Context: Advocate Prashant Bhushan argued that instead of implementing the new recruitment scheme, the government should complete the old process and cited the doctrine of promissory estoppel.
What was the case?
Advocate Prashant Bhushan who appeared for some of these candidates told the apex court that their names appeared in a provisional list for recruitment to Air Force but the recruitment process was cancelled when the Agnipath scheme was notified.
He argued that the government must be directed to complete the old process citing the doctrine of promissory estoppel.
Bhushan argued that there was a written exam, physical test, and medical exam conducted under the old recruitment process after which a provisional selection list was published with the ranks.
Thereafter for more than one year, every three months they kept saying that appointment letters were going to be issued, however, they were postponed due to Covid-19, etc.
In the meantime, they did recruitment rallies for the same posts claiming it was for fast-track recruitments to address the demographic imbalance to recruit tribal people, etc.
He added that these candidates had got jobs in BSF and other paramilitary organisations, but had refused as they were told that Air Force recruitment letters will be issued.
What is the doctrine of promissory estoppel?
Promissory estoppel is a concept developed in contractual laws.
A valid contract under law requires an agreement to be made with sufficient consideration.
A claim of the doctrine of promissory estoppel essentially prevents a “promisor” from backing out of an agreement because there is no “consideration.”
The doctrine is invoked in court by a plaintiff (the party moving court in a civil action) against the defendant to ensure the execution of a contract or seek compensation for failure to perform the contract.
In a 1981 decision in Chhaganlal Keshavalal Mehta v. Patel Narandas Haribhai, the SC lists out a checklist for when the doctrine can be applied.
First, there must be an unambiguous promise.
Second, the plaintiff must have acted relying reasonably on that promise.
Third, the plaintiff must have suffered a loss.
How does it relate to the Agnipath case?
Bhushan’s argument invoking the doctrine essentially means that the government’s actions of putting up a shortlist etc would be a “promise” made by it.
The other party here — the candidates acted based on that promise — they refused other jobs in CRPF, BSF etc and now must be compensated for their loss.
However, the judges quickly refused this argument. CJI DY Chandrachud pointed out that “promissory estoppel is always subject to the overarching public interest”.
Justice PS Narasimha added that “this is not a contract matter where promissory estoppel in public law was applied, it is a public employment” and that “the question of applying this principle will not arise in this case”.
Parliament has the primary responsibility of making laws and holding the government responsible for its actions. As representatives of citizens, MPs pass laws, oversee the working of the government and the efficient allocation of public funds. Parliamentary Committees act as a mechanism that helps in improving the effectiveness of Parliament.
Over the years, responsibilities of the government have increased significantly. Government expenditure and legislation have become technical and complex in nature. While a significant amount of Parliament’s work gets done on the floor of the House, it is difficult for Parliament to scrutinise all government activities in the House in a limited time.
Thus, Parliamentary Committees were constituted to examine proposed legislation, government policies and expenditure in detail. They also examine petitions from the public, check whether rules framed by the government are in consonance with Acts of Parliament, and help manage the administration of Parliament. Deliberations in Committees present several advantages.
Committees can get inputs from experts and stakeholders on various matters. Their ability to devote more time on each item allows them to examine matters in greater detail. They also help parties reach consensus on various issues.
However, there are several areas where Committees need strengthening. For example, all Bills are not referred to Committees. They are thinly staffed and do not have full-time technical expert support. Some Committees may not seek evidence from experts on important Bills. Further, attendance of MPs in Committee meetings is about 50%, which is lower than the 84% attendance seen during the Parliament sittings.
General Studies- II: Governance, Constitution, Polity, Social Justice and International relations.
Parliament and State legislatures—structure, functioning, conduct of business, powers & privileges and issues arising out of these.
So we will cover the following aspects:
Why are parliamentary committees needed?
Types of committees.
How is the Functioning of the Committees?
How to improve committees in India?
Why are parliamentary committees needed?
Parliamentary committees are an integral part of the legislative process in India, and they serve several important functions. Here are some key reasons why parliamentary committees are needed in India:
Detailed examination of bills: and other matters referred to them by the Parliament. This allows for a thorough review of legislation, including its various aspects such as legal, technical, financial, and policy implications. The committees can also seek inputs from experts and stakeholders, which helps in making informed decisions about the proposed legislation.
Oversight of executive actions: They review the policies, programs, and actions of government departments and agencies to ensure that they are being implemented effectively and efficiently, and to hold the government accountable for its actions. This helps in ensuring transparency and accountability in the functioning of the government.
Examination of budgetary allocations: They examine the estimates of expenditure, proposals for new spending, and the outcomes of past spending to ensure that public funds are being utilized efficiently and effectively. This helps in ensuring that taxpayer money is being spent wisely and in the best interests of the public.
Public participation: They often invite inputs from the public, civil society organizations, and other stakeholders, and conduct public hearings on important issues. This allows for a diverse range of perspectives to be taken into account in the decision-making process and promotes participatory democracy.
Expertise and specialization: This allows for in-depth examination of complex issues, as the committees can draw on the knowledge and experience of their members. It also helps in bridging the gap between legislation and implementation, as the committees can provide valuable insights and recommendations for effective implementation of laws.
Efficient and specialized functioning: Parliamentary committees are smaller and more focused than the full Parliament, which allows for more efficient and specialized functioning. Committees can delve into issues in detail, conduct hearings, and interact with stakeholders, which may not be possible in the larger forum of Parliament. This leads to a more comprehensive and informed decision-making process.
Overall, parliamentary committees play a crucial role in the Indian legislative process by providing a platform for detailed examination, oversight, public participation, and specialized expertise. They contribute to the effective functioning of democracy by ensuring that legislation is thoroughly reviewed, government actions are scrutinized, and public interests are represented.
Types of committees
There are various types of Parliamentary Committees in India which look at matters such as government expenditure, legislation, government policies and schemes, and administration of Parliament.
They can be categorised into Departmentally Related Standing Committees, financial committees, administrative committees, accountability committees, and ad hoc committees.
Departmentally Related Standing Committees (DRSCs)
DRSCs were constituted in 1993 to assist Parliament in scrutinising funds allocated to Ministries. They also examine Bills referred to them by Parliament and analyse other relevant policy issues.
There are 24 DRSCs that oversee the working of a Ministry or group of Ministries.
