mere political democracy but to strive for social democracy as well.

    How climate change affects democratic values

    • Climate change is profoundly unjust.
    •  It will increasingly impinge upon our freedom of movement, and that it could deny equality of status and opportunity to millions of disadvantaged citizens like the forest-dwelling communities who have contributed least to the crisis and yet stand to be hit the hardest.
    • The evidence is clear that unless we rapidly move to reduce planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions, vast swathes of India could be inhospitable due to floods, droughts, heatwaves, and increasingly erratic and unpredictable monsoon rains.

    Call for action against climate change

    • The fraternity can particularly serve as a call to action for the powerful to direct their resources towards shaping India’s response to climate change and “assuring the dignity of the individual”, as framed in the Preamble.
    • Indian business and philanthropy can play a key role in building resilience by encouraging innovation, complementing the role of the state, and securing citizens’ legislated rights.
    • Climate philanthropy can help develop and pilot new solutions and inspire ambitious political action.
    • A plethora of opportunities are currently on the margins but could become mainstream drivers for the three key pillars of jobs, growth, and sustainability.
    • A distinctly Indian, climate-friendly development paradigm powered by clean energy could play an integral role in fostering social and economic justice by uplifting millions of Indians.
    • Our nation’s welfare depends on healing the broken relationship between a broken economy and a broken ecology.

    Constitutional mandate to protect the environment

    • The right to life enshrined in Article 21 is increasingly interpreted as a right to environment.
    • When this is read together with Articles 48A and 51A(g), there is a clear constitutional mandate to protect the environment that will only grow more important in the coming decades for citizens and the executive, legislature, and judiciary.
    • Central to these considerations is the need for a uniquely Indian climate narrative, one that is both by and for Indians.

    Consider the question “Our constitutional values must guide us to a distinctly Indian, climate-friendly development paradigm to fulfil the constitutional commitment to its citizens. Comment.”

    Conclusion

    India can build its own pathway to become a climate leader aiming to secure a future where both people and nature can thrive. Much of this work can be rooted in the constitutional framework that binds together millions of Indians despite their myriad differences — a framework that is progressive in scope and ambitious in vision.

  • Petition in SC seeks Guidelines for Electronic Media

    The Supreme Court has decided to examine a petition seeking the framing of guidelines outlining the broad regulatory paradigm within which the right to free speech of broadcasters and electronic media can be judicially regulated.

    What is the petition about?

    • The petition wants the court to consider substantial questions of law, including whether the electronic media enjoys greater freedom than ordinary citizens and whether they could only be subject to self-regulation.
    • It has questioned whether free speech entails misinformation, fake news, hate speech, propaganda, paid news, communal and derogatory reportage, incitement, etc.
    • It has asked whether regulation will amount to the curtailment of the Press if done within the parameters specified under “reasonable restrictions” of Article 19(2) of the Constitution.
    • The plea said the right to life and dignity envisaged the right of citizens to “free, fair and proportionate media reporting”.

    What is Article 19(2)?

    • This article authorizes the government to impose, by law, reasonable restrictions upon the freedom of speech and expression “in the interests of
 public order.”
    • To understand the Supreme Court’s public order jurisprudence, it is important to break down the sub-clause into its component parts and focus upon their separate meanings.
    • Specifically, three terms are important: “reasonable restrictions”, “in the interests of”, and “public order”.
    • Clause (2) enables the legislature to impose certain restrictions on free speech under the following heads:
    1. Security of the State
    2. Friendly relations with foreign states
    3. Public order
    4. Decency and morality
    5. Contempt of court
    6. Defamation
    7. Incitement to an offense and
    8. Sovereignty and integrity of India
    • Reasonable restrictions on these grounds can be imposed only by a duly enacted law and not by executive action.

    The task before the court

    • The principal issue before the court is to bring about a balance between the right to freedom of speech and the expression of the media and various other rights.
    • These include the competing right to information of the citizenry, the right to reputation and dignity as well as the interest of preserving peace and harmony in the nation.

  • What is Non-price Competition?

    Data privacy can take the form of non-price competition and abuse of dominance can lower privacy protection, a study by the Competition Commission of India (CCI) has said.

    Try this PYQ:

    Q.Right to Privacy is protected as an intrinsic part of Right to Life and Personal Liberty. Which of the following in the Constitution of India correctly and appropriately imply the above statements?

