All questions of System of Government: Parliamentary & Federal System for BPSC (Bihar) Exam

The usual features of a federation, viz., two government, division of powers, written Constitution, the supremacy of Constitution, the rigidity of Constitution, independent judiciary and bicameralism.

Federalism is a system of government in which the power is divided between a central authority and various constituent units of the country.

Understanding the Statements
The question revolves around three statements related to the powers of the Prime Minister of India and the President of the United States, with a focus on the structure of their respective governments.
Statement 1: The Prime Minister can advise the President to dissolve the Lok Sabha, leading to fresh elections before the term ends.
- This statement is correct. In India, the Prime Minister has the authority to advise the President to dissolve the Lok Sabha. This can happen under various circumstances, including a loss of majority support or political strategy, allowing for fresh elections before the term concludes.
Statement 2: The American President can dissolve the House of Representatives.
- This statement is incorrect. In the United States, the President does not have the power to dissolve the House of Representatives. The House operates on a fixed term of two years unless it is disbanded through other political mechanisms, such as a vote of no confidence, which does not exist in the American system.
Statement 3: The American presidential system operates under the doctrine of separation of powers.
- This statement is correct. The American political system is characterized by a clear separation of powers among the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches. This separation is designed to prevent the concentration of power and to create a system of checks and balances.
Conclusion
Based on the analysis:
- Statement 1 is correct.
- Statement 2 is incorrect.
- Statement 3 is correct.
Thus, the correct answer is option 'C' (1 and 3 only).

Pakistan and Brazil practice federalism.

While each state in India enjoys autonomy in exercising powers on certain issues, subjects of national concern require that all of these states follow the laws of the central government. 

• The Constitution contains lists that detail the issues that each tier of government can make laws on. 
•  Besides, the Constitution also specifies where each tier of government can get the money from for the work that it does. So, 1 is wrong. 
• Under federalism, the states are not merely agents of the federal government but draw their authority from the Constitution as well. All persons in India are governed by laws and policies made by each of these levels of government.

US model is based on powerful states. USSR was based on an authoritarian centre. Canada is a federal country with a Union bias, the same as India.

Explanation:
The correct answer is option 'B', which states that water resources are not private property, and therefore the rule of law applied by ordinary courts is not appropriate to deal with its distribution.

Reasoning:
There are several reasons why the adjudication of inter-state water disputes requires a separate tribunal and the application of different rules compared to ordinary courts:

1. Nature of water resources:
Water resources, such as rivers, lakes, and groundwater, are not private property but are considered as public or common resources. Therefore, the distribution and allocation of these resources cannot be governed by the same rules that apply to private property. The distribution of water resources requires a more comprehensive and specialized approach.

2. Complexity of water disputes:
Water disputes between states are often complex and involve various technical, scientific, and legal aspects. These disputes require the consideration of factors such as river basin management, water availability, ecological impact, and the needs of different states. Ordinary courts may not have the necessary expertise or technical knowledge to effectively adjudicate on these matters.

3. Need for specialized expertise:
The adjudication of inter-state water disputes involves the understanding of hydrological, economic, and ecological aspects. A separate tribunal can be constituted with members who have specific knowledge and expertise in these fields. This allows for a more informed and comprehensive decision-making process.

4. Expedited resolution:
Water disputes can have significant socio-economic implications and can impact the livelihoods and development of the states involved. Having a separate tribunal helps expedite the resolution of these disputes, as the tribunal can focus solely on water-related issues and avoid the delays often associated with the regular court system.

Conclusion:
Given the unique nature of water resources and the complexities involved in inter-state water disputes, it is essential to have a separate tribunal and a different set of rules to ensure a fair and efficient resolution. This approach recognizes the public nature of water resources and the need for specialized expertise in dealing with these disputes.

