India Leadership
June 11th, 2009
Submitted by: Andre Ourthiague
India gained its freedom from British rule on August 15, 1947. Less than three years after attaining freedom, India had framed a Constitution and declared itself a Republic on January 26, 1950. The Constitution was shaped to ensure justice, liberty and equality for the citizens of India. The Constitution was made flexible enough to adjust to the new demands of social and economic changes that would arise under the new democratic framework; the 94 amendments to the Indian constitution since its adoption 60 years ago is a testament to this flexibility. The Fundamental Rights of every Indian citizen include the freedom of speech, expression, belief, assembly and association, migration, and choice of occupation or trade. These rights also protect every Indian from discrimination on grounds of race, religion, creed or sex, and are enforceable in courts of law.
The Indian constitution defines the federal government that presides over the 28 states of India. India has a parliamentary republic system of government based largely on the United Kingdom. Parliamentary republics, unlike presidential systems, do not feature an executive head of state with broad executive powers because these powers are typically designated by a prime minister. The government in India is divided as follows:
LEGISLATIVE
The legislative power of the Indian government is held in the two houses of parliament. The following descriptions are taken from the Parliament of India website.
Rajya Sabha (Council of States): The Council of States consists of not more than 250 members, of whom 12 are nominated by the President of India and the rest elected. It is not subject to dissolution, one-third of its members retiring at the end of every second year. The elections to the Council are indirect. The allotted quotas of representatives of each State are elected by the members of the Legislative Assembly of that State, in accordance with the system of proportional representation by means of a single transferable vote. The nominated members are persons with special knowledge or practical experience in literature, science, art and social service. The Rajya Sabha is presided over by the Vice- President of India.
Lok Sabha (House of the People): The House of the People consists of 545 members. Of these, 530 are directly elected from the 25 States and 13 from the seven Union Territories. Two members are nominated by the President to represent the Anglo-Indian community. Unless dissolved sooner, the term of the House is five years from the date appointed for its first meeting. The Lok Sabha elects its own presiding officer, the Speaker.
EXECUTIVE
There are three primary figures that serve in the executive branch: president, vice president, and prime minister. In India, the president serves as head of state and is commander-in-chief of the armed forces, but rarely executes constitutional power on his/her own initiative. The president is elected by an electoral college comprised of members from state legislatures and from members of both houses of parliament. Once elected the president serves a five-year term and can be re-elected. The current Indian president is Pratibha Devisingh Patil.
The vice-president serves as head of the Council of States (similar to the US vice-president). The vice president is elected by the members of parliament. The current vice president is Mohammad Hamid Ansari.
The final key figure in executive branch is the prime minister. The prime minister is elected by majority support in the Lok Sabha. It is the prime minister that oversees the day-to-day operation of the federal government. The current Prime Minister of India is Dr. Manmohan Singh. The prime minister is also responsible for selecting a cabinet of ministers that handle policy regarding specific areas of the government. The ministers are equivalent to secretaries (state, treasury, etc) in the United States, and to ministers of China.
The prime minister and the cabinet are both accountable to the Lok Sabha. Individual lapses by a department can result in a “vote of no confidence”, and thus a forced resignation for individual ministers. A serious lapse by the prime minister and his cabinet can result in a “vote of no confidence” against the government. A “vote of no confidence” against the government requires all ministers headed by the prime minister to resign. The closest parallel we have in the United States is presidential impeachment.
JUDICIARY
The Supreme Court in India upholds and interprets the constitution. The Indian Supreme Court serves in the same capacity as the US Supreme Court. Each state in India has a High Court that defines laws particular to the individual state. However, a uniform civil and criminal laws applies to the entire country of India. State High Courts also do not possess the power to contradict the Indian constitution. The Supreme Court is responsible for resolving disputes between state and federal governments.
The Indian government is very similar to that of the United States. The primary difference is in the power held by the Prime Minister. The roles of Indian president and prime minister are encompassed in the roles of the US president. Aside from this division of roles the systems are strikingly similar. Two legislative houses hold the law making power. An executive branch holds military decision making, vital decision making, and key appointment responsibility, and a judicial branch interprets the constitution. Despite fighting for independence from British rule, the United Kingdom was the model of democracy that most strongly influenced the structure of the India’s government.
Entry Filed under: China, India, New Delhi, Pre-Departure
7 Comments Add your own
1. Alex Thornton | December 18th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
The Indian legislative branch, specifically the Rajya Sabha, looks similar to the early American legislative branch. The United States Senate initially was formed of senators elected by state legislators, not the people. The first American and Indian leaders seem hesitant to grant unlimited democracy to the people. Perhaps as Indians become more familiar with democracy, they too will have direct elections to the Rajya Sabha.
