Research Project on Constitutional Law-I

Merits, Demerits and Suitability of

Parliamentary Form of Government
to the Indian Environment: A
Critique

Submitted by
Anurag Pandey
Roll Number: 21
B.A. LL.B. (Hons.)
III Semester
Batch: 2014-19

Of Law School,
Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi.
In
October, 2015
Under the guidance of
Prof. V. S. Mishra

Page | 1

CERTIFICATE
The project entitled Merits, Demerits and Suitability of Parliamentary Form of
Government to the Indian Environment: A Critique submitted to Law School,
Banaras Hindu University for Constitutional Law I, as part of Internal assessment
is based on my original work carried out under the guidance of Prof. V. S. Mishra
during the III Semester. The research work has not been submitted elsewhere for
award of any degree. The material borrowed from other sources and incorporated
in the thesis has been duly acknowledged. I understand that I myself could be held
responsible and accountable for plagiarism, if any, detected later on.

Signature of the candidate

Date:

Page | 2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to take this opportunity to express my sincere and profound gratitude
to my guide and mentor for this subject Prof. V. S. Mishra for his guidance and
constant encouragement throughout the course of my work. He gladly accepted all
the pains in going through my work, and participated in enlightening and
motivating discussions, which were extremely helpful.
I humbly extend my words of gratitude to other faculty members, teachers and
administration of the department for promising me the valuable help and time
whenever it was required.
I would like to express my deepest sense of appreciation to my family members
and mates for their constant encouragement and support, and finally thanks to the
almighty strength which inspired and continues to inspire me greatly.

YResearch Project on Constitutional Law-I...................................1

YAcknowledgement....................................................................2
YTable of Contents......................................................................3
YAbstract................................................................................... 5
YIntroduction.............................................................................6
YRationale Behind Adopting Parliamentary Form of Government in

India.......................................................................................... 7
YThe Parliamentary System.........................................................9
YAdvantages of the Parliamentary System of Government..........11
YDisadvantages of the Parliamentary System of Government......13
YArguments against Parliamentary System of Government.........15
YArguments in Favour of Parliamentary System of Government...17

Page | 3

Analysis of Parliamentary Forms Applicability in India...............19

Conclusion...............................................................................23
Bibliography............................................................................25

At the time of independence, our leaders adopted the Parliamentary

form of government, and today our country is the largest democracy in
the world. This paper analyses the pros and cons of the Parliamentary
form of government for India.

Page | 4

Abstract
This paper attempts to illustrate the efficiency of Parliamentary form of democracy
in the Indian polity and culture. It also enunciates the comparison of it with the
Presidential form of democracy in U.S.A. This paper would emphasize on the
factors that drove India to adopt the Parliamentary system of government and how
the Constitution of our country is conducive to this political system. The researcher
would analyze the impacts and repercussions if Presidential form of government is
adopted and practiced in India. Indians usually comment against the existing
political system and hence there are a lot of opinions and arguments both for and
against the existing form of democracy in the country. Due to the decline in the
efficiency of the Parliament as an institution of accountability, the purpose served
by the Parliamentary system, this issue has become a matter of great debate and
discussion and hence, the researcher took up this topic. This paper will assess the
competency of the Parliamentary system with respect to Presidential system in
India by focusing on the relationship between the Executive and the Legislature,
mainly at the Union level.

Page | 5

Introduction
The Parliamentary system of government refers to a system of government having
the real executive power vested in a cabinet composed of members of the
legislature who are individually and collectively responsible to the legislature.1
That means it is a kind of democracy where the executive and legislature are interconnected and the former obtains its democratic legitimacy2 from, and is held
accountable to, the legislature and therefore, the opposition always keeps it alert
for it always lives in the shadow of a coming defeat.3
The emergency regime of Mrs. Indira Gandhi between 1975-1977 called for a
serious discussion over the form of government in India. The demand for the
change came from the supporters of the emergency regime who argued that the
unrest and divisiveness in the country that had preceded the declaration of a
national emergency in June 1975 indicated the failure of the parliamentary
system.4 It was suggested that, in order to prevent the recurrence of similar
situations, India should adopt a stronger presidential rule in the country.

