The recent government initiatives, such as “Mission Karmayogi,” aimed at enhancing the capacity of civil servants, underscores the ongoing dialogue about reforming India’s “steel frame” of governance.
What is the current state of India’s bureaucratic structure?
India’s bureaucratic structure, particularly the Indian Administrative Service (IAS), often referred to as the “steel frame” of Indian governance, has historically been crucial in administration but is now struggling with several issues:
Politicization: Frequent transfers and promotions based on political loyalty rather than merit have undermined the professionalism and morale of IAS officers.
This politicization hampers the development of domain expertise, as officers are rotated across various departments without sufficient time to specialise in any particular area.
Corruption and Inefficiency: India ranks moderately on the World Bank’s government effectiveness index, indicating persistent corruption and inefficiencies in policy implementation.
Centralized Governance: The current governance model under the Prime Minister has led to increased centralization of power in the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO).
What are the previous efforts taken to reform the bureaucracy in India?
Commission recommendation:
First Administrative Reforms Commission (1st ARC, 1966): Highlighted the need for specialization within the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) to improve efficiency by transitioning it into a functional service focused on specific governance areas.
Second Administrative Reforms Commission (2nd ARC, 2005): Proposed a transparent lateral entry process for domain experts, mandatory training for civil servants throughout their careers, and the establishment of a National Institute of Public Administration to enhance public administration education and expand the candidate pool for civil services.
Central Government initiative:
Mission Karmayogi (2020): A capacity-building program designed to create a citizen-centric, future-ready civil service by promoting continuous learning and skill enhancement through a dedicated digital platform.
Lateral Entry Reforms: Introduced to integrate specialized talent from diverse sectors into senior civil service roles.
Important judgments given by the Supreme Court:
T.S.R. Subramanian v. Union of India (2013): The Supreme Court barred civil servants from following oral political directives, and mandated the creation of a Civil Services Board (CSB) to oversee transfers and postings for ensuring stability and reducing arbitrariness.
Delhi Government Services Case (2023): The Supreme Court upheld Delhi’s legislative authority over services, reinforcing federalism and ensuring accountability of officers operating under the Delhi government’s jurisdiction.
How do proposed reforms impact the independence and specialization of civil servants?
The proposed reforms aim to modernize India’s bureaucracy by enhancing independence, accountability, and specialization among civil servants.
Lateral Entry Initiatives: The government has introduced lateral entry into senior bureaucratic positions to bring in domain experts from outside the traditional IAS framework.
Performance-Based Promotions: Recommendations from various administrative reform commissions (Second ARC, set up in 2005) suggest linking promotions to measurable performance rather than seniority.
This shift could enhance accountability but may also meet resistance from entrenched interests within the IAS.
Protection Against Arbitrary Transfers: Proposals such as the Civil Services Standards, Performance, and Accountability Bill aim to protect bureaucrats from politically motivated transfers.
Implementing such measures could bolster the autonomy of civil servants.
What risks are associated with centralizing decision-making in the bureaucracy?
Reduced Autonomy: Centralization can diminish the independence of senior bureaucrats, making them more susceptible to political pressures.
This undermines their ability to act as effective policy executors and can lead to a culture of compliance rather than innovation.
Bottlenecks in Implementation: A centralized approach may create bottlenecks in policy implementation, as decision-making becomes concentrated at the top.
This can slow down responses to emerging challenges and reduce the overall efficiency of governance.
Neglect of Bureaucratic Expertise: By sidelining bureaucratic insights in favor of top-down directives, there is a risk that valuable expertise within the civil service goes unutilized. This could hinder effective policymaking and lead to poor outcomes in governance.
How can ancient Indic principles enhance modern governance?
Ethical Leadership and Accountability (Raj Dharma): Ancient Indic principles emphasize leaders as servants of the people, prioritizing fairness, justice, and public welfare. This aligns with modern demands for transparent and accountable governance.
Inclusive Development (Antyodaya): The concept of Antyodaya advocates for uplifting the marginalized and ensuring that governance benefits all sections of society, especially the most disadvantaged, which is essential for achieving equitable development.
Sustainability and Environmental Harmony (LiFE & Karmayogi): Indic principles stress balance with nature and responsible living, guiding modern governance towards sustainable development practices. Additionally, the Karmayogi concept promotes continuous skill-building for public servants to enhance governance effectiveness.
In what ways can citizen engagement be improved through Indic ideas?
Participative Governance (Sab Ka Prayas): The concept of Sab Ka Prayas emphasizes collective effort, where citizens are actively involved in decision-making and implementation processes.
Empathy and Responsibility (P2G2 – Pro-People Good Governance): By incorporating P2G2, which stresses sensitivity, commitment, and a sense of responsibility towards the people.
Citizens can be more engaged through empathetic governance that prioritizes their well-being and fosters trust in public institutions.
Empowerment through Education and Awareness (Antyodaya and Raj Dharma): Indic ideas like Antyodaya and Raj Dharma promote the empowerment of all individuals, particularly the marginalized, through education and awareness.