Explanation:

Statement-I:
- During a National Emergency in India, Article 358 does not automatically suspend the Fundamental Rights under Article 19.
- Article 358 only empowers the President to suspend the right to move any court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights during a National Emergency.
- This means that the other Fundamental Rights, apart from those under Article 19, remain intact during a National Emergency.

Statement-II:
- The correct provision that allows the President to suspend the right to move any court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights is under Article 359, not Article 21 as mentioned in Statement-II.
- Article 359 empowers the President to suspend the enforcement of all or any of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed by the Constitution during a National Emergency.
- Therefore, Statement-II is incorrect as it mentions the wrong article for the President's authority to suspend the right to move any court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights.

Conclusion:
- In conclusion, Statement-I is correct as it mentions the suspension of Fundamental Rights under Article 19 during a National Emergency, but Statement-II is incorrect as it mentions a wrong provision for the President's authority to suspend the right to move any court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights.

Indian Parliamentary Group (IPG)

Indian Parliamentary Group (IPG) is a non-profit, non-political, and autonomous body formed in 1949. It is aimed at promoting the interests of India's parliamentary democracy and strengthening India's relations with other countries.

Statement 1: Indian parliamentary Group is an autonomous body

The statement is correct. The Indian Parliamentary Group (IPG) is an autonomous body. It is not affiliated with any political party or government agency. It is a non-profit organization, which is run by elected members of Parliament.

Statement 2: The membership of IPG is open to all members of the Parliament

The statement is also correct. The membership of IPG is open to all members of Parliament, including Lok Sabha members, Rajya Sabha members, and members of State Legislative Assemblies. The group has more than 450 members, including members from all political parties.

Conclusion

Both statements are correct. The Indian Parliamentary Group (IPG) is an autonomous body, and its membership is open to all members of Parliament. The group aims to promote India's parliamentary democracy and strengthen India's relations with other countries.

Calling Attention Motion It is introduced in the Parliament by a member to call the attention of a minister to a matter of urgent public importance and to seek an authoritative statement from him on that matter. Like the zero hours, it is also an Indian innovation in the parliamentary procedure and has been in existence since 1954. However, unlike the zero hours, it is mentioned in the Rules of Procedure.

Parliamentary Committee: Explanation of the Answer

The correct option is "B. 2 Only." Here's an explanation of the answer:

1. Appointed, Elected, or Nominated by the House

A parliamentary committee is a group of Members of Parliament (MPs) who are appointed, elected, or nominated by the House. The appointment or nomination process varies depending on the type of committee, but typically involves a vote by the House or a decision by the Speaker or Chairman.

2. Works under the Direction of the Speaker

While parliamentary committees are appointed or nominated by the House, they do not work under the direction of the Speaker. Instead, they are independent bodies that operate according to their own rules and procedures. However, they are accountable to the House and must report back to the House on their findings and recommendations.

In summary, while the first statement is partially correct, the second statement is incorrect. Parliamentary committees work independently and are not directed by the Speaker or Chairman.

The constitution empowers parliament to make laws on any matter in-state list under five extraordinary circumstances - Rajya sabha passes the resolution, national emergency, states make a request, to implement international agreements, during president's rule.

Contempt of Courts:

Contempt of court is the offense of being disobedient to or disrespectful towards a court of law and its officers. It is an act of disrespect, disregard, or disobedience towards a court of law that may obstruct the administration of justice.

Statements:

1. Correct: This statement defines what Contempt of Court is.

2. Correct: Criminal contempt means publication of any matter that scandalizes or lowers the authority of any court. This statement is also correct.

3. Correct: The Constitution of India does not mention anything about Contempt of Courts. It is mentioned in the Contempt of Courts Act of 1971. Hence, this statement is also correct.

Therefore, the correct answer is option B, i.e., 1 and 2.

The Constitution provides for a bicameral legislature consisting of an Upper House (Rajya Sabha) and a Lower House (Lok Sabha). The Rajya Sabha represents the states of Indian Federation, while the Lok Sabha represents the people of India as a whole. The Rajya Sabha (even though a less powerful chamber) is required to maintain the federal equilibrium by protecting the interests of states against the undue interference of the centre.