They are composed of 31 members: 21 from Lok Sabha and 10 from Rajya Sabha. These DRSCs are constituted for a period of one year. Financial Committees Parliament regulates government expenditure to ensure that public finances are used efficiently.
Such financial oversight is a complex and technical task. Financial committees facilitate this task for Parliament.
They are the:
Committee on Public Accounts, Committee on Public Undertakings, and Estimates Committee.
The Committee on Public Undertakings and Public Accounts consist of 22 members: 15 from Lok Sabha and seven members from Rajya Sabha.
The Estimates Committee is composed entirely of Lok Sabha MPs. It has 30 members who are elected by the House. Members are elected for a period of one year.
Financial Committees
Name of the Committee
No. of Members
Tenure
Members Nominated or Elected
Estimates Committee
30
1 year
Elected by the Lok Sabha
Public Accounts Committee
22(15LS+7RS)
1 year
Elected by the two House(s)
Committee on Public Undertakings
22(15LS+7RS)
1 year
Elected by the two House(s)
Administrative Committees
Both Houses of Parliament also require significant administrative support for their day-to-day functioning. The Houses have set up different Committees, such as the Business Advisory Committee which helps decide the daily agenda of Parliament. Table 1 provides a list of administrative Committees in Parliament.
Committees
Functions
Business Advisory Committee
Recommends time to be allocated for the discussion of Bills and other business
Committee on Private Members' Bills and Resolutions
Examines all Private Members’ Bills after their introduction.
Committee on Government Assurances
Scrutinises the assurances, promises, and undertakings given by Ministers.
Rules Committee
Considers matters of procedure and conduct of business in the House
Committee of Privileges
Examines questions involving breach of rights, privileges, and immunities enjoyed by MPs
Committee on Ethics
Oversees the moral and ethical conduct of MPs
Committee on Absence of Members from the Sittings of the House
Examines leave applications of MPs.
Joint Committee on Offices of Profit
Examines the composition of other committees and recommends what offices may disqualify a person from becoming an MP.
Joint Committee on Salaries and Allowances of MPs
Examines salaries and allowances of MPs.
Committee on the Welfare of SCs and STs
Examines measures taken by the government to improve the status of Scheduled Castes and Tribes
Committee on Empowerment of Women
Recommends measures to improve the status and conditions women.
Library Committee
Advises on the improvement of Parliamentary library.
House Committee
Advises on matters related to residential accommodation of MPs.
General Purposes Committee
Advises on matters concerning the affairs of the House referred to it by the Chairperson.
Accountability Committees
Apart from financial Committees and DRSCs, three other Committees ensure government accountability towards Parliament and citizens. These are the Committee on Government Assurances, the Committee on Subordinate Legislation, and the Committee on Petitions.
Ad Hoc Committees
Ad Hoc Committees are appointed by either House or the presiding officers from time-to-time for a specific purpose. They cease to exist when they finish the task assigned to them and submit a report. Some Ad Hoc Committees include: the Railway Convention Committee, and Select Committees formed to examine specific Bills.
How is the Functioning of the Committees ?
Departmentally Related Standing Committees Departmentally Related Standing Committees (DRSCs) meet to examine the expenditure of all Ministries, Bills referred to them, and policies or issues selected by them. These meetings are conducted while Parliament is in session or during inter-session periods. While it is difficult to analyse the quality of deliberations in these sittings, the number of sittings held by various DRSCs can be used as an indicator to measure the quantity of work done by them. Figure 1 shows the average number of sittings for 10 Committees which examine the largest (by expenditure) Ministries/Departments.
Note that the Committees on Defence, Finance, and Home Affairs have seen a decrease in average number of sittings from the 14th to the 16th Lok Sabha, whereas the Committee on Chemicals and Fertilizers has seen an increase.
Examining Demands for Grants
After the Budget is presented, the DRSCs examine the Demands for Grants of all Ministries under its purview. Demands for Grants refer to the detailed estimates of expenditure of each Ministry. DRSCs study allocations to schemes and programmes, spending by the Ministry, and the policy priorities of the Ministry.
After this examination, the Committee compiles its recommendations in the form of a Report which is laid in both Houses of Parliament. These recommendations help MPs understand the implications of financial allocations. They also allow for a more informed debate and analysis of Demands for Grants in Lok Sabha.
Negative numbers suggest that the report was presented after the Demand for Grants were voted upon. In 2009 and 2014, all reports on the Demands were presented a few months after they were voted in the House. Note that these were election years, and in these years the budget presented by the new government was passed in the month of July.
The new DRSCs were not formed by then. The primary objective of reports on Demands for Grants is to help MPs examine government expenditure better. Therefore, it is necessary for MPs to have sufficient time to study these reports before the discussion in the House. The data suggests that in many cases MPs do not have sufficient time to study these reports.
Examining Bills
Once a Bill has been introduced in Parliament, it may be referred to a DRSC for detailed scrutiny. The Bill can be referred to a Committee either by the Speaker of Lok Sabha, or the Chairperson of Rajya Sabha. It is sent to the DRSC that reviews the working of the Ministry under which the Bill is introduced. After concluding its examination, the DRSC lays its report in Parliament. The recommendations of the DRSC on the Bill may also be discussed in the House.
Note that a Bill passed by one House can still be referred to a Committee by the other House. For instance, in the 16th Lok Sabha, the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Bill, 2016, and the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Bill, 2013 were referred to a DRSC as well as a Select Committee.
DRSCs were given the responsibility of scrutinising Bills because Parliament does not have the time and expertise to analyse each Bill in detail, on the floor of the House. However, the trend shows that fewer Bills are being referred to Committees as compared to previous Lok Sabha.
Examination of Issues
Every year, DRSCs select subjects for detailed examination. These subjects could be on existing or potential issues that could come up in the sectors that the DRSC looks at, or implementation of programmes by the relevant Ministry. For example, some of the subjects identified for examination by DRSCs constituted for 2019-20 include: state of the Indian economy, implementation of the Ayushman Bharat Yojana, and digital payment and online security measures for data protection.
Reports submitted by DRSCs
After examining Bills, Demands for Grants, and issues, DRSCs prepare reports and table them in Parliament. Subsequently, the DRSCs also submit Action Taken Reports which show the recommendations accepted by the government, and the progress made on them. The acceptance rate varies across Committees. During the 16th Lok Sabha, 2,038 sittings were held by DRSCs and they submitted 1,111 reports. On average, DRSCs published one report in 1.8 sittings. Average sittings taken to publish one report vary across DRSCs. However, it is difficult to evaluate quality of these deliberations without analysing each report.