Way forward:
Empower Decentralized Governance: Strengthen local and state-level administrative autonomy to reduce over-reliance on centralized decision-making, enabling more responsive and effective governance.
Implement Performance-Based Reforms: Institutionalize meritocratic measures such as performance-linked promotions, lateral entry, and protection against arbitrary transfers to foster accountability, specialization, and independence among civil servants.
Efficient bureaucracy: India can draw valuable lessons from the proposed Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) initiative to make a more efficient bureaucracy in India.
DOGE is a proposed initiative introduced by USA President which aims to streamline federal bureaucracy.
Mains PYQ:
Q Has the Cadre-based Civil Services Organization been the cause of slow in India? Critically examine. (UPSC IAS/2014)
The SC has emphasized the importance of individual dignity within the context of Article 21 in several landmark cases.
Discussions around individual dignity have again gained traction, especially when former SC Justice Kurian Joseph emphasized that the Constitution prioritizes individual dignity, making it a vital topic for contemporary legal discourse.
How effectively does the Constitution safeguard individual dignity?
The Constitution of India is designed to protect individual dignity through a framework that entitles citizens to fundamental rights.
Entrenchment of Individual Rights: The Constitution explicitly guarantees individual rights, aiming to protect the freedom and dignity of all citizens.
Fundamental Rights under Part III of the Constitution, such as the Right to Equality (Article 14), Right to Freedom (Articles 19-22), and Right to Life and Personal Liberty (Article 21), explicitly safeguard individual dignity.
Checks and Balances: The Constitution establishes institutional checks and balances to prevent the abuse of power.
In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978), the Supreme Court broadened the scope of Article 21, holding that any law depriving personal liberty must meet the standards of fairness, justice, and reasonableness.
Political Equality: By affirming political equality among citizens, the Constitution enables individuals to participate actively in the democratic process.
Article 326 guarantees universal adult suffrage, enabling all citizens to participate equally in democratic processes, affirming their political dignity and sense of inclusion.
What role do societal attitudes and systemic issues play in protecting dignity?
Societal attitudes and systemic issues significantly influence the protection of individual dignity under the Constitution:
Community Identity vs. Individual Rights: The emphasis on community identity whether based on caste, religion, or nation can undermine individual dignity. When societal attitudes prioritize group identities over individual rights, it can lead to discrimination and marginalization.
Trust and Cooperation: A lack of trust among citizens can hinder collective efforts to uphold constitutional values. When individuals measure each other against rigid identities, it subverts the freedom that the Constitution aims to protect.
Oligarchic Power: Concentration of wealth and power can distort democratic processes, leading to a situation where certain groups’ interests overshadow individual rights. This systemic issue can erode the effectiveness of constitutional protections for dignity.
Can legal frameworks adapt to evolving understandings of dignity?
The legal framework established by the Constitution has the potential to adapt to evolving understandings of dignity:
Basic Structure Doctrine: The Basic Structure Doctrine, established in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973), ensures that core principles like dignity remain inviolable while allowing amendments to address evolving needs.
For example, The 103rd Constitutional Amendment (2019) introduced a 10% reservation for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) in education and public employment.
Ongoing Democratic Negotiation: The Constitution leaves questions regarding economic structure open for ongoing negotiation, allowing for discussions around justice and inclusion that are vital for protecting dignity in a changing society.
For example, The introduction of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019 marked a significant step toward affirming the dignity and rights of transgender individuals.
Judicial Interpretation: Courts play a critical role in interpreting constitutional provisions related to dignity.
For example,Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018) decriminalized consensual same-sex relationships by reading down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code.
Way forward:
Promoting Constitutional Values: Enhance public awareness and foster societal attitudes that prioritize individual dignity, equality, and mutual respect over group identities.
Strengthening Institutional Adaptability: Empower judicial and legislative mechanisms to address systemic inequities, interpret evolving notions of dignity, and implement inclusive policies.
Mains PYQ:
Q Examine the scope of Fundamental Rights in the light of the latest judgement of the Supreme Court on Right to Privacy.(UPSC IAS/2017)
The 129th Constitution Amendment Bill, 2024, mandates fixed five-year Lok Sabha terms, aligning State Assembly elections, with mid-term polls serving only the remainder of the five-year tenure if dissolved.
Do fixed legislative tenures promote better governance?
Potential for Improved Stability: Fixed tenures can provide a stable political environment, reducing frequent electoral disruptions that may hinder long-term governance plans.
Governance Challenges: However, Achary argues that while fixed terms might seem beneficial, they could lead to governance issues if political instability arises, as seen in states where mid-term elections are necessary due to governmental collapse.
Note:
Fixed Legislative Tenure refers to predetermined, non-variable terms for legislatures, ensuring elections occur at set intervals, and enhancing stability.
Mid-term polls are elections held before the scheduled end of a legislative term, usually triggered by government collapse or dissolution.
How would fixed tenures impact the accountability of elected officials?