    (a) Article 14 and the provisions under the 42nd Amendment to the Constitution

    (b) Article 17 and the Directive Principles of State Policy in Part IV

    (c) Article 21 and the freedoms guaranteed in Part III

    (d) Article 24 and the provisions under the 44th Amendment to the Constitution

    What is Non-price Competition?

    • Non-price competition is a marketing strategy “in which one firm tries to distinguish its product or service from competing products on the basis of attributes like design and workmanship”.
    • It often occurs in imperfectly competitive markets as it exists between two or more producers that sell goods and services at the same prices but compete through non-price measures.
    • Such measures include marketing schemes and greater quality or any sustainable competitive advantage other than price.

    What is CCI’s observation?

    • The CCI study made observations about non-price factors such as quality of service (QoS), data speeds etc. which are likely to be the new drivers of competitive rivalry between service providers in the telecom sector.
    • CCI noted that an aspect of data in the context of competition in digital communications market is the conflict between allowing access and protecting consumer privacy.

    Privacy at stake

    • Abuse of dominance can take the form of lowering the privacy protection and therefore fall within the ambit of antitrust as low privacy standard implies lack of consumer welfare.
    • Privacy can take the form of non-price competition, said the CCI.
    • On other non-price factors of competition, CCI found that consumers ranked network coverage at the top followed by customer service despite their Privacy.

  • Appointment of the Law Commission

    The Supreme Court has asked the Home and Law Ministries to explain the nearly three-year-long lapse in making appointments to the Law Commission.

    Try this PYQ:

    Q.The power to increase the number of judges in the Supreme Court of India is vested in

    (a) The President of India

    (b) The Parliament

    (c) The Chief Justice of India

    (d) The Law Commission

    What is the news?

    • The posts of Chairperson and Members have been vacant ever since the 21st Law Commission under the former Supreme Court judge, Justice B.S. Chauhan completed its tenure in August.
    • The government approved the constitution of the 22nd Law Commission on February 19 last.
    • However, it has not appointed the Chairperson and Members to date.

    What is the Law Commission?

    • It is an executive body established by an order of the Government of India. The first law commission of independent India was established post Independence in 1955
    • Tenure: 3 Years
    • Function: Advisory body to the Ministry of Law and Justice for “Legal Reforms in India”
    • Recommendations: NOT binding
    • First Law Commission was established during the British Raj in 1834 by the Charter Act of 1833
    • Chairman: Macaulay; It recommended for the Codifications of the IPC, CrPC etc.

    Composition

    The 22nd Law Commission will be constituted for a period of three years from the date of publication of its Order in the Official Gazette. It will consist of:

    1. a full-time Chairperson;
    2. four full-time Members (including Member-Secretary)
    3. Secretary, Department of Legal Affairs as ex-officio Member;
    4. Secretary, Legislative Department as ex officio Member; and
    5. not more than five part-time Members.

    Terms of reference

    • The Law Commission shall, on a reference made to it by the Central Government or suo-motu, undertake research in law and review of existing laws in India for making reforms therein and enacting new legislations.
    • It shall also undertake studies and research for bringing reforms in the justice delivery systems for elimination of delay in procedures, speedy disposal of cases, reduction in the cost of litigation, etc.

    The Law Commission of India shall, inter-alia: –

    • identify laws that are no longer needed or relevant and can be immediately repealed
    • examine the existing laws in the light of DPSP and Preamble
    • consider and convey to the Government its views on any subject relating to law and judicial administration that may be specifically referred to it by the Government through Ministry of Law and Justice (Department of Legal Affairs);
    • Consider the requests for providing research to any foreign countries as may be referred to it by the Government through the Ministry of Law and Justice (Department of Legal Affairs);
    • take all such measures as may be necessary to harness law and the legal process in the service of the poor;
    • revise the Central Acts of general importance so as to simplify them and remove anomalies, ambiguities, and inequities

  • Mercy petition

    The article highlights the issue of delay in carrying out the dealth penalty and issues associated with it.