Expert witnesses and research support
To aid in their study, members of DRSCs can consult with expert witnesses, stakeholders, and government officials. Engaging with experts and stakeholders enables Committee members to better understand the details of complicated issues, and the potential impact of a policy or legislation.
Note that Committees invite witnesses to testify before them at their own discretion.
For instance, the DRSC that examined the Right to Education Bill, 2008, which guarantees free education to all children ages six to 14, did not invite any expert witnesses.
Apart from consulting experts, Committees can also invite comments from the wider public.
For example, the Committee on Labour and Employment published a press release inviting public comments on the Occupational, Safety, Health and Working Conditions Bill, 2019. Public comments help Committees consider the wider implications of a Bill or policy.
However, it is up to the discretion of the Committee whether or not they chose to invite public comments.
Currently, the technical support available to Parliamentary Committees is limited to a secretariat that helps with matters such as scheduling meetings and note taking.
The National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (2002) had highlighted the lack of research support and specialist advisors with the DRSCs.4 It recommended that funds should be secured to assist these Committees in conducting inquiries, holding public hearings, and collecting data. Note that Committees in other countries such as the UK, USA, and Canada can retain specialist advisors (such as lawyers, economists, and statisticians) to assist in specific inquires.
Attendance of Members
Parliamentary Committees hold several meetings to conduct in-depth analysis of various issues through extensive deliberations among Members. Success of the Committee system depends on the participation of Members in these meetings. Though Committee meetings are conducted in a closed-door environment, Lok Sabha publishes the attendance of Members in these meetings. Sixteen of the 24 DRSCs are administered by Lok Sabha and other eight by Rajya Sabha. Figure 7 shows the attendance of members during 2009-14 for the 16 DRSCs serviced by Lok Sabha. On average, 49% members were present for meetings of these Committees between this period.
Way Forward
Committees in India, like any other organization or system, can be improved through various measures.
Here are some suggestions:
Diverse and Competent Membership: which brings a wide range of expertise and perspectives. This ensures that the committee is able to effectively address the issues at hand and make informed decisions.
Transparent and Inclusive Processes: including clear rules of procedure, open meetings, and opportunities for public input. This promotes accountability, fairness, and wider stakeholder engagement.
Adequate Resources and Support: including budgetary allocations, administrative assistance, and access to relevant information and data. This enables committees to function effectively and efficiently.
Timely Completion of Work: Committees should have a defined timeline for completing their work and submitting their recommendations or reports. This prevents undue delays and ensures that the committee's work is timely and relevant.
Implementation of Recommendations: should be seriously considered and implemented by the relevant authorities. This helps ensure that the committee's efforts result in tangible outcomes and real impact.
Regular Monitoring and Evaluation: Committees' performance should be regularly monitored and evaluated to assess their effectiveness and identify areas for improvement. This helps in continuously enhancing the functioning of committees and making necessary adjustments.
Capacity Building and Training: to enhance their skills, knowledge, and understanding of the committee's mandate and processes. This helps in improving their performance and overall effectiveness.
Review and Revision of Committee Structures: Periodic review and revision of committee structures, mandates, and processes can help identify gaps and areas for improvement. This may involve restructuring or redefining committees to align with changing needs and priorities.
Utilization of Technology: Committees can leverage technology for better communication, coordination, and documentation. This may include the use of online platforms for meetings, document sharing, and data analysis, which can streamline committee processes and enhance efficiency.
By implementing these measures, committees in India can be improved to function more effectively and contribute positively to decision-making and policy formulation processes.
Context:The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has taken Suo moto cognisance of media reports about the deaths of seven sanitation workers in two different incidents in Jhajjar and Bharuch districts of Haryana and Gujarat, respectively on April 4.
Manual scavenging is the practice of removing human excreta by hand from sewers or septic tanks. India banned the practice under the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013 (PEMSR). The Act bans the use of any individual for manually cleaning, carrying, disposing of or otherwise handling in any manner, human excreta till its disposal.
Major features of Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013
The Act prohibits the employment of manual scavengers, the manual cleaning of sewers and septic tanks without protective equipment, and the construction of insanitary latrines.
It seeks to rehabilitate manual scavengers and provide for their alternative employment.
Each local authority, cantonment board and railway authority is responsible for surveying insanitary latrines within its jurisdiction. They shall also construct a number of sanitary community latrines.
Each occupier of insanitary latrines shall be responsible for converting or demolishing the latrine at his own cost. If he fails to do so, the local authority shall convert the latrine and recover the cost from him.
Offences under the act shall be cognizable and non-bailable.
Reasons for persistence of Manual scavenging:
Narrow definition of Manual scavengers:
Under the act, “manual scavenger” means a person engaged or employed, at the commencement of this Act or at any time thereafter, by an individual or a local authority or an agency or a contractor, for manually cleaning, carrying, disposing of, or otherwise handling in any manner, human excreta in an insanitary latrine or in an open drain or pit into which the human excreta from the insanitary latrines is disposed of, or on a railway track or in such other spaces or premises, as the Central Government or a State Government may notify, before the excreta fully decomposes in such manner as may be prescribed, and the expression “manual scavenging” shall be construed accordingly.
- The definition of manual scavengers as per the Act above is narrow and excludes a wide variety of work done by diverse people in terms of numbers employed, gender, and location. The current definition describes them as a single amorphous category, but leaves out other types of sanitation work such as drain cleaning or even the cleaning of toilets by domestic help; septic tank cleaners, sewage treatment plant workers. (It excluded many sanitation workers)
- a person engaged or employed to clean excreta with the help of such devices and using such protective gear, as the Central Government may notify in this behalf, shall not be deemed to be a „manual scavenger.
Inadequate rehabilitation: Though the act mandated rehabilitation of manual scavengers, they were unable to take up non-sanitation related occupations due to social stigma attached to them. Even the mechanisation of sanitation work had little impact as the underlying issue of sanitation work being a caste-based occupation will not be tackled by making descendants of manual scavengers continue the same work in a different form. So, mechanisation can only save them from health risks but may not address the stigma or results in occupational mobility
Lack of legal responsibility on the government: Neither the state nor the centre is mandated under the Bill to provide financial assistance for the conversion of insanitary latrines. This adversely impact implementation of the act.