1 Definition according to http://www.merriam-webster.com, Last seen on

07/10/2015.
2 Arun Aggarwal, The Indian Parliament. Paper presented at the Conference on
Public Institutions in India: Performance and Design, Harvard University, Cambridge,
February.
3 Devesh Kapur and Pratap Bhanu Mehta, The Indian Parliament as an Institution of
Accountability.
4 Kul B. Rai, Should India change its parliamentary system? As on 28/01/1981,
http://www.theHindu.com, Last seen on 07/10/2015

Page | 6

Rationale Behind Adopting

Parliamentary Form of
Government in India
India adopted the Parliamentary form of democracy in the year 1947 since India
has been familiar with its working during the times of British Rule. The type of
government that functioned in India before independence in 1947 was very much
similar to the British model of parliamentary. The framers of the constitution were
greatly influenced by the English system. Therefore, the members of the
Constituent Assembly decided to adopt this form of government for the
independent India. India is a nation deeply divided into several groups with
conflicting interests. All these varied groups are ensured representation in the
Parliament through this form of government.
As explained by K.M. Munshi in the Constituent Assembly, We must not forget a
very important fact that during the last one hundred years Indian public life has
largely drawn upon the traditions of the British Constitutional Law. Most of us and
during the last several generations before us, public men in India, have looked up
to the British model as the best. For the last thirty of forty years, some kind of
responsibility has been introduced in the governance of this country. Our
constitutional traditions have become Parliamentary and we have now all our
Provinces functioning more or less on the British model. As a matter of fact, today,
the Dominion Government of India is functioning as a full-fledged Parliamentary
government.5
Besides Munshi, K. Santhanam, referring to the Presidential system in the U.S.A.,
too made it clear that the presidential system the executive and legislature could
be seen at loggerheads because of their separation with each other and when they

5 Subir K. Bhatnagar, Need for Structural Changes in Indian Parliamentary Model I,

Central Law Quarterly, 2

Page | 7

are at loggerheads for a period of three or four years till either the legislature is
renewed or the president is re- elected, the whole thing will be a deadlock.6

6 Ibid, 3

Page | 8

The Constitution of India rejected the Presidential system as in the U.S.A. on the
grounds that under such a system, the Executive and the Legislatures are
separate from and independent of each other, which is likely to cause conflicts
between them, which our infant democracy could ill-afford to risk.7
Therefore, the familiarity of the Indian polity with the working of the British
system of government, representation of diverse interest groups, fear of dead-lock
between the executive and legislature- all led to the adoption of the parliamentary
system of government in India by the Constituent Assembly.

7 According to Durga Das Basu, Commentary on The Constitution of India, (8th

Edition 2012, LexisNexis Butterworths Wadhwa, Nagpur)

Page | 9

THE PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM

There are a number of features8 of this system of democracy. Some of them are as
follows:

Nominal Head of the State: Under this form of government, the

head of the state i.e. the President in Indian context is titular, while the
Prime Minister is the Real head. This implies that the person holding
the Presidential post may have great stature but he does not exercise
his power independently. Constitutionally, all the powers belong to him
and every affair of the State runs under his name and assent as
articulated in Article 77 of our Constitution, but those powers are
actually exercised by the Council of Ministers headed by the Prime
Minister who is the head of the Government. This has been provided by
the Constitution under Article 74. Thus, there exist two heads of the
executive, a real and a nominal head. The president has to act
according to the advice of the Council of Ministers or else it might be
set aside.

Close Nexus between the Executive and Legislature: The

Constitution-makers adopted a partial separation of powers between
the executive and legislature so that they are not totally independent
of each other. Therefore, under this system the executive and the
legislature have a close collaboration with each other. This is done by
choosing the Council of Ministers from the legislature, which involves
15% of the strength of the House of the People. The President
summons the legislature and gives his consent to the bills that are
initiated and passed by the legislature to make them Acts.

Accountability of the Executive: The executives have to perform all

those residuary functions of the government which involve the
implementation and administration of various policies & Acts and
orders determined by the legislature and ordered by the judiciary
respectively. In the Parliamentary system, the executive is responsible
and accountable to the legislature for all its actions since it has the
right to seek detailed information about the working of the Ministers.
The Council of Ministers remain in office as long as they enjoy the
support and confidence of the Lok Sabha, i.e., the House of the People.

8 Devesh Kapur And Pratap Bhanu Mehta, The Indian Parliament As An Institution Of
Accountability, United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, January
2006

P a g e | 10

Collective Responsibility: The Council of Ministers has Collective

Responsibility towards each other which mean that the council shares
the responsibility for the lapses of each and every minister. Moreover,
the individual minister cannot differ from the decision of the council,
particularly the Cabinet. Thus, in order to oppose the policy or
decisions of the cabinet, the minister has to resign from the council
and then refute it on the floors of the legislature. Therefore, the
ministers swim and sink together.

