GUPTA ADMINISTRATION

The two hundred years of Gupta rule may be said to mark the climax of Hindu imperial tradition.
From the point of view of literature, religion, art, architecture, commerce and colonial
development, this period is undoubtedly the most important in Indian history. The Guptas
inherited the administrative system of the earlier empires. The Mauryan bureaucracy, already
converted into a caste, had functioned with impartial loyalty under succeeding empires. Under
the Guptas we have direct allusions to viceroys, governors, administrators of provinces, and of
course to ministers of the imperial government. The Mahamatras or provincial viceroys go back
to the Mauryan period and continue, in fact, up to the twelfth century as the highest ranks in
official bureaucracy. The position of Kumaramatyas, of whom many are mentioned, is not clear
as we know of them in posts of varying importance. The gramikas or the village headmen
formed the lowest rung in the ladder. Uparikas or governors were also appointed to provinces.
In the Damodarpur plates we have mention of an uparika named Arata Datta who was
governing like police chiefs, controller of military stores, chief justice (Mahadanda Nayak) leave
no doubt about the existence of an organized hierarchy of officials exercising imperial authority
in different parts of the country.
1. Monarchs took high sounding titles - Supreme Lord and Great King of Kings - the empire had
a philosophy called imperialism but unfortunately it only touched the social and cultural fields it
had no political objectives.
2. King was at the apex - princes often Viceroys. Queens were learned. Kumaradevi of
Chandragupta I and Dhruvadevi of Chandragupta II appear o the coins.
3. Council of Ministers were often hereditary - Harisena and saba of Chandragupta II were
military generals. Very often, ministers combined many offices - some ministers accompanied
the king to the battles. Chief Ministers headed the Ministry.
4. Central Government - each department had its own seal - number of Mahasenapatis to
watch over feudatories - foreign ministers like Sandhi proably supervised the foreign policy
towards the feudastory states.
The whole organization was bureaucratic as in the case of Mauryas. To some extent, the
adminstration mellowed with the Guptas - Police regulations were less severe - capital
punishments rare. Glowing tributes were paid to the Gupta administration by Fahien. There was
no needless intereference of the government in the lives of people. It was temperate in the
repression of crime and tolerant in matters of religion. Fahien could claim that he pursued his
studies in peace wherever he chose to reside.
Provincial administration - known as Bhuktis or Deshes. Officers very often of royal blood -
maintained law and order and protected people against external aggression - also looked after
public utility services.
Bhuktis were divided into groups of districts called Pradeshes. Pradeshas were divided into
Vishyas or districts. The head of the districts was Vishayapati. Probably the provincial head was
assisted by various officials.
Damdoar plate inscription mentions number of functionaries - chief banker, Chief Merchants,
Chief Artisan, Chief of the writer class etc. Whether they formed part of the non-official council
of the districts or were elected is not known.
Districts divided into number of villages - villages being the last unit. Villages looked after
houses, streets, tmples banks etc. - each village had its own weavers, black-smits and gold-
smiths, carpentaers etc.
Village headmen known as gramike was assisted by a council called Panchamandali. Each
village had its own seal.
Towns looked after by Purapalas - town councils.
A very revealing feature of the administration was the payment of grants in land instead of
salaries. Only personnel of the military service were paid cash salaries. The grants in land were
of two kinds. The agrahara grant was only to brahmins and it was tax-free. The second variety
 of land grant was given to secular officials either as salary or as reward for services. Both these
practices were widely used as the time passed by. These grants definitely weakened the
authority of the king. Although technically the king could cancel the grants, he could not do so
as the time passed by.
11. Not enough evidence on taxation. Officials on tour were provided free rice, curd, milk,
flowers, transport, etc. Perhaps they were like modern day officials at the districts level, Local
people paid the expenses for apprehending criminals. 12. Three varieties of land - waste land
belonging to State which was donated very often. The crown land war rarely donated. The third
was the private land. Land revenue and various taxes from the land and from various
categories of produce at various stages of production. 13. Administration was highly
decentralized - police, control of military stores, chief justice, etc. Probably, recruitment ceased
to be based on merit. 14. Parallelism of power - highest concentration and extensive
decentralization. Such an administration required a good standing army and complicated
system of checks and counter-checks.

