Subject: GS 2
Syllabus: Comparison of the Indian constitutional scheme with that of other countries. Salient features of the Representation of People’s Act.
Questions
- Philosophical undertone of the Indian constitution resonates with the French constitution but there are many differences between the two. Discuss. (150 Words, 10 Marks)
- The Representation of Peoples Act of 1951 provides for grounds of election disqualification. List them and discuss the issues in current grounds of disqualification. (150 Words, 10 Marks)
Model Structure
1. Philosophical undertone of the Indian constitution resonates with the French constitution but there are many differences between the two. Discuss. (150 Words, 10 Marks)
Model Structure
Introduction
- Indian constitution is partly borrowed and partly original with many features and ideals developing during the freedom struggle. Ideals of liberty, equality and fraternity were taken from the French revolution and the ensuing constitution.
Main Body
Similarities between Indian and French Constitution:
- Written constitutions,
- Elected heads,
- Emergency and amendment process.
But there are many differences also. These differences include -
- There is a semi–presidential system in France with the President being de facto head and having more power than the Prime Minister. India went for a parliamentary form of government with the Prime Minister being the de facto head and having more powers.
- Head of the government in India is the prime minister with tenure of 5 years but the French President has tenure of 7 years.
- Indian constitution has a provision for procedure established by law and has due process of law introduced by judiciary. There is no such provision in the French Constitution.
- Both countries have secularism but the French adopted complete separation of state from religion while India has provided for distance between state and religion but not complete separation.
- India follows federal polity whereas France has more of a unitary structure.
- Elections in India are conducted by the election commission with no role of the judiciary whereas in France the judiciary plays a role in elections.
- India is a written constitution whereas the French constitution is based on the principle of Executive supremacy and is the only Democratic constitution that way.
- The constitution of India is flexible and changes can be easily done at the time of need. On the contrary, the constitution of France has a rigid constitution that requires a resolution to be passed by a 60% majority in two houses of Parliament.
- The Indian constitution does not allow the President to have an upper hand in the country’s management whereas the President of France has complete power here and the Prime Minister works as his assistant.
- France allows dual citizenship in comparison to India which provides for single citizenship.
Conclusion
- India borrowed many features from mature democracies of that time but in comparison, there are more differences than similarities which shows the indigenous nature of our constitution.
2. The Representation of Peoples Act of 1951 provides for grounds of election disqualification. List them and discuss the issues in current grounds of disqualification. (150 Words, 10 Marks)
Model Structure
Introduction
- Under articles 327 and 328 of the Indian constitution, parliament and state legislatures are empowered to make rules for elections at their respective levels. As a result, the Parliament has passed The Representation of Peoples Act of 1951 to list grounds of disqualification.
Main Body
- The act provides for conduct of elections at both levels, administrative machinery for the elections, qualifications and disqualifications, and corrupt practices. In all these provisions, there are disqualification provisions for which any guilty person can be disqualified from contesting elections for 6 years if he/she is found-
- Indulging in bribery or any corrupt practice, and if found influencing elections.
- Promoting hatred and enmity between groups or classes of people, and also spreading religious disharmony.
- Practicing and promoting untouchability and committing heinous crimes against women.
- Indulging in terrorism and other acts against the state.
- Dealing in prohibited goods and selling or consuming illegal drugs.
- Getting imprisoned for a minimum of two years and failing to declare assets.
- Though there are ways to disqualify candidates under section 8A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 for above mentioned practices, the current process of disqualification is found to be complex, time-consuming and ineffective due to reasons like-
- If a person who stands disqualified may submit a petition to the President for the removal of disqualification. This is a time consuming and complicated process. One infamous example is former CM of Sikkim Prem Singh Tamang who was convicted after 20 years.
- Corrupt practice does not cover areas like paid and fake news which has risen recently due to the internet revolution.
- Promoting hatred and enmity is also not clearly defined and many politicians have escaped any action for blatant violation of this clause.
- The Election Commission has powers to reduce disqualification period but for this there is no oversight to ensure decisions taken in objective.
Conclusion
- There is a need for a simplified and time bound disqualification process to break nexus between politicians and criminals. The Election Commission’s advice to make bribery a cognizable offense and a 2-year jail term could also be implemented to create some sort of deterrence.