Increased Accountability: Frequent elections are believed to enhance political accountability since representatives must consistently engage with their electorate. Achary emphasises that regular electoral cycles compel politicians to remain responsive to public needs.
Mid-Term Elections as a Safety Valve: Allowing mid-term elections maintains accountability within the legislative framework, ensuring that elected officials remain answerable to their constituents even if they face political challenges during their term.
What are some learnings from the Western world?
Lessons from the UK: The UK’s Fixed-term Parliaments Act of 2011 was meant to set fixed terms for its Parliament but caused problems like policy delays and constitutional issues.
It was eventually repealed. India’s plan is different because it allows mid-term elections, where new governments serve only the remaining term, not a full fixed term.
Lessons from Germany: The Constructive Vote of No Confidence in Germany mandates the selection of a new leader before the current one is removed, ensuring stability. However, this approach is not well-suited to India’s political system and has not gained significant support.
What challenges might arise from implementing fixed tenures in the Indian political context?
Erosion of Federalism: Aligning State Assembly tenures with those of the Lok Sabha could weaken federalism by reducing the autonomy of state legislatures. This may result in premature dissolutions and disruptions in local governance.
Political Instability Risks: The bill’s provision for shorter tenures following mid-term elections could result in significant instability. If a government collapses mid-term, the resultant Lok Sabha might only serve for about a year, which is seen as undesirable by Madhavan.
Potential for Increased Political Maneuvering: There is doubt about whether fixed tenures can effectively deter practices like horse trading or efforts to destabilize governments. While the bill aims to address such issues, its success is uncertain.
Way forward:
Strengthen Federalism: Ensure state legislatures retain autonomy by allowing flexibility in election cycles and minimizing central influence on state governance.
Mitigate Political Instability: Introduce safeguards like stricter anti-defection laws and robust mechanisms to address mid-term government collapses while maintaining accountability.
Mains PYQ:
Q ‘Simultaneous election to the Lok Sabha and the State Assemblies will limit the amount of time and money spent in electioneering but it will reduce the government’s accountability to the people’ Discuss. (UPSC IAS/2017)
Law Minister is proposing that the Bills on “One Nation, One Election” be referred to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for further examination.
The committee will have 21 members from the Lok Sabha and 10 members from the Rajya Sabha.
About Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC):
What is a JPC?
JPC is a committee formed by both Houses of Parliament for scrutinizing a subject or Bill in detail.
It includes members from both Lok Sabha (Lower House) and Rajya Sabha (Upper House).
Members represent both ruling parties and opposition.
Number of members in a JPC can vary based on the task at hand and the members are decided by the Parliament.
The JPC is dissolved once its task is completed or its term ends.
A motion is passed in one House of Parliament, and the other House agrees to it.
Structural Mandate
Mandate of a JPC is determined by the motion that forms it.
Scrutinizing documents related to the subject.
Summoning people for questioning.
Submitting a report and making recommendations to the government.
The proceedings and findings are confidential except in matters of public interest.
Speakerof the House resolves any disputes regarding evidence.
Nature of JPC Recommendations
Recommendations are advisory and persuasive but not binding on the government.
The government can choose whether or not to follow the recommendations.
The government must submit an Action Taken Report to Parliament on the actions taken based on the JPC’s recommendations.
Notable JPCs in the Past
Telecom Licenses and Spectrum Allocation (2011).
Stock Market Scam (1992) and related matters.
Irregularities in Securities and Banking Transactions.
Bofors Contract Inquiry (1987).
Constitutional and Legal Position Regarding the Office of Profit.
Waqf (Amendment) Bill (2024).
PYQ:
[2018] 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, by-laws, etc., conferred by the Constitution or delegated by the Parliament are being properly exercised by the Executive within the scope of such delegation?
PYQ Relevance: Q) Discuss the procedures to decide the disputes arising out of the election of a Member of the Parliament or State Legislature under The Representation of the People Act, 1951. What are the grounds on which the election of any returned candidate may be declared void? What remedy is available to the aggrieved party against the decision? Refer to the case laws. (UPSC CSE 2022)
Mentor’s Comment: UPSC mains have always focused on major issues like the Election Commission of India (2022) and the Representation of Peoples Act, of 1951 (2022).
In 1999, Sonia Gandhi contested from Bellari (Karnataka) and Amethi (Uttar Pradesh), winning both but retaining Amethi. During the 2014 elections, PM Modi contested from Vadodara (Gujarat) and Varanasi (Uttar Pradesh), winning both but choosing to keep Varanasi.
Today’s Editorial discusses the implications and challenges of allowing a single candidate to contest elections from multiple constituencies in India. This content is significant for answering the questions around electoral integrity, representation, and the overall democratic process.
_
Let’s learn!
Why in the News?
In India, candidates are permitted to contest elections from more than one constituency. This has become a common strategy for political parties to maximize their chances of winning seats in the legislature.
