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

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Polity

  • 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.

  • Power, problems and potential of federalism

    The article analyses the issues of distribution of powers under the Constitution and the issues linked with it.

    Debate on the role of Centre and states

    • There is an argument for the need to re-examine the distribution of powers under the Seventh Schedule so as to rationalise the Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSSs).
    • Under the Centrally Sponsored SchemesCentre extends support in sectors pertaining to the State List.
    • Spending by the Centre on a state subject like health and need for states’ contribute to a Union subject like defence is considered.
    • However, the constitutional assignments between the Centre and subnational governments in federations, are done broadly on the basis of their respective comparative advantage.
    • That is why the provision of national public goods is in the federal domain and those with the state-level public service span are assigned to the states.

    3 settled issues in the debate

    • The debate seems to have settled on at least three counts.
    • One, the federal organisation of powers can be revisited and reframed.
    • Two, the CSSs must continue but they should be restructured.
    • Three, there is a need for an appropriate forum to discuss the complex and contentious issue of reviewing federal organisation of powers and restructuring of central transfers.

    Review of the subjects in lists

    • In spite of health being a state subject, the response to collective threats linked to the subject required some kind of organisation of federal responsibilities on a functional basis.
    • A typical response is to recommend shifting subjects to the Concurrent List to enable an active role for the Centre.
    • The High-Level Group, constituted by the 15th Finance Commission, recommended shifting health from the State to the Concurrent List.
    • A similar recommendation was made earlier by the Ashok Chawla Committee for water.

    Challenges

    • Shifting of subjects from the State to Concurrent List in times of acute sub-nationalism, deep territorialisation and competitive federalism is going to be challenging.

    Way forward

    • The most collective threats and the challenges of coping with emerging risks of sustainability are linked to either the State List subjects or require actions by states — water, agriculture, biodiversity, pollution, climate change.
    • This extended role of ensuring security against threats to sustainability of resources forms a new layer of considerations.
    • This should define the contours of a coordinated response between the Centre and States — as it happened during the pandemic.
    • In fact, such threats and challenges require the states to play a dominant role.
    • At the same time, the Centre must expand its role beyond the mitigation of inter-state externalities and address the challenges of security and sustainability.

    Consider the question “The federal organisation of powers under the Constitution’s Seventh Schedule needs review. In light of this, examine the problems faced by the distribution and suggest the challenge the review would face.”

    Conclusion

    The ongoing friction between the Centre and the states over GST reforms tells us that consensus-building is not a one-time exercise. It has to allow sustained dialogue and deliberation. Perhaps it is time to revisit the proposal for an elevated and empowered Inter-State Council.

  • What is Queen’s Counsel?

    India has suggested Pakistan appointing a Queen’s Counsel for the Kulbhushan Jadhav case to ensure a free and fair trial.

    Queen’s Counsel

    • In the UK and in some Commonwealth countries, a Queen’s Counsel during the reign of a queen is a lawyer who is appointed by the monarch of the country to be one of ’Her Majesty’s Counsel learned in the law’.
    • The position originated in England.
    • Some Commonwealth countries have either abolished the position, or re-named it so as to remove monarchical connotations, for example, ’Senior Counsel’ or ’Senior Advocate’.
    • Queen’s Counsel is an office, conferred by the Crown that is recognised by courts.
    • Senior Advocate Harish Salve earlier this year has been appointed as Queen’s Counsel (QC) for the courts of England and Wales.

  • Nationalism and the crisis of federalism

    The article analyses the challenges federalism in India faces and the important role played by the division of states based on the languages.

    Three conceptions of nationalism in India

    • Following three conceptions of nationalism were prevalent in India before independence.
    • The first, the idea that a community with a strongly unified culture must have a single state of its own.
    • The second saw the nation as defined by a common culture whose adherents must have a state of their own.
    • But this common culture was not ethno-religious.
    •  It conceives common culture in terms of a strong idea of unity that marginalises or excludes other particular identities.
    • A third nationalism accepts that communities nourished by distinct, territorially concentrated regional cultures have the capacity to design states of their own as also educational, legal, economic, and other institutions.
    • This may be called a coalescent nationalism consistent with a fairly strong linguistic federalism.
    • The central state associated with it is not multi-national.
    • At best, it is a multi-national state without labels, one that does not call itself so; a self-effacing multi-national state.