Leadership of the Prime Minister: J. Laski said, Prime Minister is

central to formation, central to growth and central to the death of the
Council of Ministers. Since he is the Head of the Government and also
the Real head of the State, the President appoints and distributes
portfolios among the members of the Council of Ministers upon the
recommendations of the Prime Minister as enunciated by Article 75 of
the Indian Constitution. The Prime Minister has the power to dismiss
any minister any time without assigning any reason. Also, his
resignation leads to the resignation of the entire Council of Ministers.
He also serves as a link or pivot between the Council and the
President by conveying the decisions taken by the council after every
meeting.

The above are the essential features of the Parliamentary system of government in
India. Therefore, it can be said that this form of democracy rests on the Body of
representatives or Political Parties elected by the people of the country. The
Indian Constitution has various provisions facilitating the parliamentary system. It
has also been held by the Supreme Court of our country that the Parliamentary
system forms the basic structure of our constitution and therefore, many legal
problems might arise if any switch from the present system is made.

P a g e | 11

Benefits of the Parliamentary

System of Government9:
The parliamentary form of government offers the following benefits owing to its
features:
1. Smooth Functioning- The close link between the executive and the
legislature avoids any kind of conflict between the two organs of the
government. This also ensures as working of both of them in a
complementary way to each other. In India, there is a concept of partial
separation of powers which accounts for freedom accompanied with
responsibility and accountability. Therefore, the two organs can
function without any interference if they work as per the interest of the
masses.
2. Quick Decision Making- If the ruling party enjoys majority in the
legislature, then the executive can take decisions quickly and
implement them without any hindrance and fear of being let down on
the floor of the House. This can be very helpful in case of constructive
decision making and overcoming the problems of procedural delays.
3. Flexible System- This form of government is highly adaptive in
nature to the changing situations. An example of benefit of a flexible
system can be seen in case of grave emergency, wherein the
leadership can be changed without any harassment and objections.
This will enable the government to tackle the situation efficiently as
was seen in as it happened during World War II in England when Mr.
Chamberlain made way for Mr. Winston Churchill to handle the War. 10
Even the elections can be delayed till normality is restored in the
country.
4. Open Administration- The executive remains vigilant and always
tries to administer properly and effectively in order to secure its
electoral prospects and confidence of the Parliament. The Parliament
controls the executive, particularly the Cabinet in two ways:

9 Shri P.A. Sangma, Functioning of Parliamentary Democracy in India, 01/2008.

10 S.A. Aiyar, Obama shows why India must not seek a presidential system, The
Times of India Blogs as on 13th October, 2013, Last seen on 09/10/2015.

P a g e | 12

5. Need of Confidence by the Government- Since by a motion of No

Confidence against the government would make the Prime Minister
resign from his office, leading to the dissolution of the Council of
Ministers as a whole.
6. Financial Powers of the Parliament- The Government has to seek for
financial grants by the Parliament to implement its policies and for the
purpose of administration. The Parliament has the power to grant or
refuse to grant the requested funds, thereby controlling the executive.
The House also has to control the expenditure made out of granted
funds.

This control over the executive keeps it on its toes and ensures that there is no
misuse of powers and funds. The more mistake the executive commits, the less
popular it gets and more confrontation by the opposition and hence it becomes
vulnerable to the restraint of funds and collapse of the government.

P a g e | 13

Disadvantages of the
Parliamentary System of
Government:
There is no system which can be completely fool proof. Irrespective of the
soundness of this system, there are certain flaws of this system which are as
follows:
1. Absolute Majority- In case there is absolute majority enjoyed by the
government in the legislature, then the executive may become
virtually dictatorial11. It may become whimsical and corrupt in using
its powers without caring about the liberty and rights of the people.
2. Politicization of Administration- The executive is bound to take
political considerations into account before implementing any policy
and decision. This can be said for the opposition too as it may oppose
the government merely for the sake of politics rather than offering
constructive criticism after looking into the working of the government
and interest of the people. This may simply fail the purpose of
democracy as people suffer at the cost of political considerations and
actions.
3. Unsuitable for Multi-party system- In a country like India where
there are multiple parties contesting elections, there is no absolute
majority to one party and this leads to the formation of a coalition
government which is highly unstable and chaotic. The leader is also
chosen after political considerations and there is no autonomy and
efficiency in the government. Dual party system is the essence of
parliamentary system as in Great Britain. India has witnessed a high
level of political instability due to the presence of numerous parties
and this makes the system flawed, chaotic and confused.
4. Emergencies- Professor Dicey has pointed out that the Parliamentary
system fails to respond properly to the critical situations since the
Prime Minister has to consider the party and every political outcome
before coming to a decision. Also, the members of the Parliament are
not always unanimous to a particular decision. This may make the
situation even worse and uncontrollable.
11 Rohini Dasgupta, Notes on Parliamentary Form of Government in India, As on
28/02/2014, available at http;//www.indiaBIX.com, Last seen on 09/10/2015.