Understanding the Statements
In the context of the National Emergency provisions in India, let’s analyze both statements to determine their correctness.
Statement-I: Correctness
- Statement-I asserts that the President can declare a National Emergency in the face of imminent danger.
- This is indeed correct. Article 352 of the Indian Constitution allows the President to declare a National Emergency when there is a threat to the security of India or any part thereof due to war, external aggression, or armed rebellion.
Statement-II: Correctness
- Statement-II claims that the geographical scope of a National Emergency proclamation can only apply to the entire country and not to specified parts.
- This statement is incorrect. While a National Emergency declaration typically applies to the whole country, it can also be limited to specific areas. For instance, during the 1975-77 Emergency, it was applicable to the entire nation, but the Constitution allows for localized declarations under specific circumstances.
Conclusion
- Since Statement-I is correct and Statement-II is incorrect, the correct answer is option 'C': Statement-I is correct, but Statement-II is incorrect.
This distinction is crucial as it reflects the flexibility embedded in the Constitution regarding emergency powers, allowing for regional applicability under certain conditions.

Fiscal Federalism in India

Fiscal federalism refers to the distribution of financial powers between the Centre and the States. In India, the practice of fiscal federalism is enshrined in the Constitution and involves several components.

Distribution of Financial Powers

The Constitution of India divides the financial powers between the Centre and the States through the Union List, State List, and Concurrent List. The Union List contains subjects on which only the Centre can legislate and collect taxes, while the State List contains subjects on which only the States can legislate and collect taxes. The Concurrent List contains subjects on which both the Centre and the States can legislate, but the Centre has the power to override the State laws in case of a conflict.

Setting up of Finance Commission

The Finance Commission is set up every five years to recommend the distribution of the central pool of taxes between the Centre and the States. The Commission also recommends measures to improve the finances of the States and grants-in-aid to the States based on their needs.

Devolution of Central Pool to States

The devolution of the central pool of taxes to the States is based on the recommendations of the Finance Commission. The devolution is done through the Finance Commission Grants, which are provided to the States to meet their revenue deficits and developmental needs.

Conclusion

In India, fiscal federalism is an important aspect of the federal structure of governance. It ensures that the financial powers are distributed between the Centre and the States in a manner that promotes cooperative federalism and ensures the overall development of the country.

The Supreme Court can strike down certain provisions/amendments of the Indian Constitution if it feels that the provisions are unconstitutional or alter the basic structure of the constitution. But striking down does not take away the provisions from the Constitution. To take away the provisions, Parliament has to present a Constitution Amendment bill to repeal the provisions.

Explanation:

Grants from the Centre to the States are an important aspect of fiscal federalism in India. These grants are given by the Central Government to the State Governments under various schemes and programmes. Grants are given by the Centre to the States under the recommendations of the Finance Commission.

Statutory Grants:

Grants from the Centre to the States under the recommendations of the Finance Commission are known as Statutory Grants. These grants are provided to the States as per the provisions of the Constitution of India. The grants are given to the States for the purpose of promoting their welfare and development. The grants are provided to the States in the form of tax devolution, grants-in-aid, and specific grants.

Tax Devolution:

Tax devolution is the distribution of taxes collected by the Central Government among the States. The Finance Commission determines the share of each State in the taxes collected by the Central Government. The share of each State is determined based on the population and other factors.

Grants-in-Aid:

Grants-in-aid are given to the States by the Central Government for specific purposes. These grants are provided to the States to meet the expenditure incurred by them for implementing various schemes and programmes.

Specific Grants:

Specific Grants are given to the States by the Central Government for specific purposes. These grants are given to the States for implementing specific schemes and programmes. The grants are provided to the States for the purpose of promoting their welfare and development.