    Suspicion of linguistic identities

    • After Partition, the Indian ruling class began to view with suspicion the political expression of even linguistic identities.
    •  It was feared that federation structured along ethno-linguistic lines might tempt politicians to mobilise permanently on the basis of language.
    • The second fear was about an increase in the likelihood of inter-ethnic violence, encourage separatism and eventually lead to India’s break up.
    • Thus, when the Constitution came into force in 1950, India adopted unitary, civic nationalism as its official ideology.

    Formation of states on linguistic basis and its implications

    • A unitary mindset shaped by the experience of a centralised colonial state was resurrected.
    • The second tier of government was justified in functional terms, not on ethical grounds of the recognition of group cultures.
    • Following the Committee’s recommendations, States were reorganised in 1956.
    • India slowly became a coalescent nation-state, moving from the ‘holding together’ variety to what is called the ‘coming together’ form of (linguistic) federalism.
    • This meant that regional parties were stronger than earlier in their own regions and at the centre.
    • This let to more durable centre because it was grounded more on the consent and participation of regional groups that, at another level, were also self-governing.
    • Indian federalism also attempted to remove its rigidities by incorporating asymmetries in the relation between the Centre and different States.
    • Treating all States as equals required the acknowledgement of their specific needs and according them differential treatment.

    Conclusion

    Coalescent nationalism has served India well, benefiting several groups in India. True, it has not worked as well in India’s border areas such as the North-east and Kashmir. But their problems can only be resolved by deepening not abandoning coalescent nationalism.

  • What are Supplementary Grants?

    Finance Minister has tabled the first batch of Supplementary Demands for Grants for this financial year in the Lok Sabha.

    Supplementary Demand for Grants

    • Article 115 of the constitution provides for Supplementary, additional or excess grants. (Note: Article 116 provides for Votes on account, votes of credit and exceptional grants.)
    • They are additional grants which are required to meet the expenditure of the government
    • Their demand is presented when the authorized amounts are insufficient and need for additional expenditure has arisen.

    Why need supplementary grants?

    • When actual expenditure incurred exceeds the approved grants of the Parliament, the Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Railways presents a Demand for Excess Grant.
    • It is needed for government expenditure over and above the amount for which Parliamentary approval was already obtained during the Budget session.
    • When grants, authorised by the Parliament, fall short of the required expenditure, an estimate is presented before the Parliament for Supplementary or Additional grants.
    • These grants are presented and passed by the Parliament before the end of the financial year.

    Who notices such grants?

    • The Comptroller and Auditor General of India bring such excesses to the notice of the Parliament.
    • The Public Accounts Committee examines these excesses and gives recommendations to the Parliament.

    What are other grants?

    • Excess Grant: It is the grant in excess of the approved grants for meeting the requisite expenses of the government.
    • Additional Grant: It is granted when a need has arisen during the current financial year for supplementary or additional expenditure upon some new service not contemplated in the Budget for that year.
    • Token Grant: When funds to meet proposed expenditure on a new service can be made available by re-appropriation, demand for the grant of a token sum may be submitted to the vote of the House and, if the House assents to the demand, funds may be so made available.

  • Departmental Standing committees

    The article analyses the issue of tenure of the members of the Department related committees and suggest the changes to the rules about the tenure.

    Context

    • There was speculation in the media that the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha, M. Venkaiah Naidu, is keen on amending the rules to give them a fixed tenure of two years.

    Why 2-year tenure?

    • According to the Rajya Sabha Rules, the term of office of the “members” of the committees shall not exceed one year.
    • Thus, it is the term of office of the members and not that of the committees per se that is one year.
    • The tenurial issue has to be looked at against the backdrop of the fact that the Rajya Sabha itself undergoes partial biennial renewal.
    • While Lok Sabha has a fixed tenure of five years, unless sooner dissolved.
    • Given these facts,2-year tenure suggestion is in consonance with the biennial partial reconstitution of the Rajya Sabha.

    Need to rethink the tenurial prescription

    • In case of Lok Sabha, the major reconstitution takes place when a new Lok Sabha is elected, that is normally after five years.
    • Since Rajya Sabha elects new member every two years and the Lok Sabha after every five years, it is only once in 10 years that the requirement of major reshuffle of the Standing Committees in both the Houses is expected to coincide.
    • Given the different election schedules of the two Houses, there is perhaps no need to mandate the same term for the members of both the Houses.