P a g e | 14

5. Mal-administration- Since the government is elected from the social

field, having no administrative training, background or skill, the
efficiency of the system depends largely on the civil servants for
proper formulation and implementation of the policies. Thus the
bureaucrats assume huge importance in the system and they often
misuse their position leading to maladministration.

Therefore, we see that within the enlisted benefits of the parliamentary system,
there are flaws and lacuna too. This makes the system questionable and calls for a
consideration over another form of democracy in India, i.e., Presidential System of
Government.

P a g e | 15

Arguments against Parliamentary

System of Government12:

No Development13- The Parliamentary government produces drift in

policy and incoherence. A Presidential government would help to
restore order to our politically troubled country, dilute the corruption of
the political system and accelerate the pace of development through
quick decision making and implementation. It also provides stable
governance in the country, unlike the changes of government through
political realignments and mid-term elections. Such changes in
government brings about disruption in the formulation and
implementation of various developmental and welfare policies,
schemes and decisions.

Criminalization of Politics14- It is argued that the politicians today

are mostly incompetent, dishonest and have criminal background.
Thus, the criminalization of Indian politics has made it a dirty game 15.
They hardly think about the progress of our nation and its people. They
take their parliamentary tenure as a period to gain as much as they
want. They work as per their whims. Unlike this a Presidential
system would allow the President to appoint men of talent as the
ministers.

Debilitated Capacity of Cabinet- The cabinet is said to be not able

to respond to the urgent demands and because there is lack of
consensus among the ministers regarding a course of action. It is
burdened with varying interests and contrary decisions which makes it
incapable of proper administration. The Presidential system is free of
such burden and hence, it can pursue the actions of national interest,
since the executive power rests with the President himself.

12 Ramesh Thakur Parliamentary Government Trumps Presidential, as on

15/03/2008, http://www.thehindu.com, Last seen on 09/10/2015.
13 Supra note 9 at 1.
14 Supra note 8 at 38.
15 Supra note 10 at 4.

P a g e | 16

Mere Politics- The anti-parliamentary group also argues that the bane
of Indian politics is the existence of multiple parties which call for
coalitions. This way there is no sense of belongingness among the
members and there is only politics and trading of support 16 among
the parties. There is no consideration of development and welfare. The
Presidential system, on the other hand overcomes this problem
owing to its feature of fixed tenure of the President in normal
circumstances.

Less Democratic- It is claimed that the Parliamentary system is

less democratic since the Real head of the State i.e. the Prime Minister
is not chosen by the people directly as in case of India. There is a lot of
politics involved in the name of the Prime Ministerial candidate. There
is a rule of party in power as the President is a mere titular head
having no actual powers. But the Presidential system allows the
people to directly choose their Head which is the President. Hence, he
enjoys popular authority and therefore acts in their best interest.

Owing to the above arguments, there is a claim made that the Presidential system
would be better than the existing Parliamentary government in India. All the
aforementioned arguments have been very well answered by the proParliamentarian democracy group. Their arguments follow on the next page.

16 Ibid at 5

P a g e | 17

Arguments in Favour of
Parliamentary System of
Government:17

Over-estimation of the other system- The pro group argues that

the Presidential system is too prone to the acquiring of presidential
position through persuasion, manipulations and bargaining which
makes the situation very dangerous. This will further lead to abuse of
power and failure of the system. The Parliamentary system makes
the tackling of such a situation effective as this mechanism allows easy
removal of a bad leader in three legal ways, namely, vote of
confidence; removal by the party; removal by the Prime Minister.