The inscriptions mention the following titles as: paramadvaita, paramabhattaraka, maharajadhiraja, prithvipala,
paramesvara, samrat, ekadhiraja and chakravartin. The king was assisted in his administration by a chief minister
called mantra or sachiva. Pratiharas and mahapratiharas were important officers in the royal court though they did not
participate in the administration. Among the important military officers are mentioned senapati, mahasenapati,
baladhyaksha, mahabaladhyaksha, baladhikrita and mahabaladhikrita who perhaps represented different grades. There
were two other high military officers-the bhatasvapati, commander of the infantry and cavalry and the katuka,
commander of the elephant corps. Another important official mentioned in the Basarh seals was
ranabhandagaradhikarana, chief of the treasury of the war office. One more high officer mentioned for the first time in
the Gupta records was sandhibigrahika or mahasandhivigrahika a foreign minister. One of the inscriptions mentions
sarvadhyakshas, superintendents of all but it is not clear whether they were central or provincial officers. Numerous
inscriptions mention dutaka or duta who communicated royal commands to officers and people concerned.
Dandapasadhikarana represented the chief of the police. Ordinary police officials were known as dandapasika, chatas,
bhatas, dandika and chauroddharanika. The king maintained a close liaison with the provincial administration through a
class of officials called kumaramatyas and ayuktas.

The provinces called bhuktis were usually governed by officers called uparikas. The governor of a bhukti has various
designations in the official records-bhogika, gopta, uparika-maharaja and rajasthaniya. Bhuktis were subdivided into
vishayas. These were governed by vishayapatis. The headquarters of the district was known as adhishthana and the
executive officers of the district as samvyavahari and ayuktakas. The district magistrate was helped in his
administration in his administration by a large staff. They were maharattaras(village elders), ashtakuladhi-
karanikas(officers in charge of groups of eight kulas or families in the local area), gramika(village headman), saulkika
(collector of customs and tolls), gaulmika(incharge of forest and forts), agraharika(in charge of the
agraharas, settlements dedicated to Brahmins). The district records office called akshapatala was placed
in charge of mahakshapatalika. There were also in the district office, sarbodhyakshas or general superintendents under
whom were employed men of noble lineage called kulaputras to guard against corruption. The popular element played
an important part in the district administration. The advisory district council consisted principally of four members
namely the guild president, the chief merchant, the chief artisan and the chief scribe. The villages were under gramikas
along with whom were associated mahattaras or the senior persons of different classes. The town administration was
carried on by the mayor of the city called purapala who corresponded to nagaravyavaharakas of the Mauryan age.

A study of the epigraphical records of the Gupta empire shows that there was a hierarchy of
administrative divisions from top to bottom. The empire was called by various names such as
Rajya, Rashtra, Desha, Mandala, Prithvi and Avani. It was divided in to 26 provinces, which were
styled as Bhukti, Pradesha and Bhoga. Provinces were also divided into Vishayas and put under
the control of the Vishayapatis. A Vishayapati administered the Vishaya with the help of the
Adhikarana council of representatives, which comprised four representatives: Nagarasreshesthi,
Sarthavaha, Prathamakulika and Prathama Kayastha. A part of the Vishaya was called Vithi.