    Way forward

    • There are 24 Department-related Standing Committees, each with a membership of 31 (10 of the Rajya Sabha and 21 of the Lok Sabha).
    • They can accommodate 240 members of the Rajya Sabha and 504 members of the Lok Sabha.
    • Therefore, once a member is nominated to a committee, he should be allowed to continue till he retires or otherwise discontinues the membership in order that the committee is able to benefit from his experience and expertise.
    • The Standing Committees are permanent. Hence, there should be no difficulty if the terms of the members of the two Houses on these committees are different, in consonance with the tenure of the Houses themselves.
    • Given these facts, it would stand to reason if the tenure of Department-related Standing Committees is prescribed differently for the two Houses.
    • The Rules could also provide that casual vacancies may be filled in by the Presiding Officers.

    Conclusion

    While making changes to the rules the Chairman and the Speaker should consider the different tenure for the members of the two Houses on the Department-related committees.

  • Understanding the significance of Kesavananda Bharati case

    The article revisits the impact and significance of the case for the democracy in India.

    Understanding the Basic Structure doctrine

    • Basic Structure and essential features doctrine was expounded in the Kesavananda Bharati case.
    • In the case, the validity of the 29th amendment which immunised, in the Ninth Schedule Kerala’s takeover of the religious mutt’s property was challenged.
    • Basic structure is the power of judicial review and essential features are what the Court identifies as such in the exercise of that power.
    • Justice Bhagwati remarkably enunciated as an essential feature the “harmony” between fundamental rights and directive principles.
    • The crucial message though is that the apex court has, in the rarest of rare cases, the constituent power to pronounce a constitutional amendment invalid.

    Limits on the powers of Supreme Court

    • The Court is bound by the “golden triangle” of rights created by Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution.
    • Court must derive the “spirit” of the Constitution by reference to the provisions of the Constitution.
    • Since 1973, the evidence shows the Apex Court has shown utmost democratic responsibility and rectitude in interpreting the doctrine of BSEF.

    Consider the question asked by the UPSC in 2019 “Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution is limited power and it cannot be enlarged into absolute power”. In light of this statement explain whether parliament under article 368 of the constitution can destroy the Basic Structure of the Constitution by expanding its amending power? “

    Conclusion

    The ultimate message of BSEF doctrine is not merely to set limits to the power of the managers of people, but to make little by little the tasks of emancipation less onerous.

  • New Bill on powers of Delhi government, Lieutenant Governor

    The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) is likely to introduce legislation in the ongoing Parliament session to amend a 1991 Act pertaining to the powers and function of the Delhi government and the Lieutenant Governor.

    Try this PYQ:

    Q. Consider the following statements

    1. Union territories are not represented in the Rajya Sabha.
    2. It is within the purview of the Chief Election Commissioner to adjudicate the election disputes.
    3. According to the constitution of India, the Parliament consists of the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha only.

    Which of the statement(s) given above is/are correct?

    (a) Only 1

    (b) 2 and 3

    (c) 1 and 3 only

    (d) None

    Key propositions of the Bill

    • The Bill proposes to clearly spell out the functions of the Council of Ministers and the Lieutenant-Governor (L-G) by giving more discretionary powers to the L-G.
    • As per the Bill, the L-G could act in his discretion in any matter that is beyond the purview of the powers of the Legislative Assembly of Delhi in matters related to the All India (Civil) Services and the Anti Corruption Branch.
    • It will also give more teeth to the L-G, and the validity of any decision taken as per such discretion shall not be questioned.

    Back2Basics: Special provisions for New Delhi

    • The Union Territory of Delhi with a Legislative Assembly came into being in 1991 under Article 239AA of the Constitution inserted by ‘the Constitution (Sixty-ninth Amendment) Act, 1991’.
    • It said that the UT of Delhi shall be called the National Capital Territory of Delhi.
    • The administrator thereof appointed under Article 239 shall be designated as the Lieutenant-Governor.
    • According to the existing Act, the Legislative Assembly of Delhi has the power to make laws in all matters except public order, police, and land.

  • MPLAD Scheme

    While extending support to the move for salary-cut, most Members of Parliament have demanded that the MPLADS funds, meant for development work in constituencies, be restored immediately.