Conclusion:

Thus, it can be concluded that grants from the Centre to the States under the recommendations of the Finance Commission are known as Statutory Grants. These grants are given to the States in the form of tax devolution, grants-in-aid, and specific grants. The grants are provided to the States for the purpose of promoting their welfare and development.

Introduction:
In India, the states have the authority to borrow from the market in order to meet their financial requirements. However, there are certain conditions and procedures that need to be followed for borrowing purposes. The correct answer to the given question is option 'C', which states that the states can borrow from the market with the consent of the Centre.

Explanation:
The borrowing powers of the states are regulated by the Constitution of India and the Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management (FRBM) Act, 2003. Let's understand why option 'C' is the correct answer.

Borrowing powers of the states:
The states in India have the power to borrow from the market to meet their fiscal requirements. This borrowing can be done through the issuance of State Development Loans (SDLs). These loans are issued by the state governments to finance their development projects, infrastructure development, and other expenditure needs.

Consent of the Centre:
While the states have the authority to borrow from the market, they need to obtain the consent of the Centre for such borrowings. This is because the Centre plays a crucial role in regulating and monitoring the borrowing activities of the states to ensure fiscal discipline and stability.

Conditions for borrowing:
The consent of the Centre is required for the states to borrow from the market, and this consent is granted based on certain conditions and guidelines. These conditions include:

1. Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management (FRBM) Act: The states need to adhere to the provisions of the FRBM Act, which sets targets for fiscal deficit and debt levels. The Centre ensures that the borrowing by the states is in line with these targets.

2. Fiscal Consolidation Plan: The states also need to prepare a Fiscal Consolidation Plan (FCP) in consultation with the Centre. This plan outlines the strategies and measures to be undertaken by the states to achieve fiscal discipline and reduce their debt burden.

3. Market Borrowing Limits: The Centre sets limits on the market borrowing by the states as a percentage of their Gross State Domestic Product (GSDP). The states need to adhere to these limits while borrowing from the market.

4. Monitoring and Reporting: The states are required to regularly report their borrowing activities to the Centre. The Centre monitors the borrowing of the states to ensure compliance with the prescribed guidelines and targets.

Conclusion:
In conclusion, the states in India can borrow from the market with the consent of the Centre. The Centre plays a crucial role in regulating and monitoring the borrowing activities of the states to ensure fiscal discipline and stability. The states need to adhere to the conditions and guidelines set by the Centre while borrowing from the market.

B

Consultative Committees Formation These committees are constituted by the Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs. These are normally constituted after the new Lok Sabha is constituted. This implies that these committees stand dissolved upon dissolution of every Lok Sabha and thus, are reconstituted upon the constitution of each Lok Sabha. Composition The guidelines regarding the composition, functions and procedures of these committees are formulated by the Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs. The same Ministry also makes arrangements for holding their meetings both during the session and the intersession period of Parliament. These consist of members of both the Houses of Parliament. However, the membership of these committees is voluntary and is left to the choice of the members and the leaders of their parties. The maximum membership of a committee is 30 and the minimum is 10. Functions These committees are attached to various ministries/departments of the Central Government. The Minister/Minister of State in charge of the Ministry concerned acts as the chairman of the consultative committee of that ministry. These provide a forum for informal discussions between the ministers and the members of Parliament on policies and programmes of the government and the manner of their implementation. The Consultative Committees are not Parliamentary Committees. A parliamentary committee means a committee that: Is appointed or elected by the House or nominated by the Speaker/Chairman. Works under the direction of the Speaker/Chairman. Presents its report to the House or to the Speaker/Chairman Has a secretariat provided by the Lok Sabha/Rajya Sabha.