Comparing this with the presidential system wherein the only legal recourse is
through the process of impeachment, which is too difficult to be successful, leaving
the people with the option of either waiting until the end of the term or forcefully
removing the leader through a risky revolution like coup dtat, which are certainly
undesirable.

Accountability ensures efficiency- In the Parliamentary system,

the people have a direct say in the day-today administrative affairs of
the country through legislature since each member of the legislature
has the power to pull out the executive in case there is any
shortcoming or mistake on its part. The executive is responsible to the
legislature and hence, they work in the best interest of the public.
However, in the Presidential system, there is no accountability of
the executive and this may make the person in power tyrannical and
abusive. He may also dictate the state by his whimsical and wishful
decisions. This can be very harmful to the very essence of democracy.

Qualified and Talented members- It is argued that such talented

and qualified members who are nominated or are the members of the
Rajya Sabha in the Parliamentary system can be inducted in the
cabinet, thereby making good people available for administration and
law making purpose as in the case of Presidential system.
Therefore, it is pointless to argue that such appointments can be made
only in the presidential system. Also, it can be argued that politicians

17 Supra note 5 at 7.

P a g e | 18

of Parliamentary system are more competent than that of the

presidential one since there is a possibility for the legislature to engage
the executives into constructive debates and checks. The executive is
obligated to readily participate and act in a proper desired manner to
remain in power. This obligation is absent in the presidential system
which makes them less competent than the parliamentary politicians.

Multi-party suitability- It cannot be said that the Presidential

system is suitable for the multi-party system like that of India. The
regional or small parties may choose the President in order to pursue
their own legislative ideologies, which also represent varied interest
groups and their demands. Once the president is elected, then there is
no surety that the President would fulfill those demands and
aspirations. Moreover, there is no check upon him to make him act in
the desired direction.

Quality of Leadership- It is argued that the presidents are mostly

chosen in the Presidential system mainly on the basis of their ability
to win elections owing to their popularity and election campaigns,
rather than on their ability to rule and administer. Unlike this approach,
the Parliamentary system provides for the best politician who is
accepted by all and has the capacity to rule properly, thereby
enhancing the quality and level of leadership than what is found under
the other system.

Deadlocks are not feasible- For a country like India, deadlocks and
conflicts arising out of the Presidential system due to separation of
power is not affordable at all. Referring to the recent event of
deadlock of Congress in the U.S.A. between the Democrats and
Republicans, President Obama said, shutdown will have a real
economic impact on real people, right away, with hundreds thousands
of federal workers furloughed and veterans centers, national parks,
most of the space agency and other government operations
shuttered18. This clearly depicts that it creates a highly critical
situation for the country, stagnating all its activities. This is surely
overcome by the Parliamentary system.

Too idealistic- The proponents of the parliamentary system argue

that the portrayal of the Presidential system is too ideal. The only

18
http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/common/briefing/Senate_Deadlock_2013.htm,
Last seen on 11/10/2015.

P a g e | 19

consideration is made over the situation prevailing in the U.S.A., which

is exceptionally better off with its system. However, it is not the only
country with the Presidential system. Many Latin American countries
also share the presidential regimes which are unfortunately not that
better off. It has been seen that some Presidents in Philippines and
Indonesia are not more decisive and effective than the most ineffectual
PMs in India.

Therefore, these arguments are good answers to those of the anti-parliamentary

groups.

P a g e | 20

Analysis of Parliamentary Forms

Applicability in India:
After establishing the main features and aspects relating to both the forms of
government, its now time to analyse the conditions relevant in India since
independence, tracing the past records and comparing it with that of Presidential
system, hypothetically. India celebrated its 65 th Republic day this year and it also
amounted to more than 60 years or six decades of parliamentary democracy in our
country. Time and again, there have been certain issues which have distorted the
image of the current polity like that of corruption, scams, party-politics, economic
slugger, denial of welfare at the altar of self-interest of the legislature and so on.
This has led to a major doubt among the masses that whether the democracy really
is of the people, for the people and by the people. Analysing the conditions that
have existed and what would have been the conditions had there been the
presidential system, by comparing it with that of other country, like that of France
and analysis shall be made in its case which opted from the prior Parliamentary
system to the present semi-presidential system.
According to Dr. B.R.Ambedkar, the Chairman of the Drafting Committee of
Indian Constitution too favored the Presidential form of government as he believed
that A Democratic Executive must be stable and responsible 19. However, the
fulfillment of both the conditions is not possible since in the case of America and
Switzerland, the government is more stable than responsible, while in Indian and
British systems, the government is more responsible and less stable. Over the past
post-Independence years, there has been a change in the political parties both in
terms of quality and quantity.
1951-52 saw the first general elections in our country under the new constitution
with the British Parliamentary system as its model. The Indian Congress won the
elections absolutely with only about 15% total voting. Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru
became the first Prime Minister of our country. Looking at the economic aspect of
19 Dr. B.R.Ambedkar Speech
http://casenglishdepartment.wordpress.com/2014/01/04/dr-b-r-ambedkars-speech/,
Last seen on 12/10/2015.