Failure of swatch Bharat to eradicate manual scavenging: Toilets that are built under SBM are mainly pit based toilets that are not linked to the sewer network. As long as households remain unconvinced about or unmotivated to construct twin pit latrines, the risky work of manual scavenging (performed largely by Dalits) is likely to continue.
A technical solution to a social problem will have limited impact.
Context: The Centre has tightened the fund flow rulebook on Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS) even further and for the first time has also brought in a ‘penal interest’ clause for delays in fund transfers by states.
New rules
States have been asked to ensure that their share of funds are transferred to the Single Nodal Agency (SNA) for CSS scheme within 30 days of receiving central funding instead of 40 days, as allowed earlier.
Any delay beyond 30 days would attract a ‘penal interest’ of 7% per annum. This ‘penal interest’ by a state that delays prescribed fund flow will be transferred to the Consolidated Fund of India.
Centrally sponsored scheme
The Union government supports several developmental initiatives at the state level. The category of centrally sponsored schemes comprises programmes that have a national character or a regional character. Earlier, there were nearly 67 centrally sponsored schemes, but many of them were phased out after the suggestions of the 14th Finance Commission were implemented.
Centrally Sponsored Scheme Vs Central Sector Scheme
The central welfare schemes at the state level fall into two broad categories.
The first category is centrally sponsored schemes, and the second is the central sector schemes.
While the Union government fully funds the central sector schemes, centrally sponsored schemes are jointly funded by the Centre and states.
While centrally sponsored scheme are implemented by states, central sector schemes are implemented by centre directly.
The Centre Sector Schemes are mainly formulated to cover subjects which are under the Union List or the Concurrent List whereas centrally sponsored schemes covers items that are listed in state list.
Funding pattern of Centrally Sponsored Scheme
There are several models of funding of centrally sponsored schemes, but a large part of the funding comes from the Centre.
In most of the cases, the Union government and the states fund these schemes at a 60:40 ratio.
Ratio of funding could vary , the funding ratio could be 50:50, 60:40, 70:30 or 75:25. In the case of north-eastern states, 90 per cent of the funds come from the central government.
Union government spends nearly 12% of its annual budget on centrally sponsored schemes.
Categorisation of Centrally Sponsored Scheme
i) Core of the Core Schemes: Those schemes which are for social protection and social inclusion should form the core of core and be the first charge on available funds for the National Development Agenda.
The six core of the core schemes are:
MGNREGA or the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act
Umbrella Scheme for Development of Scheduled Castes
Umbrella Programme for Development of Scheduled Tribes
Umbrella Scheme for Development of Minorities
Umbrella Scheme for Development of Other Vulnerable Groups
ii) Core schemes: Focus of CSSs should be on schemes that comprise the National Development Agenda where the Centre and States will work together in the spirit of Team India.
iii)Optional Schemes: The Schemes where States would be free to choose the ones they wish to implement. Funds for these schemes would be allocated to States by the Ministry of Finance as a lump sum.
Context: The 17th Lok Sabha, which is entering its final year, has functioned for 230 sitting days so far. Of all the Lok Sabhas that completed the full five-year term, the 16th Lok Sabha had the lowest number of sitting days (331). With one more year remaining, and 58 average sitting days a year, the 17th Lok Sabha is unlikely to sit for more than 331 days. This could make it the shortest full-term Lok Sabha since 1952.
The declining productivity of the Indian Parliament has been a cause for concern in recent years. As the 17th Lok Sabha, the current term of India's lower house of parliament, enters its final year with only 230 sitting days so far, it is likely to have one of the shortest full-term durations since 1952. This article discusses the importance of parliamentary productivity, how it can be measured, the factors contributing to its decline, and the way forward. The roles of Parliament in India, including lawmaking, scrutiny of government, budgetary control, oversight of the executive, electoral functions, and constitutional functions, are vital for maintaining the democratic system of the country.
However, indicators such as the number of bills passed, disruptions during Question Hour, and declining participation in private members' bills suggest a decline in parliamentary productivity. Factors such as increasing polarization, lack of preparation and deliberation, weak committee system, and lack of diversity have contributed to this decline. The article emphasizes the need for addressing these issues to ensure effective governance and strengthen the democratic process in India. Various measures, such as promoting constructive debates, enhancing committee system, ensuring diversity, and promoting transparency, are suggested as a way forward to improve parliamentary productivity and uphold the democratic principles of the country.
So in this regard, we are going to discuss the following to do complete justice with the topics:
Why is productivity of the parliament important?
How do we know that the productivity is declining?
What is causing such a decline?
Way forward
Why is productivity of the parliament important?
The Parliament of India is the supreme legislative body in the country and is responsible for enacting laws and overseeing the functioning of the government. The roles of Parliament in India include:
Law making: The primary function of Parliament is to make laws. Bills are introduced in either house of Parliament, debated and discussed, and finally passed as Acts of Parliament.
Scrutiny of Government: Parliament has the power to hold the government accountable by asking questions, seeking clarifications, and conducting debates on government policies and actions.
Budgetary Control: Parliament has the power to approve or reject the government's budget proposals and to scrutinize government spending.
Oversight of Executive: Parliament has the power to investigate and examine the functioning of the executive branch of the government and its various agencies.
Electoral Functions: Parliament has the power to decide on the qualifications and disqualifications of members, conduct elections to fill vacancies, and determine the electoral boundaries.
Constitutional Functions: Parliament has the power to amend the Constitution, approve the proclamation of emergency, and to impeach the President, Vice-President, and other high officials.
Overall, the roles of Parliament in India are essential for maintaining the democratic system of the country and ensuring that the government is accountable to the people.
How do we know that the productivity is declining?
There are a few possible indicators that have been used to suggest that parliamentary productivity is declining in India. Here are a few examples:
Number of bills passed: According to data from the PRS Legislative Research, the number of bills passed by the Lok Sabha (the lower house of India's parliament) has declined in recent years. In the 16th Lok Sabha (2014-2019), a total of 205 bills were passed, compared to 248 bills in the previous Lok Sabha (2009-2014). In the current 17th Lok Sabha (2019-present), only 17 bills have been passed so far.