Key Features of the Representation of the People Act, 1951
• Conduct of Elections: The Act provides detailed procedures for conducting elections to the Lok Sabha (House of the People) and state legislative assemblies, ensuring free and fair electoral processes.This law permits candidates to contest elections from two constituencies simultaneously. However, if a candidate wins from both, they must vacate one seat within 14 days, triggering a by-election in the relinquished constituency. • Eligibility Criteria: It outlines qualifications for candidates contesting elections, including age, citizenship, and other criteria necessary for membership in the Parliament and state legislatures. • Disqualifications: The Act specifies grounds for disqualification of candidates, such as criminal convictions (Section 8), mental incapacity, and other factors that may affect a candidate’s ability to serve effectively.The Act provides mechanisms for resolving disputes arising from elections, including procedures for challenging election results in court. • Corrupt Practices: The Act defines corrupt practices related to elections (Section 123), including bribery, undue influence, and other electoral malpractices. This provision aims to uphold the integrity of the electoral process. • Election Commission Powers: It grants significant powers to the Election Commission of India (ECI) for overseeing elections, managing electoral rolls, and ensuring adherence to election laws. Section 29A allows political parties to register with the Election Commission, establishing a framework for party participation in elections. • By-elections: Provisions are included for conducting by-elections when a seat becomes vacant due to various reasons such as resignation or disqualification. • Administrative Machinery: The Act lays down the administrative structure required for conducting elections efficiently, detailing roles and responsibilities of various officials involved in the electoral process. The Act has been amended multiple times since its enactment to address emerging challenges in the electoral landscape and improve the electoral process.
What are the legal implications of a candidate contesting from multiple constituencies?
Increased Financial Burden: The practice of contesting from multiple constituencies leads to additional taxpayer costs due to frequent by-elections.
For example, the administrative cost of the 2014 general elections was ₹3,870 crore, projected to rise to ₹6,931 crore in 2024. If multiple candidates win from two constituencies, the extra cost for holding by-elections can amount to around ₹130 crore.
This financial burden ultimately falls on the public and is compounded by significant expenditures from political parties.
Favoring the Ruling Party: By-elections often tend to favor the ruling party because they can mobilize resources and provide patronage more effectively than opposition parties. This creates an uneven playing field.
Repetition of Costs for Defeated Candidates: Candidates who lose in their primary constituencies but still contest from multiple seats face a disproportionate financial burden when by-elections are necessitated by winning candidates vacating their seats.
This forces them to expend additional resources on campaigning for a second time.
Undermining Democratic Principles: This practice prioritizes political leaders’ interests over those of the electorate. It acts as a hedging mechanism against uncertainties rather than focusing on serving constituents’ needs.
Voter Confusion and Discontent: Contesting from multiple constituencies can lead to voter confusion regarding representation and accountability. When elected representatives vacate seats shortly after winning them, it can cause disillusionment among voters. Such actions can diminish voter turnout and engagement in subsequent elections.
How does contesting from multiple constituencies affect electoral fairness and representation?
Undermines Equal Representation: Each voter is entitled to one vote, yet candidates can leverage their influence across multiple areas, potentially sidelining local issues and needs in favor of broader political ambitions.
Increased Costs and Resource Waste: The practice leads to frequent by-elections when candidates vacate seats after winning multiple constituencies. This not only incurs significant costs for taxpayers but also wastes resources that could be better utilized elsewhere.
Voter Disenfranchisement and Confusion: When candidates win from multiple constituencies and subsequently vacate one seat, it can lead to voter confusion about representation. This practice may cause disillusionment among constituents who feel their needs are not being prioritized.
Perception of Manipulation and Corruption: Contesting from multiple constituencies can foster perceptions of manipulation within the electoral system, where candidates appear more focused on personal political gain rather than serving their constituents. This perception can erode public trust in the democratic process.
What are the political motivations behind this practice?
Strategic Advantage: Contesting from multiple constituencies allows candidates to maximize their chances of electoral success by hedging against uncertainties in voter preferences. This strategy is particularly useful in competitive political environments.
Resource Mobilization: Candidates who are part of ruling parties can leverage their party’s resources and influence across multiple constituencies, giving them an advantage over opposition candidates who may lack similar support.
Demonstrating Party Strength: By contesting from various constituencies, candidates can project their party’s strength and reach, potentially swaying voter sentiment in their favor across broader regions.
Perception of Legitimacy: Winning from multiple constituencies can enhance a candidate’s perceived legitimacy and popularity, reinforcing their position within their party and among voters.
How does this issue need to be addressed in the Indian context?
Amendment of the Representation of the People Act, 1951: Amend Section 33(7) to prohibit candidates from contesting elections from more than one constituency at a time. This would eliminate the practice of winning multiple seats and subsequently vacating one, thus reducing the frequency of by-elections.
Imposing Financial Accountability: Introduce a provision requiring candidates who contest from multiple constituencies and subsequently cause by-elections to deposit a specified amount (e.g., ₹5 lakh for assembly elections) to cover the costs incurred by conducting those by-elections.