Explanation of the Answer
The question presents two statements regarding National Emergency and President's Rule in India. Let’s analyze both statements to understand why option 'C' is the correct choice.
Statement I: National Emergency
- Incidents of Proclamation: National Emergency has indeed been proclaimed three times in India:
- 1962: Induced by the Sino-Indian War.
- 1971: During the Bangladesh Liberation War.
- 1975: Due to internal disturbances.
- Duration and Implications: Each proclamation had different durations and implications for civil liberties and state governance.
Statement II: President's Rule
- Article 356: This article allows the central government to assume control of a state's administration if the state government is unable to function according to constitutional provisions.
- Exceptional Circumstances: It serves as a mechanism for maintaining constitutional order when there is a failure in governance at the state level.
Correctness of Statements
- Both Statements Correct: Both Statement I and Statement II are accurate. Statement I correctly outlines the instances of National Emergency, while Statement II correctly explains the functioning of President's Rule under Article 356.
- Independence of Statements: However, Statement II does not directly explain Statement I. They pertain to different aspects of governance and emergency powers in India.
Conclusion
- Since both statements are correct but do not explain each other, the answer is option 'C': Both Statement I and Statement II are correct, but Statement II does not explain Statement I.

Under Article 368(2), Parliament can amend the constitution by passing a Bill in each House by a majority of the total membership of that House and by a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of that House present and voting. Those provisions of the Constitution which are related to the federal structure of the polity can be amended by a special majority of the Parliament and also with the consent of half of the state legislatures by a simple majority. If one or some or all the remaining states take no action on the bill, it does not matter; the moment half of the states give their consent, the formality is completed. There is no time limit within which the states should give their consent to the bill.

Legislative matters on which uniformity of legislation throughout the country is desirable but not essential are enumerated in the Concurrent List of the Indian Constitution. This list consists of subjects on which both the Central and State Governments can legislate simultaneously. Some of the important matters covered under the Concurrent List include:

1. Education: This includes primary, secondary and higher education, as well as vocational training and technical education.

2. Criminal law: This includes the Indian Penal Code, Criminal Procedure Code, and other laws relating to crimes and punishments.

3. Marriage and divorce: This includes laws regulating marriage, divorce, and maintenance.

4. Adoption: This includes laws relating to the adoption of children.

5. Drugs and poisons: This includes laws relating to the manufacture, sale, and distribution of drugs and poisons.

6. Trade unions: This includes laws relating to the formation, registration, and regulation of trade unions.

7. Economic and social planning: This includes laws relating to economic and social planning, as well as the implementation of plans.

8. Family planning: This includes laws relating to family planning and population control.

9. Labour welfare: This includes laws relating to the welfare of labour, such as the Employees' State Insurance Act, the Minimum Wages Act, and the Factories Act.

In conclusion, the Concurrent List of the Indian Constitution contains important legislative matters on which both the Central and State Governments can legislate simultaneously, and the uniformity of legislation throughout the country is desirable but not essential.

To protect the interest of states in the financial matters, the Constitution lays down that the following bills can be introduced in the Parliament only on the recommendation of the President

The idea of cooperative federalism suggests that both the general government and regional governments are coordinate and independent bodies. This concept is based on the belief that the central government and regional governments should work together to address the needs of the people and uphold the principles of federalism. Cooperative federalism promotes a system where power is shared between the central government and regional governments, allowing them to work in collaboration and partnership.

Cooperation and Coordination:
In cooperative federalism, the general government and regional governments cooperate and coordinate their efforts to address various issues faced by the country. This means that instead of the central government being completely dependent on regional governments or regional governments being subordinated to the central government, both entities work together as equal partners. They share responsibilities, resources, and decision-making powers to ensure effective governance and address the diverse needs of the people.

Power-sharing:
Cooperative federalism emphasizes the importance of power-sharing between the central government and regional governments. It recognizes that different regions may have unique needs and priorities, and therefore, regional governments should have the power to make decisions and policies that are best suited for their specific contexts. At the same time, the central government retains certain powers and responsibilities that are necessary for the overall functioning of the country.