    Review of India’s position on the death penalty

    • The delay in carrying out the death penalty is one of the reasons to review India’s position on capital punishment.
    • The debate on the efficacy of the death penalty in reducing crime has been going on for several decades.
    • A few years ago, the issue of abolishing capital punishment was raised in the Rajya Sabha but was rejected by a voice vote.
    • The then Minister of State for Home Affairs stated that the government was not contemplating abolition of the death penalty.
    • In 2015, the Law Commission of India proposed abolishing the death penalty and sought the comments of States and Union Territories on the subject.
    • India figures among the 56 nations in the world that have retained the death penalty.

    Issue of delay in carrying out the punishment

    • The prolonged detention of death row convicts in prison is not just inhuman but also against the canons of justice.
    • The delay coupled with long years of solitary confinement leads to immense psychological trauma.
    • It is small wonder that the courts tend to take a lenient view and reduce the sentence when such cases of prolonged years of detention come before them.
    • A time frame needs to be fixed for the President to dispose of mercy petitions.
    •  Delays in investigations, court hearings, and administrative steps to be taken after the final verdict need to be inquired into, and responsibility fixed.

    Consider the question “Against the backdrop of delay in carrying out the dealth penalty in India, take the review of India’s position on the abolition of death penalty.”

    Conclusion

    With the changing time, we must change and so do the way we punish people. Capital punishment should be abolished in the country and until then, the inordinate delays in carrying out punishment should be avoided.

  • Defending liberty against selective prosecution

    The article examines the issue of selective prosecution and Indian judiciary’s approach toward it. It also highlights the importance of recent Goswami case.

    Selective prosecution: Form of abuse of state power

    • Recently the case involving bail application of a T.V. anchor brought to the fore issue of selective prosecution.
    • The illegal selection of accused based on grounds prohibited by the Constitution is called “selective prosecution”.
    • In case of selective prosecution, the police and enforcement agencies selectively target political and ideological opponents of the ruling dispensation to interrogate, humiliate, harass, arrest, torture and imprison.
    • It is one of the oldest, most pernicious and widespread forms of abuse of state power.

    How it is illegal: Two independent legal issues

    1) Exercise of prosecutorial discretion

    • The applicable legal standard is that while the police and prosecutors in common law jurisdictions enjoy vast discretion in deciding who they may pursue and who they may spare.
    • However, the choice of accused must not be based on grounds that violate Constitutional rights, including the Article 14 right to equal protection of the law.
    • The accused should not be selected, either explicitly or covertly, on constitutionally prohibited grounds.

    2) Merit of the case filed

    • When the choice of accused runs contrary to the Constitution, the entire criminal proceeding is vitiated, irrespective of the determination of the second issue, viz., whether the accused are convicted or acquitted on the charges brought against them.
    • Once the proceedings fail under the first issue, there is no legal basis to proceed to the second issue., i.e., trial on the merits of the case.
    • The theory is that the Constitution cannot be violated to uphold the law — such an approach would spell doom for the Constitution.
    • The selective prosecution claim must be adjudicated as a threshold issue, with the prosecution being quashed at the outset of the criminal case if the claim is justified.
    • In the context of this discussion, the constitutionally prohibited ground we are confronting in India is the political or ideological affiliation of the accused.
    • It is an arbitrary ground that violates the Article 14 guarantee of equal protection of the law.

    Approach of judiciary

    • Our courts have not recognised selective prosecution as an independent claim.
    • This is because courts assume that lawfulness of prosecution can only be taken up after the trial, if the accused is acquitted.
    • The 2018 Report of the Law Commission on ‘Wrongful Prosecution (Miscarriage of Justice): Legal Remedies’ discusses remedies for wrongful prosecution available only if and after the accused is acquitted.
    • Remedy after acquittal comes far too late, well after a brutal and long drawn out criminal justice process that upends the lives of the victims.
    • Also, the right against selective prosecution cannot be extinguished by conviction.
    • Separate from post-acquittal actions for wrongful prosecution (which will still be available), the claim of selective prosecution is a threshold issue that is required to be adjudicated at the outset of criminal proceedings even during the investigation stage irrespective of the merit of the charges.

    Importance of Goswami case

    • The case provides a much needed and long awaited legal opening to strengthen the recognition and use of the selective prosecution claim in India to counter politically coloured prosecution.
    • The judgment says, “Courts should be alive to the needof ensuring that the law does not become a ruse for targeted harassment ”.
    • The Goswami judgment also quotes the 2018 Supreme Court holding in Romila Thapar v. Union of India that, “[T]he basic entitlement of every citizen who is faced with allegations of criminal wrongdoing is that the investigative process should be fair. This is an integral component of the guarantee against arbitrariness under Article 14 and of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21.”