Question Hour: One important aspect of parliamentary productivity is the ability of MPs to ask questions of the government during Question Hour. However, Question Hour has been disrupted in recent years, with MPs often protesting and preventing the House from functioning. According to an analysis by IndiaSpend, the 16th Lok Sabha lost 29% of its scheduled time due to disruptions, while the current 17th Lok Sabha has lost 48% of its scheduled time so far.
Private Members' Bills: Private Members' Bills are bills introduced by MPs who are not part of the government. They are often seen as a way for backbenchers to contribute to the legislative process. However, the number of Private Members' Bills being introduced and passed in parliament has declined in recent years. According to data from PRS Legislative Research, only two Private Members' Bills were passed in the 16th Lok Sabha, compared to 14 in the previous Lok Sabha.
It should be noted that these statistics are just a few possible indicators of parliamentary productivity, and there may be other factors at play as well. Additionally, it is important to consider the context in which these numbers are being presented, as well as any potential biases in the data sources used.
What is causing such a decline?
There are several reasons behind the declining parliamentary productivity in India.
One of the primary factors is the increasing polarization and confrontational politics, leading to frequent disruptions in the House. MPs often engage in protests, sloganeering, and walkouts, which prevent the smooth functioning of parliament. This has resulted in the loss of valuable time and resources, hindering the legislative process.
Another reason is the lack of adequate preparation and deliberation before introducing bills in parliament. The government often rushes to pass bills without thorough discussions, leading to inadequate scrutiny and oversight. This has resulted in poorly drafted legislation, causing delays, and controversies, ultimately reducing the productivity of parliament.
Moreover, the absence of a robust committee system has also contributed to the declining productivity of parliament. Committees play a crucial role in scrutinizing bills, conducting in-depth research, and engaging in consultations with stakeholders, which help in drafting effective legislation. However, the committee system in India is weak, resulting in the bypassing of committees and inadequate scrutiny of bills.
Furthermore, the Indian parliament lacks diversity, with a significant underrepresentation of marginalized groups, including women and religious minorities. This has resulted in the exclusion of diverse voices and perspectives, leading to the passing of legislation that does not reflect the needs and aspirations of all sections of society.
In conclusion, several factors contribute to the declining parliamentary productivity in India, including political polarization, lack of adequate preparation, weak committee system, and lack of diversity. Addressing these issues is crucial to ensure effective governance and strengthen the democratic process in India.
Way forward:
There are several ways to increase parliamentary productivity in India.
There needs to be a greater focus on constructive and consensus-based politics, where members from different parties work together towards common goals. This would reduce disruptions in the House and allow parliament to function more efficiently.
There needs to be better preparation and scrutiny of bills before they are introduced in parliament. This can be achieved by establishing a robust committee system that engages in in-depth research and consultations with stakeholders. Such a system would ensure that bills are well-drafted, scrutinized thoroughly, and adequately debated in parliament, leading to more effective legislation.
The Indian parliament needs to focus on increasing diversity and representation, particularly of marginalized groups such as women, Dalits, and religious minorities. This would ensure that the voices of all sections of society are heard, and legislation reflects their needs and aspirations.
Moreover, parliament should leverage technology to improve productivity, such as using electronic voting systems, enabling remote attendance for members, and enhancing digital communication channels. This would enable parliament to function more efficiently, reduce disruptions, and save valuable time and resources.
Finally, there should be a focus on capacity-building and training for parliamentarians, particularly in areas such as legislative drafting, public speaking, and committee work. This would enable MPs to be more effective in their roles, contributing to better legislative outcomes and increased productivity.
In conclusion, increasing parliamentary productivity in India requires a multi-faceted approach, including constructive and consensus-based politics, better preparation and scrutiny of bills, greater diversity and representation, leveraging technology, and capacity-building for parliamentarians. By adopting these measures, India can strengthen its democratic institutions and ensure effective governance for all its citizens.
Context: The Union Minister of Education and Skill Development & Entrepreneurship (MSDE), unveiled the digital version of the Employability Skills curriculum for students enrolled in India’s Industrial Training Institutes (ITIs) at the Future Skills Forum in New Delhi.
About The Future Skills Forum
It is an initiative of the Future Right Skills Network (FRSN) a collaborative effort by QUEST Alliance, Accenture, Cisco, and J.P. Morgan.
It brings together government skills training institutions, civil society organisations, industry and corporate social responsibility partners to help young people acquire critical skills for the future.
About Employability Skills (ES)Curriculum
ES curriculum which was launched by the MSDE in September 2022.
Aimed at fulfilling the need for anytime, anywhere learning, these modules will be accessible to more than 2.5 million learners through the Government of India’s Bharat Skills Portal as well as other platforms.
Developed with active industry contribution, the curriculum includes 12 modules in a bite-sized, gamified format and each lesson is followed by assessments that are designed to help learners assess the depth of their learning.
The storytelling approach followed in the modules provides learners with relatable scenarios that they can apply to real-world situations.
The constructive feedback system ensures that learners receive feedback that is specific, timely, and actionable thus enabling improved learning outcomes.
The digital lessons will be instrumental in introducing innovative pedagogical models like blended learning in Industrial Training Institutes (ITI), which will empower educators to create and lead 21st-century classrooms.
The digital lessons include modules on financial and digital literacy, diversity and inclusion, career development, goal setting and entrepreneurship.
Context: Recently the Bombay High Court directed the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology to file its response in a plea by Kunal Kamra, political satirist and stand-up artist, challenging the constitutional validity of the Information Technology Amendment Rules, 2023.
Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2023 (IT Amendment Rules, 2023)
As per the Rules notified on April 06, 2023, the Ministry will notify several self-regulatory bodies tasked with determining the permissibility of online games [Rule 4A(1)].
Further, a fact check unit notified, based solely on the discretion of the Union Government, will be empowered to identify fake or false or misleading online content related to the government [Rule 3(1)(b)(v)].
The inclusion of the latter under Rule 3 makes taking action against content identified by such a fact-check unit a due diligence requirement for intermediaries.
In an event where any intermediaries, including social media intermediaries (Facebook, Twitter etc.), Internet Service Providers (ISPs) (Airtel, ACT, Jio etc.), or other service providers, fail to/ decide against taking action on content identified as “fake” or “false” by the notified fact check unit, they will risk losing their safe harbour protections.
Why new rules are being Questioned?