Strengthening Election Commission Authority: Enhance the powers of the ECI to monitor and regulate electoral practices more effectively. This includes ensuring compliance with electoral laws and addressing grievances related to candidate conduct.
Encouraging Political Party Reforms: Encourage political parties to adopt internal democratic processes that ensure candidates are selected based on merit and local support rather than merely party loyalty. This can help foster genuine representation in constituencies.
Recently, the SC considered a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) advocating for the applicability of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Act, 2013 to political parties.
What is the legal status of political parties concerning the POSH Act?
Current Legal Interpretation: The Kerala HC previously ruled that political parties do not fall under the scope of the POSH Act due to a lack of an employer-employee relationship with their members. This interpretation suggests that political parties are not obligated to establish ICCs as required by the Act.
Definition of Workplace: The POSH Act defines “workplace” broadly, including various public and private entities. However, applying this definition to political parties is complex, as many party workers operate without a defined workplace and often have temporary roles that do not align with traditional employment structures.
Potential for Inclusion: Advocates argue that since the POSH Act includes locations visited by employees during their course of employment, it could extend protections to party workers in field operations. The definition of “employee” also encompasses temporary and contract workers, which could potentially include political party members.
How can Internal Complaints Committees (ICCs) be effectively established?
What are Internal Complaints Committees (ICCs)?
ICCs are mandated bodies established under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 in India. These committees play a crucial role in addressing complaints of sexual harassment in the workplace, ensuring a safe and supportive environment for all employees.
Need for ICCs: The recent PIL presented in the court emphasizes that political parties should have mechanisms to address sexual harassment complaints in line with the POSH Act.
Currently, internal discipline mechanisms within parties may not adequately address issues of sexual harassment or comply with ICC requirements under the Act.
Challenges in Implementation: Creating ICCs within political parties poses challenges due to their non-traditional structures. The determination of who qualifies as an “employer” in this context is crucial for establishing accountability and compliance with the POSH Act.
Existing Party Structures: Political party constitutions outline hierarchical structures that could potentially facilitate the establishment of ICCs. However, these existing frameworks may not meet the requirements set forth by the POSH Act regarding membership and external oversight.
What role should the ECI play in enforcing compliance with the POSH Act?
Competent Authority: The Supreme Court directed that any grievances regarding the application of the POSH Act to political parties should first be addressed to the ECI, which is seen as the competent authority for enforcing compliance among registered political entities.
Historical Context: The ECI has previously been involved in ensuring compliance with other laws applicable to political parties, such as the Right to Information Act. However, its role concerning workplace harassment laws remains less defined.
Future Implications: If political parties are compelled to comply with the POSH Act through ECI directives, it could set a precedent for accountability and gender equality in politics, potentially influencing broader societal norms regarding workplace harassment.
Way forward:
Strengthening Compliance Framework: The Election Commission of India (ECI) should issue clear guidelines requiring political parties to establish Internal Complaints Committees (ICCs) in alignment with the POSH Act, ensuring accountability and gender-sensitive grievance redressal mechanisms.
Legislative Clarification: Amend the POSH Act to explicitly include political parties within its scope, defining “employer” and “workplace” in the context of party structures to address the unique challenges of non-traditional workplaces.
Mains PYQ:
Q What are the continued challenges for Women in India against time and space? (UPSC IAS/2019)
UCC is envisioned under Article 44 of the Constitution, which calls for securing a UCC for all citizens throughout India.
Personal law subjects, including marriage, divorce, and inheritance, fall under the Concurrent List.
Hindu personal laws:Also applicable to Sikhs, Jains, and Buddhists as well, were codified by Parliament in 1956, encompassing: The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 The Hindu Succession Act, 1956 The Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 The Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956.
Muslim personal matters are governed by the Shariat law of 1937.
The state refrains from interfering, and religious authorities decide based on Quran and Hadith.
UCC measures in India:
Special Marriage Act, 1954: Permits civil marriage for any citizen, regardless of religion, allowing marriage outside religious customs.
Shah Bano Case 1985: Supreme Court ruled in favour of Shah Bano for maintenance under Section 125 of CrPC, advocating for a UCC.
Sarla Mudgal Judgement 1995 and Paulo Coutinho vs Maria Luiza Valentina Pereira case 2019: Supreme Court reiterated the need for implementing the UCC, urging the government to enact it.
What KM Munshi Said on UCC
Support for UCC: During the Constituent Assembly debate on November 23, 1948, KM Munshi advocated for the UCC. He rejected the argument that it would be tyrannical towards minorities.
Counterarguments: Munshi pointed out that advanced Muslim countries did not regard personal law as untouchable and had implemented civil codes.
Equality for Women: He emphasized that without a UCC, women’s rights in personal matters (like inheritance and succession) would remain unequal, particularly in Hindu law, which discriminated against women.
National Unity: Munshi linked UCC with national unity, stating that religion should be restricted to spiritual spheres and that social and civil matters should be regulated uniformly for the progress of the nation.