The two hundred years of Gupta rule may be said to mark the climax
of Hindu imperial tradition. From the point of view of literature,
religion, art, architecture, commerce and colonial development, this
period is undoubtedly the most important in Indian history. The
Guptas inherited the administrative system of the earlier empires.
The Mauryan bureaucracy, already converted into a caste, had
functioned with impartial loyalty under succeeding empires. Under
the Guptas we have direct allusions to viceroys, governors,
administrators of provinces, and of course to ministers of the imperial
government. The Mahamatras or provincial viceroys go back to the
Mauryan period and continue, in fact, up to the twelfth century as the
highest ranks in official bureaucracy. The position of Kumaramatyas,
of whom many are mentioned, is not clear as we know of them in
posts of varying importance. The gramikas or the village headmen
formed the lowest rung in the ladder. Uparikas or governors were
also appointed to provinces. In the Damodarpur plates we have
mention of an uparika named Arata Datta who was governing like
police chiefs, controller of military stores, chief justice (Mahadanda
Nayak) leave no doubt about the existence of an organized hierarchy
of officials exercising imperial authority in different parts of the
country.
1. Monarchs took high sounding titles - Supreme Lord and Great King
of Kings - the empire had a philosophy called imperialism but
unfortunately it only touched the social and cultural fields it had no
political objectives.
2. King was at the apex - princes often Viceroys. Queens were
learned. Kumaradevi of Chandragupta I and Dhruvadevi of
Chandragupta II appear o the coins.
3. Council of Ministers were often hereditary - Harisena and saba of
Chandragupta II were military generals. Very often, ministers
combined many offices - some ministers accompanied the king to the
battles. Chief Ministers headed the Ministry.
4. Central Government - each department had its own seal - number
of Mahasenapatis to watch over feudatories - foreign ministers like
Sandhi proably supervised the foreign policy towards the feudastory
states.
The whole organization was bureaucratic as in the case of Mauryas.
To some extent, the adminstration mellowed with the Guptas - Police
regulations were less severe - capital punishments rare. Glowing
tributes were paid to the Gupta administration by Fahien. There was
no needless intereference of the government in the lives of people. It
was temperate in the repression of crime and tolerant in matters of
religion. Fahien could claim that he pursued his studies in peace
wherever he chose to reside.
Provincial administration - known as Bhuktis or Deshes. Officers very
often of royal blood - maintained law and order and protected people
against external aggression - also looked after public utility services.
Bhuktis were divided into groups of districts called Pradeshes.
Pradeshas were divided into Vishyas or districts. The head of the
districts was Vishayapati. Probably the provincial head was assisted
by various officials.
Damdoar plate inscription mentions number of functionaries - chief
banker, Chief Merchants, Chief Artisan, Chief of the writer class etc.
Whether they formed part of the non-official council of the districts or
were elected is not known.
Districts divided into number of villages - villages being the last unit.
Villages looked after houses, streets, tmples banks etc. - each village
had its own weavers, black-smits and gold-smiths, carpentaers etc.
Village headmen known as gramike was assisted by a council called
Panchamandali. Each village had its own seal.
Towns looked after by Purapalas - town councils.
A very revealing feature of the administration was the payment of
grants in land instead of salaries. Only personnel of the military
service were paid cash salaries. The grants in land were of two kinds.
The agrahara grant was only to brahmins and it was tax-free. The
second variety of land grant was given to secular officials either as
salary or as reward for services. Both these practices were widely
used as the time passed by. These grants definitely weakened the
authority of the king. Although technically the king could cancel the
grants, he could not do so as the time passed by.
11. Not enough evidence on taxation. Officials on tour were provided
free rice, curd, milk, flowers, transport, etc. Perhaps they were like
modern day officials at the districts level, Local people paid the
expenses for apprehending criminals. 12. Three varieties of land -
waste land belonging to State which was donated very often. The
crown land war rarely donated. The third was the private land. Land
revenue and various taxes from the land and from various categories
of produce at various stages of production. 13. Administration was
highly decentralized - police, control of military stores, chief justice,
etc. Probably, recruitment ceased to be based on merit. 14.
Parallelism of power - highest concentration and extensive
decentralization. Such an administration required a good standing army and complicated system of checks and
counter-checks.