P a g e | 21

our nation, since 1951, the emphasis was laid down on heavy industries in order to
make the manufacturing sector the backbone of the Indian economy. The
agricultural sector comprised 60% and service sector a mere 30% in the 50s. India
was then at the beginning stage to emerge as a planned economy and it had started
its journey afresh in those days. There were a lot of hindrances to the development
of the economy including the political obstacles towards opening up to the world
through international trade. Main focus was laid down on the domestic industries
and products in an effort to pace the economic growth.
In 1971, the Congress government came back to power with majority having Mrs.
Indira Gandhi as the PM. Her regime turned out to be more of a dictatorial one
than a democratic system. She was found guilty of misusing her powers in the
election process by the Allahabad High Court. Our then President, Fakhruddin Ali
Ahmed declared the Emergency under Article 352 of the Indian Constitution. This
proclamation gave the powers to the Union Government to maintain and defend
the law and order in the nation. Mrs. Indira Gandhi postponed the national and
state elections and suspended many of the civil liberties on the grounds of threat to
national security and crush of law and order in the country. The situation was
criminalized and became serious in those days. Protests, strikes, imprisonment,
postponements, arbitrary decisions and abuse of power characterized that era.
However, many socialist economic policies were introduced enhancing the
industrial and agricultural productivity and employment generation. Mrs. Gandhi
called for elections in the year 1977, and was defeated by the Janata Party. People
wondered how Indian democracy could survive, but it has strengthened.20
1980s saw the death of Mrs. Indira Gandhi, the Congress Government coming
back to power and Rajiv Gandhi, being the youngest PM of India which brought a
youthful insight in the country as well as in the polity. The government attained an
absolute majority of over 415 seats out of 545 in the Indian Parliament. Under his
leadership, there was a relaxation of the economic policies and encouraged foreign
investments through abolishment of license raj system, restrictions on imports and
foreign currency.
20 Sanjay Kumar, The Changing Face of Indian Legislative Assemblies, Published in the year
2009, available at http://archive.thedailystar.net/beta2/news/the-unfolding-scenario-ofindian-politics/, Last seen on 12/10/2015.

P a g e | 22

In 1991, there was an introduction of LPG (Liberalization, Privatization and

Globalization) policy of the government. Thus, 1990s saw the opening up of the
Indian economy to the global trade and investment and the rise of many regional
based small parties. There were short term governments in the Centre lasting for
about less than a year or so. There were all efforts made by the political parties to
remain in the House in the form of coalitions. Therefore, there were not much
development in the late 1990s except for the commencement of the bus service
between India and Pakistan. However, there were certain political and social
indifferences between the two nationals owing to the increased infiltrations and
terrorist activities in both the countries.
The era of 2000s, saw an increase of the conflicts within the nation with a blend of
politics involved like that of Gujarat Godhra Riots. There were coalition
governments formed under the leadership of Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Dr.
Manmohan Singh, the ex-PM of India. There is a continuing process of economic
liberalization in India and improvement of friendly relations with other nations.
There have been summits like G20 and Rio+20, of which India has been a
signatory, thereby achieving the objective of developing relations with other
countries and participation in the issues prevailing in the world.
In the recent years of 2010s, there has been a distorted image of Indian politics
carved by the ruling party, Indian National Congress. The years began with a
number of scams and scandals, namely, the Commonwealth Games scam, the 2G
spectrum scam, the Coal-gate scam and so on. Even the PM of India, including
eminent leaders of the party came under the scrutiny of the public. There have been
recent campaigns launched by Anna Hazare, a social activist as well as an
introduction of a new party at the centre by Arvind Kejriwal, namely the Aam
Aadmi party (AAP) in November, 2012. Economically, India is still able to
maintain its strong position against recession. There are still further developments
going on. There are consultations for passing the Food Security Bill, the FDI is still
pending for debate in the House, the Jan Lokpal Bill has been passed by the
Houses, Corporate Social Responsibility made compulsory and many more. These
developments are very much needed and desired for the country, irrespective of the
political scenario prevalent.