What Ambedkar Said on UCC
Support for UCC: Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, in the debate, did not delve into the merits or demerits of a UCC but strongly supported Article 35 (which was later renumbered as Article 44 of the Constitution of India), which called for securing a uniform civil code for citizens.
Challenging Religious Personal Laws: He criticized the view that Muslim personal law was immutable and noted that regions like the North-West Frontier Province (pre-independence) followed Hindu law for issues like succession.
State Power and Personal Law: He argued that religion should not govern personal laws and that the State had the right to legislate and reform social systems to address inequities and discriminations in personal laws.
What happened at the end of the Debate?
Passage of Article 35: After discussions, Article 35 was passed by the Constituent Assembly. This article laid down the directive principle that the State shall endeavor to secure a UCC for the citizens of India.
Renumbering to Article 44: Later, this article was renumbered as Article 44 in the Indian Constitution. It continues to remain a Directive Principle of State Policy (DPSP), guiding future policies on personal laws and advocating for uniformity in civil matters across religious communities.
PYQ Relevance: Q) Do you think that Constitution of India does not accept principle of strict separation of powers rather it is based on the principle of ‘checks and balance’? Explain. (UPSC CSE 2019)
Mentor’s Comment: UPSC mains have always focused on major issues like Constitutional Principles (2019) and Basic structure (2014 and 2019) of our Constitution.
The 2024 general elections saw a turnout of approximately 65.79%. While India’s Constitution provides for a strong framework of rights and governance, its effectiveness has been compromised by political interference and corruption. The judiciary’s ability to enforce laws impartially is often challenged by political dynamics, leading to perceptions of selective justice.
Today’s editorial highlights critical concerns regarding recent actions that may undermine the foundational principles enshrined in the Indian Constitution. It talks about the significant in the current political climate, as it addresses issues of governance, civil liberties, and the rule of law. This content can be used to reflect the Constitutional governance issues in India.
_
Let’s learn!
Why in the News?
In the light of a controversial ruling by the Allahabad High Court, debates around Nationalism, Secularism, and Civil liberties are increasingly polarized, which has led to a resurgence of interest in how constitutional principles are being interpreted and applied in contemporary governance.
What are the debates and key issues highlighted recently?
• Freedom of Speech vs. Responsibility: The Allahabad High Court recently upheld a charge against an individual, Owais Khan, for mocking a Hindu deity on social media. ○ The court emphasized that while freedom of speech is a fundamental right in India, it is not absolute. ○ This means that individuals must exercise this freedom with a sense of responsibility, particularly when it comes to respecting the beliefs and sentiments of others.
•Judicial Activism and Accountability: Certain judicial decisions as given below may reflect a departure from constitutional values. 1. Zakia Jafri Case (2022): The Supreme Court dismissed a plea for further investigation into the 2002 Gujarat riots, stating there was no evidence of a larger conspiracy. This ruling was controversial as it was perceived to undermine accountability for state actions during communal violence, raising concerns about the rule of law and justice for victims. 2. Umar Khalid’s Bail Denial: The Delhi High Court denied bail to activist Umar Khalid, citing a prima facie case against him. Critics argue that this decision reflects an overreach of judicial authority and raises questions about the treatment of dissenters in politically sensitive cases.
•Supreme Court on Places of Worship: The Supreme Court recently barred new suits against places of worship, which has implications for ongoing disputes over religious sites.This decision has been viewed as an attempt to maintain communal harmony but also raises concerns about the judiciary’s involvement in sensitive religious matters.
•Controversial Remarks by Judges: Instances like Justice Srishananda’s remarks referring to a Muslim-majority area as “Pakistan” highlight how judicial comments can perpetuate biases and affect public perception of the judiciary’s impartiality. Such statements have prompted calls for clearer guidelines on judicial conduct
•Secularism and Pluralism: The court’s stance on respecting religious sentiments is framed within the broader context of India’s secular fabric. ○ True secularism requires not only tolerance but also an active promotion of fraternity among diverse communities, which seems to be at risk amid rising tensions surrounding religious identities.
•Public Perception and Constitutional Compact: These actions are perceived as mockery of constitutional principles and can erode public confidence in democracy. ○ It calls for a reaffirmation of commitment to the values of justice, liberty, and equality as outlined in the Preamble to the Constitution.
What are the other contemporary challenges facing the Indian Constitution?
Rise of Hindu Nationalism: The ascent of Hindu nationalism poses a significant threat to the secular and pluralistic fabric of India. Policies such as the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC), have sparked debates about their alignment with constitutional values of equality and secularism.
Erosion of Civil Liberties: There has been rising communal violence, restrictions on freedom of speech, and attacks on media independence, which deviate from the constitutional promise of a democratic society.
Judicial Independence and Institutional Integrity: The independence of the judiciary is under scrutiny as there are fears that political considerations may influence judicial decisions. The weakening of institutional checks and balances threatens the foundational principle of separation of powers, which is crucial for maintaining democratic governance.
Social and Economic Inequalities: The influence of money and muscle power in politics exacerbates persistent social and economic disparities, undermining democratic processes and leading to questions about fair representation. The non-enforceability of Directive Principles of State Policy further complicates efforts to address these disparities effectively.