There is some debate on a theoretical level whether, and to what extent, courts should
enforce standard form contracts. On one hand, they undeniably fulfill an important role
of promoting economic efficiency. Standard form contracting reduces transaction costs
substantially by precluding the need for buyers and sellers of goods and services to
negotiate the many details of a sale contract each time the product is sold. On the other
hand, there is the potential for inefficient, and even unjust, terms to be accepted by
signatories to these contracts. Such terms might be seen as unjust if they allow the seller
to avoid all liability or unilaterally modify terms or terminate the contract.[1] These
terms often come in the form of, but are not limited to, forum selection clauses and
mandatory arbitration clauses, which can limit or foreclose a party's access to the
courts; and also liquidated damages clauses, which set a limit to the amount that can be
recovered or require a party to pay a specific amount. They might be inefficient if they
place the risk of a negative outcome, such as defective manufacturing, on the buyer
who is not in the best position to take precautions. There are a number of reasons why
such terms might be accepted:[2] [3]
Standard form contracts are rarely read
 Lengthy boilerplate terms are often in fine print and written in complicated legal
language which often seems irrelevant. The prospect of a buyer finding any useful
information from reading such terms is correspondingly low. Even if such
information is discovered, the consumer is in no position to bargain as the
contract is presented on a “take it or leave it” basis. Coupled with the often large
amount of time needed to read the terms, the expected payoff from reading the
contract is low and few people would be expected to read it. Sometimes a
standard form contract may literally be dispensed from a vending machine to
drivers sitting in line to enter a parking garage (see photograph below), which
means that stopping to read the contract risks provoking road rage.
Access to the full terms may be difficult or impossible before acceptance
Often the document being signed is not the full contract; the purchaser is told that
the rest of the terms are in another location. This reduces the likelihood of the
terms being read and in some situations, such as software license agreements, can
only be read after they have been notionally accepted by purchasing the good and
opening the box. These contracts are typically not enforced, since common law
dictates that all terms of a contract must be disclosed before the contract is
executed.
Boilerplate terms are not salient
The most important terms to purchasers of a good are generally the price and the
quality, which are generally understood before the contract of adhesion is signed.
Terms relating to events which have very small probabilities of occurring or
which refer to particular statutes or legal rules do not seem important to the
purchaser. This further lowers the chance of such terms being read and also means
they are likely to be ignored even if they are read.
There may be social pressure to sign
Standard form contracts are signed at a point when the main details of the
transaction have either been negotiated or explained. Social pressure to conclude
the bargain at that point may come from a number of sources. The salesperson
may imply that the purchaser is being unreasonable if they read or question the
terms, saying that they are "just something the lawyers want us to do" or that they
are wasting their time reading them. If the purchaser is at the front of a queue (for
example at an airport car rental desk) there is additional pressure to sign quickly.
Finally, if there has been negotiation over price or particular details, then
concessions given by the salesperson may be seen as a gift which socially obliges
the purchaser to respond by being co-operative and concluding the transaction.
Standard form contracts may exploit unequal power relations
If the good which is being sold using a contract of adhesion is one which is
essential or very important for the purchaser to buy (such as a rental property or a
needed medical item) then the purchaser might feel they have no choice but to
accept the terms. This problem may be mitigated if there are many suppliers of
the good who can potentially offer different terms (see below).
Some contend that in a competitive market, consumers have the ability to shop around
for the supplier who offers them the most favorable terms and are consequently able to
avoid injustice. However, in the case of credit cards (and other oligopolies), for
example, the consumer while having the ability to shop around may still have access to
only form contracts with like terms and no opportunity for negotiation. Also, as noted,
many people do not read or understand the terms so there might be very little incentive
for a firm to offer favorable conditions as they would gain only a small amount of
business from doing so. Even if this is the case, it is argued by some that only a small
percentage of buyers need to actively read standard form contracts for it to be
worthwhile for firms to offer better terms if that group is able to influence a larger
number of people by affecting the firm’s reputation.
Another factor which might mitigate the effects of competition on the content of
contracts of adhesion is that, in practice, standard form contracts are usually drafted by
lawyers instructed to construct them so as to minimize the firm’s liability, not
necessarily to implement managers' competitive decisions. Sometimes the contracts are
written by an industry body and distributed to firms in that industry, increasing
homogeneity of the contracts and reducing consumer's ability to shop around.
[edit] Common law status
As a general rule, the common law treats standard form contracts as any other contract.
Signature or some other objective manifestation of intent to be legally bound will bind
the signor to the contract whether or not they read or understood the terms. The reality
of standard form contracting, however, means that many common law jurisdictions
have developed special rules with respect to them. In general, courts will interpret
standard form contracts contra proferentem (literally 'against the proffering person') but
specific treatment varies between jurisdictions

Introduction
The law of contract has in recent time to face a problem, which is assuming new
dimensions. The problem has arisen out of the modern large scale and widespread
practice of concluding contracts in standardized form. People upon whom such
exemption clauses or standard form contracts are imposed hardly have any choice or
alternative but to adhere. This gives a unique opportunity to the giant company to
exploit the weakness of the individual by imposing upon him terms, which may go to
the extent of exempting the company from all liability under contract. It is necessary
and proper that their interests should be protected. The courts have therefore
devised some rules to protect the interest of such persons.

A valid contract requires offer and acceptance. It is in the essence of acceptance,

that such acceptance must be a valid acceptance, that is to say, an acceptance
made, fully conscious of and alive to the terms and conditions of the proposal. Of
course, this is not to say that a man who signs an agreement blindfolded will be
relieved from his obligations under that agreement, simply because he later chooses
to discard the blindfold. However, what Section 2(b) does require is that the acceptor
must have a real opportunity to review the proposal and decide on whether to accept
it or not.

Lord Denning MR pointed out in Thornton v. Shoe Lane Parking Ltd. - He cannot alter
those terms or even discuss them; they are therefore him to take or leave. He
therefore does not undertake the laborious and profitless task of discovering what
the terms are.

The battle against the abuse has fallen to the courts. The courts have found it very
difficult to come to the rescue of the weaker party particularly where he has signed
the document. In such cases courts have been constrained to hold that he will be
bound by the document even if he never acquainted himself with its terms.

The first and primal argument in favour of the enforcement of standard form
contracts is that a standard form contract must be respected and honored by the
parties to it, just as any other contract. To refuse to do so, would be to introduce an
element of uncertainty in mercantile relations, which is to be avoided at all costs.
One of the earliest decisions requiring strict enforcement of a standard form contract
was that of the Court of Exchequer in 1860, in Lewis v. Great Western Rly. In this
case, the Court of Exchequer rejected a plea of the plaintiff that a printed form in a
contract was not binding on him since he could not be expected to have read so
lengthy a document, which was presented to him in printed form. Speaking for the
Court, Baron Bramwell said: A person who signs a paper like this must know that he
signs it for some purpose, and when he gives it to the Company must understand
that it is to regulate the rights which it explains. I do not say that there may not be
cases where a person may sign a paper, and yet be at liberty to say, 'I did not mean
to be bound by this', as if the party signing were blind, and he was not informed of its
contents. But where the party does not pretend that he was deceived, he should
never be allowed to set up such a defence."

The strict enforcement theory is not a satisfactory means of resolving the issue, as it
requires for its applicability, a valid contract. The Madras High Court has held that
printed forms are not directly enforceable in view of the absence of consensus as to
the terms thereof. There are many other examples of courts refusing to apply this
strict enforcement theory.

Under our legal system, Section 23 of the Contract Act deals with the issue of when
contracts may be struck down. The third clause of Section 23 deals with agreements,
which are immoral or opposed to public policy. The Supreme Court in Central Inland
Water Transport Corpn. Ltd. v. Brojo Nath Ganguly held that an unfair or an
unreasonable contract entered into between parties of unequal bargaining power was
void as unconscionable, under Section 23 of the Act.

Thus Indian courts have, since then, shown a marked willingness to interfere with
printed form contracts where there is evidence of unequal bargaining power. It has
been held that the courts would relieve the weaker party to a contract from
unconscionable, oppressive, unfair, unjust and unconstitutional obligations in a
standard form contract. The Supreme Court has also held that standard form
contracts drawn up even by the Government must be fair, and that these contracts
are open to judicial review on grounds of unreasonableness or unfairness. The
Supreme Court has upheld a plea that a printed form contract was void on grounds of
coercion, where the parties had unequal bargaining power. A printed form in a dry-
cleaning contract, exempting the dry-cleaner from any liability in the event of loss or
damage to the clothes concerned has been held to be contrary to public policy and
therefore void. The Bombay High Court has followed this view of the Madras High
Court.
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission after referring to copious
case- law, refused to enforce an onerous clause in a printed form contract and
accordingly relieved a consumer from the terms found thereon.

The doctrine of unconscionability doctrine steps in and strikes out any contracts,
which the court found to be unconscionable, as understood by the judicial decisions
of that country. The doctrine gives the courts a very powerful tool with which to look
into contracts and adjudge their validity on the basis of the ability of parties to
consent on the terms thereof.

However, in India at least, the strength of this doctrine is its very drawback. Founded
as it is, in the bedrock of the Indian Contract Act, its flexibility to adapt to
circumstances not envisaged in Section 23 of the Act is very limited. The Supreme
Court in Central Inland Water Transport Corpn. case, has held that an answer to an
unconscionable contract can be found only in Section 23 of the Act and accordingly
refused to apply this doctrine where the parties were not in unequal bargaining
positions. This view of the Supreme Court has been refined in a later decision
wherein it has been laid down that standard form contracts which are settled over
the years and widely adopted by parties whose bargaining power is fairly matched
are presumed to be fair and reasonable.

Judged by the Central Inland Water Transport Corpn. standard, most consumer
contracts would escape the applicability of this doctrine. However, the modification
provided by Green Rubber case provides a more sound footing for the
unconscionability doctrine, making standard form contracts binding where they have
additionally derived legitimacy through the force of trade usages.

However, a study of the authorities would reveal that it is Central Inland Water
Transport Corpn. case which has been repeatedly followed by successive Benches of
the Supreme Court and not Green Rubber case. The Notice Theory: The "notice
theory" is a principle evolved by common law jurisdictions as an exception to the
strict enforcement theory. This principle states that a clause in a printed form is not
binding unless the attention of the other party is drawn thereto, and such clause is
brought to his or her notice.

In one case, the Calcutta High Court held to be binding, the conditions of carriage
applicable to an air ticket, which were printed in small font, on the inside of the air
ticket. The High Court was of the view that sufficient steps were taken by the airline
company to bring these conditions of carriage to the notice of the customers
Similarly, the Madras High Court held to be binding, certain conditions limiting the
liability of a carrier, which were printed on the consignment note. The High Court was
of the view that these were the conditions that the customer could reasonably expect
to be bound by in the course of such transactions.

The question as to what constitutes sufficient notice of a particular clause varies from
case to case. In cases of mass issuance of a printed form, such as in the case of a
ticket, the consumer may notice the clause but still feel unable to negotiate the
clause. Thus, there are cases where a party is either aware of, or is deemed to be
aware (by constructive notice) of a clause, and yet, the contract would still not truly
represent the terms of the understanding between the parties. The notice theory fails
to address this problem.

The Standard Form Contracts are standardized contracts that contain a large number
of terms and conditions in ?fine print? which restrict and often exclude liability under
the contract. This gives a unique opportunity to the giant company to exploit the
weakness of the individual by imposing upon him terms which often look like a kind
of private legislation and which may go to the extent of exempting the company from
all liability under the contract. The battle against abuse has fallen to the courts. The
courts have found it very difficult to come to the rescue of the weaker party.

The courts have evolved and applied certain rules to protect the interest of the
consumer, customer or passenger, as the case may be upon whom standard form
contracts or exemption clauses are imposed, like reasonable notice should be given,
notice should be given, notice should be contemporaneous with contract, theory of
fundamental breach, contra proferentem interpretation of the contract, liability in
tort, exemption clauses and third parties etc.

These modes, along with other Acts help the courts in dealing with the problem of
Standard Form Contract

Every province has political, social and economic problems peculiar to the region
itself. Provincial government representatives live in close proximity to the people
and are most of the times from the same community, so that they are in a better
position to understand these problems and offer unique solutions for them. For
example, traffic congestion in Oahu, Hawaii is a problem that can be best solved
by the local government, keeping local factors in mind, rather than by somebody
living in New York.

Federalism offers representation to different populations. Citizens of various

provinces may have different aspirations, ethnicity and follow different cultures.
The central government can sometimes overlook these differences and adopt
policies which cater to the majority. This is where the regional government steps
in. While formulating policies, local needs, tastes and opinions are given due
consideration by the state governments. Rights of the minorities are protected
too. For example, in states like Arizona where there is a large Hispanic
population and therefore, a large number of schools provide bilingual education.

State governments have the freedom to adopt policies which may not be followed
nationally or by any other state. For example, same sex marriages are not
recognized by the federal government of USA but they are given legal status
within the states of Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont and Massachusetts.

Division of work between the central and the regional governments leads to
optimum utilization of resources. The central government can concentrate more
on international affairs and defense of the country while the provincial
government can cater to the local needs.
Federalism has room for innovation and experimentation. Two local governments
can have two different approaches to bring reforms in any area of public domain,
be it taxation or education. The comparison of the results of these policies can
give a clear idea of which policy is better and thus, can be adopted in the future.

Federalism no doubt has many positives vis a vis Communism or Imperialism but
still some political scientists often raise questions about advantages of
Federalism.

Disadvantages of Federalism

Sharing of power between the Center and the states includes both advantages
and disadvantages of federation. Sometimes there can be overlapping of work
and subsequent confusion regarding who is responsible for what. For example,
when typhoon Katrina hit Greater New Orleans, USA, in 2005, there was delay in
the rescue work as there was confusion between the state governments and the
federal government on who is responsible for which disaster management work.
This resulted in the loss of many lives.

Federal system of government is very expensive as more people are elected to

office, both at the state and the center, than necessary. Thus, it is often said that
only rich countries can afford it. Too many elected representatives with
overlapping roles may also lead to corruption.

Federalism leads to unnecessary competition between different regions. There

can be a rebellion by a regional government against the national government too.
Both scenarios pose a threat to the countries' integrity.

Federalism promotes regional inequalities. Natural resources, industries,

employment opportunities differ from region to region. Hence earnings and
wealth are unevenly distributed. Rich states offer more opportunities and benefits
to its citizens than poor states can. Thus, the gap between rich and poor states
widens.

Federalism can make the state governments selfish and concerned only about
their own region's progress. They can formulate policies which might be
detrimental to other regions. For example, pollution from a province which is
promoting industrialization in a big way can affect another region which depends
solely on agriculture and cause crop damage.

Federalism does not eliminate poverty. Even in New York, there are poor
neighborhoods like Harlem with a majority of black population. The reason for
this may be that during policy framing, it is the intellectuals and not the masses
who are invited by the local government. These intellectuals may not understand
the local needs properly and thus, policies might not yield good results.
Thus, it is understandable that there have been both advantages and
disadvantages of Federalism in USA. There is a general feeling that the rights of
the minorities, like blacks, are compromised in USA. But at the same time, USA
now has a democratically elected African American President. Similarly, there
have been advantages and disadvantages of federalism in other countries as
well. For federalism to be truly successful it should be accompanied by other
ideals like Secularism, Democracy and Liberalism.