Assigning any unit of the government such arbitrary, overbroad powers to determine the authenticity of online content bypasses the principles of natural justice, thus making it an unconstitutional exercise.
The notification of these amended rules cements the chilling effect on the fundamental right to speech and expression, particularly on news publishers, journalists, activists, etc.
The fact check unit, notified by the Executive, could effectively issue a takedown order to social media platforms and even other intermediaries across the internet stack, potentially bypassing the process statutorily prescribed under Section 69A of the IT Act, 2000.
In addition to circumventing the parliamentary procedures required to expand the scope of the parent legislation, i.e., the IT Act.
These notified amendments are also in gross violation of the Hon’ble Supreme Court ruling in Shreya Singhal vs. Union of India (2013) which laid down strict procedures for blocking content.
Finally, the vagueness of the undefined terms such as “fake”, “false”, and “misleading” make such overbroad powers further susceptible to misuse.
Context: The 17th Lok Sabha, which is entering its final year, has functioned for 230 sitting days so far. Of all the Lok Sabhas that completed the full five-year term, the 16th Lok Sabha had the lowest number of sitting days (331). With one more year remaining, and 58 average sitting days a year, the 17th Lok Sabha is unlikely to sit for more than 331 days. This could make it the shortest full-term Lok Sabha since 1952.
Poor Functioning of 17th Lok Sabha
The latest session (Budget session) held from January 31, 2023, to April 6, 2023, with a recess from February 14 to March 12 saw limited legislative activity, and minimal discussion on the Budget amidst continuous disruptions.
In this session, the Lok Sabha functioned for 33% of its scheduled time (46 hours) and the Rajya Sabha functioned for 24% (32 hours).
In the 15 days of the second part of the session, the Lok Sabha worked for 5% of its scheduled time and the Rajya Sabha for 6%, with most of the time spent on the procedural work of tabling papers.
In this Lok Sabha, so far, 150 Bills have been introduced and 131 Bills have been passed (excluding Finance and Appropriation Bills).
The latest Budget session was the sixth shortest Budget session since 1952.
The Lok Sabha spent 18 hours on financial business, of which 16 hours were spent on the general discussion of the Budget.
The Motion of Thanks on the President’s Address was the only item discussed in the latest session.
The latest session also saw the least amount of time spent on questions in the current Lok Sabha. Question Hour functioned for 19% of the scheduled time in the Lok Sabha and 9% of the scheduled time in the Rajya Sabha.
About 7% of starred questions were answered in each House.
No Private Member Bills were introduced or discussed in this session.
Each House discussed one Private Member Resolution only.
Context: Saudi Arabia has been pursuing as assertive foreign policy in order to extend its influence in the West Asia.
Background
For past many years, Saudi’s foreign policy centred around Iran and it resulted into the proxy conflicts across the region. The rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran is rooted in Islamic sectarianism. While Iran is the foremost Shia state in the world, Saudi Arabia is considered to be the religious home of Sunni Islam. This sectarian rivalry has translated into a tussle for regional hegemony and both sides being involved in multiple proxy conflicts against each other in Iraq, Lebanon, Syria and most devastatingly, Yemen.
Saudi’s changing foreign policy:
It agreed to establish ties with Iran through talks mediated by China.
Saudi – Omani delegation hold talks with Houthi rebels for a permanent ceasefire.
It is holding talks with Syria to normalize ties with Assad Regime which may result into re-entry of Syria to Arab League.
It is also trying to balance its relationships with the US, Russia, and China.
The reason behind the shift:
Saudi’s past endeavours in West Asia were either unsuccessful or only partially successful.
In Yemen, Saudi led coalition failed to oust Houthi’s from Sana’a (Yemen’s Capital).
Saudi Arabia’s “Vision 2030” calls for diversifying the oil-dependent economy by attracting tourism and foreign investment. Regional peace will be crucial to turning Saudi Arabia into the global hub that “Vision 2030” envisions. This has led to Saudi Arabia making concerted efforts to end long-standing conflicts/rivalries with powers across the region.
As the U.S. shifts its priorities away from West Asia, Saudi Arabia is confronted with a choice to either persist in their unsuccessful efforts to contain Iran in a region or they can work towards establishing a new balance with Iran.
Implications for the region:
Saudi Arabia’s normalization talks with Syria would help improve the overall relationship between Syria and other Arab capitals.
If Saudis can reach a settlement with Houthis, it could infuse some stability in the Gulf region.
Context: Election commission using its power under The Election Symbols (Reservation And Allotment) Order, 1968 withdrew the National Party Status of Trinamool congress (TMC), Nationalist congress party (NCP) and Communist party of India (CPI). However, It also accorded the status of national party to the Aam Admi Party (APP).
The Election Symbols (Reservation And Allotment) Order, 1968
Para 6A deals with Conditions for recognition as a State Party ;
Para 6B deals with the Conditions for recognition as a National Party
Para 6C delas with Conditions for continued recognition as a National or State party.
As per the Election Commission of India’s latest review, at present, there are Six political parties which are the status of recognised National Parties.
A political party shall be eligible for recognition as a State party in a State, if, and only if, any of the following conditions is fulfilled
At the last general election to the Legislative Assembly of the State, the candidates set up by the party have secured not less than six percent of the total valid votes polled in the State; and, in addition, the party has returned at least two members to the Legislative Assembly of that State at such general election; or
At the last general election to the House of the People from that State, the candidates set up by the party have secured not less than six percent of the total valid votes polled in the State; and, in addition, the party has returned at least one member to the House of the People from that State at such general election; or
At the last general election to the Legislative Assembly of the State, the party has won at least three percent of the total number of seats in the Legislative Assembly, or at least three seats in the Assembly, whichever is more; or
At the last general election to the House of the People from the State, the party has returned at least one member to the House of the People for every 25 members or any fraction thereof allotted to that State;] or
At the last general election to the House of the People from the State, or at the last general election to the Legislative Assembly of the State, the candidates set up by the Party have secured not less than eight percent of the total valid votes polled in the State.
Conditions for recognition as a National Party (6B)
A political party shall be eligible to be recognized as National party, if, and only if, any of the following conditions is fulfilled
The candidates set up by the party, in any four or more States, at the last general election to the House of the People, or to the Legislative Assembly of the State concerned, have secured not less than six percent of the total valid votes polled in each of those States at that general election; and, in addition, it has returned at least four members to the House of the People at the aforesaid last general election from any State or States; or
At the last general election to the House of the People, the party has won at least two percent of the total number of seats in the House of the People, and the party’s candidates have been elected to that House from not less than three States; or
The party is recognized as State party in at least four States.