    Consider the question “How selective prosecution could threten the liberty of person? How Indian judiciary approaches the issue of selective prosecution and what are the issue with the approach adopted by the judiciary?”

    Conclusion

    To strengthen the protection of civil liberty, equality and democracy, it is time our courts — at all levels — recognise selective prosecution as a threshold constitutional defence against the abuse of police and prosecutorial power.

  • TN Governor to decide on Ex-PM assassin Pardon

    Tamil Nadu Governor would take a decision as per the Constitution in the next three or four days on the plea for release filed by A.G. Perarivalan, who is undergoing life imprisonment for the assassination of former PM Rajiv Gandhi in 1991.

    Give your personal views in favour and against Capital Punishment in the comment box.

    What is the news?

    • The court noted in its short order that the Solicitor General submitted that the application filed by the petitioner Perarivalan under Article 161 of the Constitution.
    • The TN State Cabinet had earlier made the recommendation to remit the life sentences of seven convicts, including Perarivalan in September 2018.
    • The new turn of events when the Additional Solicitor General for the Centre, had argued recently that the pleas for pardon and release should go to the President instead of the Governor.

    What does Pardon mean?

    • A pardon is a government/executive decision to allow a person to be absolved of guilt for an alleged crime or other legal offense as if the act never occurred.

    Why need a Pardon?

    • Pardons can be granted when individuals are deemed to have demonstrated that they have “paid their debt to society”, or are otherwise considered to be deserving of them.
    • Pardons are sometimes offered to persons who were either wrongfully convicted or who claim that they were wrongfully convicted.
    • Pardons are sometimes seen as a mechanism for combating corruption, allowing a particular authority to circumvent a flawed judicial process to free someone that is seen as wrongly convicted.

    What does Article 161 say?

    • Article 161 of the Constitution provides the Governor with the power to remit or commute the sentence of any prisoner.
    • The Governor’s decision will be subject to judicial review by the constitutional courts.

    Supreme court’s observations

    • The Constitution Bench in 2015, in a majority decision, had held that the States cannot unilaterally remit the sentences of life convicts in cases investigated by a Central agency under a Central law.
    • The assassination case was probed by the CBI.
    • In compliance with the 2015 verdict, the Tamil Nadu government wrote to the Centre in 2016, proposing the grant of remission to the convicts. The State wanted the Centre to concur.
    • After a wait of over two years, the Centre rejected the State’s proposal, saying this was an unparalleled act in the annals of crimes committed in this country.

    Arguments in Perarivalan’s petition seeking pardon

    • Perarivalan had been pleading for release citing that he was 19 when he was arrested.
    • He was the only male child of his parents, there were no records of criminal antecedents, and that he had excellent conduct in his entire prison life.
    • His petition also cited UG and PG degrees, and that he was the university topper, Gold medalist in diploma in DTP, and that he completed more than eight diploma and certificate courses during his prison term.
    • His probation officer gave a report about lapses in recording his confession statement that handed out maximum punishment in his case.

    Basis of his innocence

    • Perarivalan cannot be called innocent before the law as he continues to be a convicted prisoner serving imprisonment.
    • He was accused of having bought two battery cells for Sivarasan, the LTTE man who masterminded the conspiracy.
    • He was sentenced to death based on this crucial confession statement.

    Significance of the convicts’ release

    • The release of seven convicts is a demand raised by not only the ruling party of TN but the main opposition too.
    • All TN politicians voiced that the judiciary should be able to reform and let them live as good citizens to uphold the high values of reformatory justice and restitution.

  • Supreme Court dismisses Aadhaar Review Petition

    The Supreme Court, in a majority view (4:1), dismissed a series of petitions seeking a review of its 2018 judgment upholding the Lok Sabha Speaker’s certification of Aadhaar law as a Money Bill and its subsequent passage in Parliament.

    Try this PYQ:

    Consider the following statements:

    1. Aadhaar card can be used as a proof of citizenship or domicile.
    2. Once issued, Aadhaar number cannot be deactivated or omitted by the Issuing Authority.