Federalism and Centralization: Initiatives like “One Nation, One Election” could undermine the autonomy of state governments, affecting local governance and representation. Critics argue that this centralization could dilute regional identities and issues.
What implications do these challenges have for India’s democratic framework?
Erosion of Democratic Norms: As the judiciary grapples with issues like political interference and judicial overreach, there is a risk of eroding democratic norms.
When judicial decisions appear to align with political interests rather than constitutional principles, it undermines the public’s trust in the judiciary as an impartial arbiter of justice.
Threat to Fundamental Rights: Challenges such as restrictions on freedom of speech and assembly can directly impact citizens’ fundamental rights. If the judiciary fails to protect these rights effectively, it may result in a chilling effect on dissent and activism, weakening the democratic fabric that relies on robust public discourse and participation.
Judicial Independence at Risk: The increasing politicization of the judiciary threatens its independence, which is crucial for maintaining checks and balances in governance.
A compromised judiciary may lead to unchecked executive power, resulting in potential abuses and violations of citizens’ rights.
Increased Polarization: The rise of identity politics and communal tensions can exacerbate societal divisions, making it difficult for the judiciary to operate effectively.
When legal interpretations are influenced by political ideologies or communal sentiments, it can lead to verdicts that favor one group over another, undermining the principle of equality before the law.
Impact on Governance and Accountability: Judicial decisions that favor state actions without adequate scrutiny can diminish accountability in governance. This could enable corruption and misuse of power by public officials, further eroding public confidence in democratic institutions.
How has the judiciary responded to perceived threats against constitutional values?
Judicial Review: The Indian judiciary exercises the power of judicial review, allowing it to examine the constitutionality of legislative and executive actions.
This power is enshrined in Articles 13, 32, and 226 of the Constitution, which enable the Supreme Court and High Courts to strike down laws or actions that violate fundamental rights or exceed the authority granted to the legislature or executive.
Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980): This landmark judgment reaffirmed the supremacy of the Constitution over parliamentary authority, emphasizing that laws infringing on fundamental rights could be invalidated.
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973): The Supreme Court established the “basic structure” doctrine, asserting that certain fundamental features of the Constitution cannot be altered or destroyed by amendments.
Protection of Fundamental Rights: The judiciary has consistently defended individual rights against state encroachments. The courts have expanded the interpretation of fundamental rights, ensuring they encompass a broader range of protections for citizens.
In cases like Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978), the Supreme Court broadened the scope of Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty), ruling that due process must be followed in any deprivation of life or liberty.
The judiciary has also intervened in cases involving social justice, such as ensuring rights for marginalized communities and addressing issues like sexual harassment through interpretations aligned with international human rights standards.
Upholding Judicial Independence: Judicial independence is seen as crucial for maintaining constitutional integrity. The judiciary has asserted its role as a guardian of the Constitution, often resisting pressures from other branches of government.
Justice Kurian Joseph emphasized that as long as an independent judiciary exists, there is no threat to the Constitution, highlighting the judiciary’s role in safeguarding democratic values and individual rights.
Way Forward:
National Judicial Commission (NJC): Forming an NJC to oversee the appointment of judges can ensure transparency and accountability in judicial appointments, reducing political influence.
Expansion of the e-Courts Project: Enhancing digital infrastructure for courts, including online case filing and AI-assisted case management, can significantly reduce delays and improve access to justice.
Implementing systems like FASTER (Fast and Secured Transmission of Electronic Records) for quick communication of court orders will also expedite processes.
Promoting Legal Literacy: Increasing public awareness about legal rights and judicial processes through educational campaigns can empower citizens to engage more effectively with the legal system.
The ongoing debate on simultaneous elections, commonly referred to as One Nation One Election (ONOE), presents a valuable opportunity to highlight a fundamental aspect of local democracy: the need for elections to Urban Local Governments (ULGs).
What is the Significance of Urban Local Government elections?
Decentralized Governance: ULGs are crucial for decentralized self-governance, which is fundamental to democratic functioning at the grassroots level.
Service Delivery: ULGs are responsible for delivering essential civic services such as water, sanitation, public health, and urban planning, which directly affect citizens’ quality of life.
Local Democracy: Regular elections to ULGs ensure democratic legitimacy, enabling citizens to participate in the governance process at the local level and hold local representatives accountable.
Economic and Social Impact: ULGs play a vital role in urban development, economic growth, and social well-being. As cities are responsible for a significant portion of the country’s GDP, well-governed local bodies contribute to national prosperity.
Why is Voter Turnout in Urban Local Elections Typically Lower?
Lack of Awareness: Voter awareness regarding local elections is often lower than that for state or national elections, leading to reduced participation.
Perceived Impact: Many voters feel that the impact of urban local elections is less significant compared to state or national elections, resulting in voter apathy.
Political Disengagement: In many cases, urban residents may feel disconnected from local governance, especially when local issues are not perceived as urgent or when political campaigns do not adequately address them.