P a g e | 23

The conditions since independence have not been so good. Even today, one-third
of worlds poor are found in India. Although the life expectancy has increased to
62 years from 32 years since independence, the infant-mortality rate which is 50
deaths per 1000 births holds the highest rate in the world. As per Pramod Paliwal,
the secretary of the Jaipur-based Indian Institute of Rural Development, a nonprofit focusing on rural healthcare, Lack of government spending is largely to
blame for our ailing healthcare system, said. According to a Paris-based
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, India spends only 1%
of its GDP in the healthcare sector. Because of lack of modernization of the Indian
economy, more than half of our population is still employed in the agricultural
sector, making it overburdened and less productive. India ranked 132 out of 187
countries on the UNDPs gender inequality index in 2013. Literacy levels have
increased from 16% in 1951 to about 74% in 2011 as per the statistics.
Summarizing the said developments, we see that while there was an absolute
majority in the legislature, there was stability and favourable political atmosphere
for economic growth and development of the country.

P a g e | 24

CONCLUSION
Indias tryst with democracy began with its efforts to overcome the colonial legacy
marked by underdevelopment, poverty, illiteracy and social and economic
inequalities. Democracy was construed as a flexible system wherein every citizen
makes his/her contribution to the society. However, the past few decades since
independence have clearly demonstrated that in India, democracy has failed to
deliver its purpose, both theoretically and practically. In the present context of
rapid degradation of democratic norms, criminalization of politics, corruption in
the legal, executive and political sects of the government meant for facilitating and
catering to peoples needs and open violation of electoral reforms, alternative
forms of democracy have become increasingly needed in India. The alternative
form of democracy that could be made applicable in India is that of Participatory
Democracy.

Suggestions:
Participatory democracy is seen as a form of social action and political practice
expanding the arena of politics beyond the representational institutions of
elections, political parties and the bureaucracy.21 The Participatory democracy is
inclusive of deliberative, consensus, anticipatory and semi-direct democracy.
However, the researcher recommends the Semi-direct Democracy or SemiPresidential system of democracy in India like it has been adopted in France. In
such a system, the balance of power shifts decisively from the politicians to the
citizens where it truly belongs. This form of system is effective and desirable since
it is not a fully Presidential form of democracy, nor it is as similar to the present
Parliamentary system. This will increase the role of common man in the matters of
public concern and importance. The President shall be made more powerful and
responsible. People will be able to elect their head of the executive as well as the
State. The active role of the president will ensure smooth functioning of the three
organs of the government. This idea of participatory democracy was central to
Gandhijis political thinking and practice. It features public participation, Rule of
law, transparency, responsiveness, consensus of the public and the three organs,
efficiency and accountability. Thus, this form of democracy will be a key to
21 Renu Vinods article in Quest for Participatory Democracy, Rawat
Publications, 2010.

P a g e | 25

effectuate good governance and participatory citizenship in India because of the

following reasons:

The demand for greater transparency in government decision making

processes in order to assure public scrutiny and participation in
governance. The RTI (Right to Information) is an example for such a
demand.

The demand for accountability of people in power through

decentralization of the decision making power to the lowest levels for
direct peoples participation in the process.

The demand for competition in government monopolized areas by

encouraging the participation of private individuals in those areas
which will lead to better delivery of services.

Such an adoption will require the amendment of the Constitution. Since the
constitution has already been amended multiple times by the legislature, another
amendment for the benefit and in the interest of the public would not be
objectionable. Also, to implement the idea of participatory democracy,
technological resources can be used to enhance the role of people in the election
and decision making processes and look into their interest and political and social
destiny. Internet has a great role and ease to deliver in such a case. An online
voting mechanism can be introduced for the purpose of peoples will and views in
major areas. Today, internet has reached almost every district of India and its
usability and connectivity would be effective in this regard. People would be able
to vote and participate without any harassment. This will entail a fairer and a more
appropriate approach to the prevailing demands and needs. Therefore, semi-direct
democracy type of participatory democracy along with technology would be in the
interest of the nation.

P a g e | 26

Bibliography
The relevant sources in the form of articles, website, books and journals have been
simultaneously cited at the bottom of the pages itself for the convenience of the
reader.