Mutual Independence:
While cooperative federalism promotes cooperation and coordination between different levels of government, it also recognizes the importance of mutual independence. This means that both the general government and regional governments have their own respective spheres of authority and can operate independently within those areas. They have the autonomy to make decisions and implement policies without interference from other levels of government, as long as they do not violate the principles and laws established by the constitution.

Benefits of Cooperative Federalism:
1. Efficient Governance: Cooperative federalism allows for the efficient allocation of resources and responsibilities between the central government and regional governments. This can lead to better governance and faster decision-making processes.

2. Enhanced Representation: By involving regional governments in decision-making processes, cooperative federalism ensures that the diverse needs and interests of different regions are taken into account. This helps in enhancing democratic representation and inclusivity.

3. Flexibility: Cooperative federalism allows for flexibility and adaptability in governance. Regional governments can tailor policies and programs to suit the specific needs of their regions, while the central government provides a framework for coordination and collaboration.

4. Strengthened Unity: By working together and sharing responsibilities, cooperative federalism strengthens the unity and integrity of the country. It promotes a sense of collaboration and shared purpose among different levels of government, fostering a stronger nation.

In conclusion, the idea of cooperative federalism suggests that the central government and regional governments should work as equal partners, sharing responsibilities and resources, and making decisions in a coordinated manner. This approach promotes efficient governance, enhances democratic representation, and strengthens the unity of the country.

Some members of the Constituent Assembly criticized the incorporation of emergency provisions in the Constitution on the following grounds - (a) The federal character of the Constitution will be destroyed and the Union will become all. (b) powerful. (c) The powers of the State - both the Union and the units - will entirely be concentrated in the hands of the Union executive. (d) The President will become a dictator. (e) The financial autonomy of the state will be nullified. (f) Fundamental rights will become meaningless and, as a result, the democratic foundations of the Constitution will be destroyed. However, there were also protagonists of the emergency provisions in the Constituent Assembly. Sir Alladi Krishnaswami Ayyar labelled them as ‘the very life-breath of the Constitution’. Mahabir Tyagi opined that they would work as a ‘safety-valve’ and thereby help in the maintenance of the Constitution. While defending the emergency provisions in the Constituent Assembly, Dr B. R. Ambedkar also accepted the possibility of their misuse. He observed, ‘I do not altogether deny that there is a possibility of the Articles being abused or employed for political purposes’.

Explanation:

Statement-I: Parliamentary systems often lack continuity in long-term policies due to government tenure uncertainties.
- This statement is correct because in a parliamentary system, the government's tenure is dependent on the support of the majority in the parliament. If the government loses a vote of confidence or fails to pass key legislation, it may lead to early elections and a change in government. This can result in a lack of continuity in long-term policies as new governments may have different agendas and priorities.

Statement-II: The system provided better representation for various sections, interests, and regions, fostering national unity and inclusivity.
- This statement is incorrect. While parliamentary systems do provide for better representation of various sections, interests, and regions through the proportional representation system, it does not necessarily foster national unity and inclusivity. In fact, the multi-party system in parliamentary systems can sometimes lead to fragmented politics and regionalism, which may hinder national unity.
Therefore, the correct answer is option 'C' - Statement-I is correct, but Statement-II is incorrect.

Committee on Absence of Members

- This committee considers all applications from members for leave of absence from the sittings of the House.
- It also examines the cases of members who have been absent for a period of 10 days or more without permission.
- The committee is constituted by the Speaker/Chairperson of the House.
- In Lok Sabha, the committee consists of 15 members, while in Rajya Sabha it consists of 10 members.
- The members of the committee are nominated by the Speaker/Chairperson based on the proportionality of the party strength in the House.
- The committee meets periodically to consider the applications for leave of absence and to examine the cases of prolonged absence.
- It submits its report to the Speaker/Chairperson who then lays it before the House.
- The report includes the reasons given by the absent members for their absence and the committee's recommendations on whether to grant leave of absence or take any other action.
- The committee's role is important in ensuring that members attend the sittings regularly and participate in the proceedings of the House.