Timing and Scheduling Issues: Elections to ULGs may be held at different times or not synchronized with other elections, causing confusion and disengagement.
Voter Fatigue: Frequent elections at different levels may contribute to voter fatigue, lowering participation rates in local elections.
What reforms are necessary to enhance the effectiveness of urban local governments?
Empower State Election Commissions (SECs): Strengthening SECs by granting them autonomy and resources for conducting timely and fair elections is essential. Currently, many SECs lack the authority to carry out ward delimitation effectively, which delays elections.
Regular Elections: Ensuring that ULGs hold regular elections every five years is crucial. The recent acceptance of recommendations by the High-Level Committee (HLC) for synchronizing local body elections with state and national polls is a positive step in this direction.
Decentralization of Powers: The 74th Constitutional Amendment aimed at decentralizing powers to ULGs; however, actual implementation has been inconsistent.
Public Participation: Encouraging greater public involvement in decision-making processes will enhance transparency and accountability within ULGs. This can be achieved through community engagement initiatives and participatory budgeting processes.
Way forward:
Strengthen Institutional Capacity and Autonomy: Empower State Election Commissions (SECs) with the necessary authority and resources to ensure timely and independent elections.
Promote Public Engagement and Accountability: Encourage active public participation through initiatives like community engagement, participatory budgeting, and transparency in governance. This will improve the responsiveness of ULGs to citizen needs and foster stronger local democracy.
Mains PYQ:
Q The strength and sustenance of local institutions in India has shifted from their formative phase of ‘Functions, Functionaries and Funds’to the contemporary stage of ‘Functionality’. Highlightthe critical challenges faced by local institutions in terms of their functionality in recent times. (UPSC IAS/2020)
The Opposition in Rajya Sabha is preparing to move a motion for impeachment of Allahabad High Court Judge for his controversial remarks inciting communal hatred.
Impeachment Processfor Judges in India:
About
The process involves Parliament passing an address to the President to remove the judge.
To pass the motion, two–thirds of the MPs present and voting in both Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha;
Must approve it, with a majority of more than 50% of the total membership of each House.
Key Constitutional Provisions
Article 124(4): The judge can only be removed by a Presidential order, passed after a majority vote in both Houses of Parliament.
The vote must come from two-thirds of the members present and voting.
Articles 218 of the Constitution extends the same rules to High Court judges.
The impeachment process ensures judicial independence by maintaining a high bar for removal, limiting political influence.
Grounds for Impeachment
A judge of the Supreme Court or High Court can be impeached on two grounds: “proved misbehaviour” or “incapacity” as per the Constitution of India.
Further clarified in the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, including:
Misuse of office
Grave offences that undermine the judge’s integrity
Contravention of the provisions of the Constitution.
What does the process entail?
Procedure under the Judges Inquiry Act, 1968:
Initial Step: The impeachment motion must be signed by at least 100 MPs in the Lok Sabha and 50 MPs in the Rajya Sabha.
Committee Formation: Once the motion is introduced, the Speaker or Chairperson of the respective House forms a three-member inquiry committee:
Headed by the Chief Justice of India or a Supreme Court judge.
The second member is usually a Chief Justice of any High Court.
The third member is a distinguished jurist, appointed by the Speaker or Chairman.
Inquiry Process: The committee investigates the charges, cross-examines witnesses, and regulates its procedure.
The committee may also request a medical test if the charge relates to mental incapacity.
Outcome: If the committee finds the judge not guilty, the motion is dismissed. If found guilty, it will be reported back to the House for further action.
Instances of Impeachment in India:
1993: Justice V Ramaswami (Supreme Court) faced impeachment proceedings on financial impropriety. The motion was unsuccessful despite a guilty finding.
2011: Justice Soumitra Sen (Calcutta High Court) was impeached for corruption but resigned before Lok Sabha could take up the matter.
2015: Justice S K Gangele (Madhya Pradesh High Court) faced impeachment on charges of sexual harassment, but the committee cleared him in 2017.
2015: Justice J B Pardiwala (Gujarat High Court) faced impeachment for controversial remarks about reservation but the motion was dropped after the judge expunged the remarks.
2017: Justice C V Nagarjuna (Andhra Pradesh & Telangana High Court) faced impeachment for financial misconduct and victimizing a Dalit judge, but the motion was not pursued.
PYQ:
[2019] Consider the following statements:
1. The motion to impeach a Judge of the Supreme Court of India cannot be rejected by the Speaker of the Lok Sabha as per the Judges (inquiry) Act, 1968.
2. The Constitution of India defines and gives details of what constitutes ‘incapacity and proved misbehaviour’ of the Judges of the Supreme Court of India.
3. The details of the process of impeachment of the Judges of the Supreme Court of India are given in the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.
4. If the motion for the impeachment of a Judge is taken up for voting, the law requires the motion to be backed by each House of the Parliament and supported by a majority of total membership of that House and by not less than two-thirds of total members of that House present and voting.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?