Conditions for continued recognition as a National or State party (6C)
If a political party is recognised as a State party under paragraph 6A, or as a National party under paragraph 6B, the question whether it shall continue to be so recognised after any subsequent general election to the House of the People or, as the case may be, to the Legislative Assembly of the State concerned, shall be dependent upon the fulfilment by it of the conditions specified in the said paragraphs on the results of that general election.
Significance of being recognised as National or State Parties
Apart from those recognised as state or national party , the other parties are simply declared as registered-unrecognised parties.
RPA allows political parties to accept contributions voluntarily offered to it by any person or company other than a government company.
Candidates of registered parties get preference in allotment of election symbols. Other Candidates are identified as independents and do not get preference in symbol allocation.
If a party is recognised as a State Party’, it is entitled for exclusive allotment of its reserved symbol to the candidates set up by it in the State in which it is so recognised.
If a party is recognised as a `National Party’ it is entitled for exclusive allotment of its reserved symbol to the candidates set up by it throughout India.
Recognised `State’ and `National’ parties need only one proposerfor filing the nomination and are also entitled for two sets of electoral rolls free of cost at the time of revision of rolls and their candidates get one copy of electoral roll free of cost during General Elections.
They get broadcast/telecast facilities over Akashvani/Doordarshan during general elections.
A recognized National or State party can have a maximum of 40 “Star campaigners” and a registered un-recognised party can nominate a maximum of 20 ‘Star Campaigners”. The travel expenses of star campaigners are not to be accounted for in the election expense accounts of candidates of their party.
Context:Finland joined the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), becoming its 31st member. This is a significant event, given that NATO security guarantees will extend to this country which shares a 1,340 kilometre border with Russia. This historical moment in NATO’s history was full of symbolism, since NATO had clearly scored an additional point against Russia.
‘Conventional deterrence’ as a response to post-cold War Russian policies:
The main rationale behind Finland’s decision has been to receive additional security guarantees from NATO, which are specified in Article 5 of NATO’s founding treaty. It ‘binds the members together, committing them to protect each other and setting a spirit of solidarity within the alliance’.
Finland’s NATO membership can be viewed through the lens of ‘conventional deterrence’. As described John Mearsheimer this concept as ‘an attempt to persuade an adversary not to initiate a war because the expected costs and risks outweigh the anticipated benefits’.
Finland is certainly not the first and will not be the last neighbour of Russia to join the alliance. Before Finland’s accession, countries such as Norway (1949), Latvia (2004), Estonia (2004), Poland (1999) and Lithuania (2004) were already a part of NATO.
In this scenario, Russia needs to learn how to navigate through these growing complexities, which it is partly responsible for.
Complicated past of Russia and Finland
The ‘relationship between Finland and Russia has been a combination of struggle and compromise. In 1809, the Russian Tsar Alexander I defeated Sweden, acquired Finland, and made it an autonomous Grand Duchy of the Russian empire.
In 1917, the collapse of the Tsarist regime and the Bolshevik Revolution paved the way for the full independence of Finland’. This made Finland pursue a pragmatic security policy which was flexible enough to balance its autonomy with the need for military cooperation with the West.
In the post-war era and during the cold war Finland saved itself from the spread of communist ideology. In 1948, the Agreement of Friendship, Cooperation, and Mutual Assistance was signed between the USSR and Finland, outlining ‘Finland’s desire to stay outside the conflicts of interests between the great powers’. This came to be known as Finland’s ‘neutrality’.
Paasikivi’s line (named after Juho Kusti Paasikivi, the president of Finland between 1946 and 1956) emerged and began to morph into what would eventually become Finland’s foreign policy strategy.
This Paasikivi’s line was based on the idea of peaceful coexistence with the Soviet Union with neutrality being its cornerstone. It helped Finland navigate complex international relations after the turbulent time of the Second World War.
While the Finno-Soviet Treaty of 1948 helped Finland boost trade with the Soviet Union, it became heavily dependent on Moscow thereby making it vulnerable to economic and political overtures from the Soviets.
Policy Change?
There were tensions between Finland and Russia as a result of the flux in domestic politics in both countries. For instance, Nikita Khrushchev was willing to negotiate with Finland and allowed for increased trade and cultural exchange between the two countries, despite the 1950s seeing Finland side with the West when the Soviet Union called for a boycott of the 1956 Summer Olympics in Australia.
Following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, it sought to build closer ties with Russia while also pursuing greater integration with Europe.
The country has been an active participant in European security initiatives such as the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) and the Nordic Defence Cooperation (NORDEFCO). At the same time, it has been able to maintain close economic ties with Russia.
The cooperation between Finland and NATO began as early as in 1994 with the Partnership for Peace (PfP) programme. Finland had the status of an ‘Enhanced Opportunity Partner’ and contributed in a significant manner to the NATO-led operations in the Balkans, Afghanistan and Iraq.
Possible Outcome and wayforward
Finland's accession to NATO gives the impression that Finland’s security concerns are mostly assuaged.
However Russian authorities have signalled possible ‘countermeasures’ to the alleged ‘assault on its security and national interests’.
International political scientist believe that Russia and NATO should exercise cautious behaviour vis-à-vis the other. NATO and Russia should search for ways out of the constant cycle of implementing ‘measures’ and imposing ‘countermeasures’. During the last decade, a classic example of ‘security dilemma’ has been unfolding, whereby Russia and the West have been enhancing their security and creating a more precarious environment altogether.
Neither Finland nor Russia should see an escalation in their relations. The newly elected centre-right government in Finland should not exaggerate the potential threats from Russia but engage in bilateral dialogue, trying to understand the other’s security concerns. There should be at least some NATO members who would be willing to rely more on diplomatic tools and ‘lower the temperatures’.
Context: The Supreme Court on April 10 orally observed how can the Lieutenant Governor (L-G) act “without aid and advice” of the Council of Ministers in nominating 10 members to the Municipal Corporation of Delhi. This article discusses the need for full statehood for Delhi, the capital city of India. Delhi's government has limited powers despite being one of the most populous cities in India. There is a need to view Delhi from the prism of the interests of the entire country, given that it is the national capital.