    Try this PYQ:

    Q.With reference to the Parliament of India, consider the following statements:

    1. A private member’s bill is a bill presented by a Member of Parliament who is not elected but only nominated by the President of India.
    2. Recently, a private member’s bill has been passed in the Parliament of India for the first time in its history.

    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

    What is the MPLAD scheme?

    • The Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS) is a programme first launched during the Narasimha Rao Government in 1993.
    • It was aimed towards providing funds for developmental works recommended by individual MPs.

    Funds available

    • The MPs then were entitled to recommend works to the tune of Rs 1 crore annually between 1994-95 and 1997-98, after which the annual entitlement was enhanced to Rs 2 crore.
    • The UPA government in 2011-12 raised the annual entitlement to Rs 5 crore per MP.

    Implementation

    • To implement their plans in an area, MPs have to recommend them to the District Authority of the respective Nodal District.
    • The District Authorities then identify Implementing Agencies which execute the projects.
    • The respective District Authority is supposed to oversee the implementation and has to submit monthly reports, audit reports, and work completion reports to the Nodal District Authority.
    • The MPLADS funds can be merged with other schemes such as MGNREGA and Khelo India.

    Guidelines for MPLADS implementation

    • The document ‘Guidelines on MPLADS’ was published by the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation in June 2016 in this regard.
    • It stated the objective of the scheme to enable MPs to recommend works of developmental nature with emphasis on the creation of durable community assets based on the locally felt needs in their Constituencies.
    • Right from the inception of the Scheme, durable assets of national priorities viz. drinking water, primary education, public health, sanitation and roads, etc. should be created.
    • It recommended MPs to works costing at least 15 per cent of their entitlement for the year for areas inhabited by Scheduled Caste population and 7.5 per cent for areas inhabited by ST population.
    • It lays down a number of development works including construction of railway halt stations, providing financial assistance to recognised bodies, cooperative societies, installing CCTV cameras etc.

  • [pib] Status of Mahanadi Tribunal

    At present, the Mahanadi dispute is under adjudication in the Tribunal under Section 5 (2) of Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956

    Note the interrelation between the Article 262 and 253.They contain provisions related to international and interstate water sharing.

    Mahanadi Tribunal

    • The Central Government has constituted Mahanadi Water Disputes Tribunal in 2018 under Section 4 of the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956.
    • It is set to adjudicate on water disputes between the riparian States of Odisha and Chhattisgarh
    • The tribunal is expected to give its verdict within a period of three years.
    • Provided that if the decision cannot be given for an unavoidable reason, within a period of three years, the Central Government may extend the period for a further period not exceeding two years.

    What is the dispute about?

    • Chhattisgarh has been constructing dams and weirs (small dams) upstream the Mahanadi. This is being allegedly carried on without consulting Odisha.
    • It would affect the flow of the river downstream and affect drinking water supply. Also, it would impact the irrigation facilities in Odisha and adversely affect the interests of the farmers.
    • Moreover, the weirs and other projects would impact the flow of water in the Hirakud reservoir, a multipurpose river valley project, which is a lifeline for many in the state.

    Back2Basics: Water Disputes Resolution in India

    • The Interstate River Water Disputes Act, 1956 (IRWD Act) is an Act of the Parliament of India enacted under Article 262 of Constitution of India on the eve of the reorganization of states on the linguistic basis to resolve the water disputes that would arise in the use, control and distribution of an interstate river[1] or river valley.
    • Article 262 of the Indian Constitution provides a role for the Central government in adjudicating conflicts surrounding inter-state rivers that arise among the state/regional governments.
    • This Act further has undergone amendments subsequently and its most recent amendment took place in the year 2002.
    • A/c to art 262, the Parliament may by law provide for the adjudication of any dispute or complaint with respect to the use, distribution or control of the waters of, or in, any inter-State river or river valley.
    • Parliament may by law provide that neither the Supreme Court nor any other court shall exercise jurisdiction in respect of any such dispute or complaint.

    Note: Any river water sharing treaty made with other countries, has to be ratified by the Parliament as per Article 253 after deciding the share of the Indian riparian states per Article 262 to make the treaty constitutionally valid or enforceable by the judiciary. The government has signed Indus Waters Treaty with Pakistan, Ganga water-sharing treaty with Bangladesh, etc. without the ratification by the Parliament and the consent of concerned riparian states per Article 252.