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    (a) 1 only

    (b) 2 only

    (c) Both 1 and 2

    (d) Neither 1 nor 2

    Backgrounder

    • The review petitions had highlighted how the Aadhaar Act was passed as a Money Bill by superseding the Rajya Sabha. It was called a “fraud on the Constitution”.
    • The review petition had argued that the Aadhaar Act clearly did not fall within the ambit of Article 110 (1) of the Constitution, which restricted Money Bills to certain specific fields only.

    What is a Review Petition?

    • Article 137 of the Constitution provides that subject to provisions of any law and rule made under Article 145 the Supreme Court of India has the power to review any judgment pronounced (or order made) by it.
    • Thus the binding decision of the Supreme Court/High Court can be reviewed in the Review Petition.

    Aadhaar Case: Two questions for review

    • Two questions had come up for review regarding the five-judge Aadhaar Bench’s judgment in 2018.
    • One, whether the Speaker’s decision to declare a proposed law as Money Bill was “final” and cannot be challenged in court.
    • The second, whether the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016 was correctly certified as a ‘Money Bill’ under Article 110(1) of the Constitution.

    What is the majority Judgment?

    • On the first question, the majority judgment in 2018 said the Speaker’s decision could be challenged in court only under “certain circumstances”.
    • On the second, it concluded that the Aadhaar Act was rightly called a Money Bill.

    Back2Basics: Money Bill

    • A Bill is said to be a Money Bill if it only contains provisions related to taxation, borrowing of money by the government, expenditure from or receipt to the Consolidated Fund of India.
    • Bills that only contain provisions that are incidental to these matters would also be regarded as Money Bills.
    • A Money Bill may only be introduced in Lok Sabha, on the recommendation of the President as per Article 110 of the Constitution.
    • Then, it is transmitted to the Rajya Sabha for its recommendations. Following this, it may be sent to the Rajya Sabha for its recommendations, which Lok Sabha may reject if it chooses to.
    • If such recommendations are not given within 14 days, it will be deemed to be passed by Parliament.

    How is a Money Bill different from a financial bill?

    • While all Money Bills are Financial Bills, all Financial Bills are not Money Bills.
    • For example, the Finance Bill which only contains provisions related to tax proposals would be a Money Bill.
    • However, a Bill that contains some provisions related to taxation or expenditure, but also covers other matters would be considered as a Financial Bill.

  • Question Hour to resume during Budget Session

    Question Hour, which had been suspended by the government during the monsoon session, will resume when Parliament meets for the budget session.

    Q.Discuss the various instruments of Parliamentary Control in India.

    Must read edition: [Burning Issue] Quashing of the Question Hour

    What is Question Hour?

    • Question Hour is the liveliest hour in Parliament. It is during this one hour that MPs ask questions of ministers and hold them accountable for the functioning of their ministries.
    • Prior to Independence, the first question asked of government was in 1893. It was on the burden cast on village shopkeepers who had to provide supplies to touring government officers.
    • The questions that MPs ask are designed to elicit information and trigger suitable action by ministries.
    • Over the last 70 years, MPs have successfully used this parliamentary device to shine a light on government functioning.
    • Their questions have exposed financial irregularities and brought data and information regarding government functioning to the public domain.
    • With the broadcasting since 1991, Question Hour has become one of the most visible aspects of parliamentary functioning.

    Its evolution

    • The right to question the executive has been exercised by members of the House from the colonial period.
    • The first Legislative Council in British India under the Charter Act, 1853, showed some degree of independence by giving members the power to ask questions to the executive.
    • Later, the Indian Council Act of 1861 allowed members to elicit information by means of questions.
    • However, it was the Indian Council Act, 1892, which formulated the rules for asking questions including short notice questions.
    • The next stage of the development of procedures related to questions came up with the framing of rules under the Indian Council Act, 1909, which incorporated provisions for asking supplementary questions by members.
    • The Montague-Chelmsford reforms brought forth a significant change in 1919 by incorporating a rule that the first hour of every meeting was earmarked for questions. Parliament has continued this tradition.
    • In 1921, there was another change. The question, on which a member desired to have an oral answer, was distinguished by him with an asterisk, a star. This marked the beginning of starred questions.

    Its significance

    • Question Hour is not only an opportunity for the members to raise questions, but it is a parliamentary device primarily meant for exercising legislative control over executive actions.
    • The government’s actions erode the constitutional mandate of parliamentary oversight over executive actions as envisaged under Article 75 (3) of the Indian Constitution.