So we will cover the following aspects in this article:
Some Historical perspective on administration of Delhi
Why Delhi should be provided with statehood
Reasons against granting statehood to Delhi
Way forward
Supreme Court Verdict on Delhi-Centre Power Tussle
General Studies- II: Governance, Constitution, Polity, Social Justice and International relations
Functions and responsibilities of the Union and the States, issues and challenges pertaining to the federal structure, devolution of powers and finances up to local levels and challenges therein.
Some Historical perspective on administration of Delhi
Till 1992, except for a brief interlude, Delhi was a union territory under the complete control of the Government of India.
Delhi was allowed its ‘statehood’ early in the 1990s, with a Chief Minister and a popularly elected unicameral legislature though the ‘State’ remained truncated in its powers.
But It remained in substance a union territory and in form a State, with the Lt. Governor retained as its chief executive.
The Chief Minister and his Cabinet made a late entry into space where Lt Governor and several municipal corporations already existed which created friction.
Many departments of the Centre, State, scores of parastatals and five ULBs (urban local bodies) providing bits of governance in the city.
It could safely be asserted that Delhi has more government and less governance than any other city or state in the country
Why Delhi should be provided with statehood:
Massive increment in population of Delhi
In 1991, the 69th Amendment to the Constitution created the Legislative Assembly of Delhi, at a time when the city's population was much smaller. However, as of today, the city has nearly two crore people, making it one of the most populous cities in India. This growth in population has led to a demand for more representation and self-governance.
Limited powers of the Delhi Government:
Nowhere in any democracy are two crore people represented by a government with restricted powers. Despite being one of the most populous cities in India, Delhi's government has limited powers because it is not a full state.
The Delhi government struggled to fight the COVID-19 pandemic because it did not have complete control over its healthcare system. The Central government controls some aspects of Delhi's healthcare, making it difficult for the state government to take timely and effective measures to control the spread of the virus.
The original idea behind Union Territories was just transitional:
When the Union Territories were first created, the idea was to provide a flexible yet transitional status to several territories that joined India. The territories were given a certain degree of autonomy, but they were also expected to eventually transition to statehood.
Goa, Manipur, Himachal Pradesh, and Tripura were initially Union Territories but were granted statehood as they developed economically and politically. This shows that the Union Territory status was meant to be temporary, and statehood was the ultimate goal.
Equal rights for representation and self-governance
Providing equal rights for representation and self-governance was one of the primary reasons for the creation of the Legislative Assembly of Delhi. As the city's population grows, the demand for more representation and self-governance becomes even more critical.
The Delhi government has been advocating for full statehood for years, arguing that it would give the city's residents more say in matters of governance. The lack of full statehood has led to several conflicts between the Delhi government and the Central government over issues like land, law and order, and the police.
The need for full statehood
The time has come to enter the second and final stage to create the full state of Delhi. This would give the city an elected government with greater powers and more say in matters of governance, such as law and order and land management.
If Delhi becomes a full state, it would have complete control over its police force, which is currently under the Central government's control. This would allow the city's elected government to take timely and effective measures to maintain law and order and ensure the safety of its citizens.
UN report on Delhi's population
According to a United Nations report, Delhi's urban agglomeration will make it the most populous city in the world by 2028. This highlights the urgency of granting full statehood to Delhi, as the city's population continues to grow.
With a population of nearly two crore people, Delhi is already struggling with issues like traffic congestion, pollution, and water scarcity. As its population grows, the city's infrastructure and governance will come under even more strain, making the need for full statehood even more urgent.
Reasons against granting statehood to Delhi:
Local political ambition:
The demand for statehood has primarily been driven by the political ambitions of the local government, rather than a national compulsion. The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) has been advocating for full statehood for Delhi since it came to power in 2015.
National capital interests:
Delhi, being the national capital, must be viewed from the prism of the interests of the entire country, and not just those of the city.
The central government has the responsibility to ensure that the security of vital institutions such as the President's estate, Parliament, and foreign embassies is maintained.
Special security cover:
These institutions require special security cover and close coordination with centrally administered agencies such as RAW and IB, which cannot be provided by a state government.
In 2020, there were protests in front of the Chinese embassy in Delhi, and the Delhi Police had to coordinate with the central government to ensure the safety of the embassy and its staff.
Central government responsibility:
The institutions in Delhi are the sole responsibility of the Union government, and not of any particular state legislative assembly.
The Delhi Police, which is responsible for maintaining law and order in the city, comes under the Ministry of Home Affairs, which is a part of the Union government.
Control over territory:
The Indian government must have some territory under its control and cannot be an occupant or a tenant of a state government.
The central government owns the land on which the President's estate and Parliament are located.
Reservation from regional parties:
Many regional parties have expressed their strong reservation towards granting full statehood to Delhi, as they believe that the national capital belongs to every citizen of the country and not just those who reside in the city.
The Shiromani Akali Dal, a regional party in Punjab, has opposed the demand for full statehood for Delhi.
Loss of advantages:
Statehood would deprive Delhi of the many advantages it gets as the national capital, such as the entire burden of policing being borne by the federal government.
The Delhi Police force has a strength of around 80,000 personnel and is responsible for maintaining law and order in the city, along with providing security to the vital institutions.
Way forward
Supreme Court Verdict on Delhi-Centre Power Tussle
The Supreme Court judgement in the Government of NCT Delhi vs Union of India case, overturned the August 2016 judgment of the Delhi high court, which had ruled that since Delhi was a Union territory all powers lay with the central government, not the elected Delhi government.
Resolving the dispute over the demarcation of powers between the Union Government and the Government of Delhi, the Supreme Court laid down a few key principles:
Delhi government has power in all areas except land, police and public order and the LG is bound by the aid and advice of the government in areas other than those exempted
The only exception to this rule, it said, was a proviso to Article 239-AA, which allowed the LG to refer to the President any issue on which there was a difference of opinion with the council of ministers. In such a case, the LG would be bound by the President’s decision.
Delhi Lieutenant Governor cannot act independently and must take the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers because national capital enjoys special status and is not a full state. Hence, the role of the L-G is different than that of a Governor.
It observed that neither the state nor the L-G should feel lionized, but realize that they are serving Constitutional obligations and there is no space for absolutism or anarchy in our Constitution.