2. Jason Silver | February 11th, 2010 at 4:10 pm
The US government and the Union government of India are structured very similarly. However there are certain aspects of the political landscape which are completely different. In America, the major political stalwarts have been the Democrats and the Republicans. Most of the citizenry from states around the union affiliate themselves with these two. India however has at least 40 from what I can count. This can create vastly different opinions on certain public policy issues and can certainly lead to confusion and political chaos if parties cannot agree. It will be interesting to see how the political structure of India plays a role in its continued economic development.
3. Jay Ponto | February 28th, 2010 at 5:53 pm
“The Economist” describes India’s central government as “an army of clerks.” The article goes on to say that “India’s central government employs around 3 [million] civil servants and then states another 7 [million],” with these workers being referred to as “vast armies of paper-shuffling peons.” The article also classifies India’s bureaucrats as some of the hardest working in the world, yet they fail to do a substantial job at serving their citizens (http://www.economist.com/world/asia/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10804248&source=login_payBarrier).
Unfortunately, issues like corruption still greatly trouble the Indian government. Much development spending does not reach the intended purposes, and is siphoned off by inefficient and dishonest individuals along the way. Though Prime Minister Singh promised reform throughout the Indian government in 2004, it seems that more work will be necessary to construct a more efficient democracy.
4. Kirk Story | March 3rd, 2010 at 11:04 pm
Andre’s initial article is informative and objective. After reading the responses of my fellow classmates, I am impressed by their comments on the Union government.
Alex made an astute point that, “The first American and Indian leaders seem hesitant to grant unlimited democracy to the people. Perhaps as Indians become more familiar with democracy, they too will have direct elections to the Rajya Sabha.” I agree with this statement, but also feel that the current, along with the first, American leaders seem hesitant to grant unlimited democracy to the people. The US electoral college remains as an archaic hindrance to unlimited democracy.
Jason made the point that India has approximately 40 political parties. This reality has resulted in political gridlock, similar to what we are seeing in the US legislative body at present. I personally feel the US would benefit from a multi-party system requiring coalition building to pass initiatives undemanding of partisan polarity.
Jay’s post regarding the “vast armies of paper-shuffling peons,” is significant. Conceivably, India would pull far greater international weight if it’s government behaved as a more cohesive and productive unit. Again, I speak as an outsider for my country’s representative body does not stand on “cohesive and productive” higher-ground.
5. Catherine Kristensen | March 12th, 2010 at 2:17 pm
40 political parties seems like a lot! Until you realize that this number just reflects the number of recognized political parties. According to Wikipedia, there are an additional 730 registered unrecognized parties. Political gridlock is right! What a great metaphor, Kirk.
In America, our two primary political parties are visually representing by a donkey and an elephant. I find it interesting that each of the recognized political parties in India also have their own symbol. Not surprisingly, the elephant is the symbol for one of their parties as well (Bahujan Samaj Party). Many of the symbols are animals, following the American tradition, such as the lion or cock.
But some of some of the other symbols are a little obscure, including:
- mango
- umbrella
- conch
- bicycle
- chair
- ladder
- lightbulb
- spectacles
(Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_recognised_political_parties_in_India)
6. Chase Janvrin | March 13th, 2010 at 8:14 pm
At the risk of sounding anti-democracy, I can’t help but compare the effectiveness of the governments of the US, India, and China. While India, much like the US, frequently gets bogged down in bureaucratic paperwork and loopholes (um, hello health care reform), China seems to power forward, focused intently on progress. At this point it sounds like Indian government is just an even bigger, even more bloated government than the US or Britian. In my mind politicians have two purposes; to represent, and to lead. These often are conflicting ideals. I wonder if we’re on the verge of a new political system, a hybrid of sorts. Imagine leaders having the power and freedom to lead progress, instead of trying to appease each and every constituent. All the while still adhering to the values of the people. The values and needs of the people: a peopleocracy. I wonder who can achieve this first.
7. Jeff | March 19th, 2010 at 2:56 pm
When I think of Indian government, I am reminded of Vogans in the movie The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy. Endless bureaucracy, everything in triplicate, signed off by 14 people. One of the major reasons for the success of call centers and telecommunications in India was because they couldn’t make laws fast enough to get the red tape in place. These first mover companies therefore had an opportunity that the established businesses didn’t have. This still remains a major impediment to new foreign businesses in India.
In the PBS documentary about the “Killing Fields” in India where farmers were committing suicide because of inability to pay loan sharks, I was reminded again of the towering Bureaucracy. People were given lip-service that help was coming, but nothing really ever happened.
I know with such a diverse population, it’s probably smart to go slow and steady rather than quickly and risk upsetting people, but it does slow down progress.
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed