Group Discussion

"Group Discussion", popularly labeled as GD, is a methodology used by an organization

(company, institute, business school, etc.) to gauge whether the candidate has certain personality
traits. GDs form an important part of the short-listing process for recruitment or admission in a
company or institution.

Group Discussion: Tips & Strategy

Keep the following GD preparation tips in mind:

Be Yourself:
The most important mantra to ace GDs is “Be Yourself”. The more you change things about
yourself, the more trouble you would find yourself in. The best way to go about things is to be
natural and make sure all your responses are natural and spontaneous. To ease the burden of
yourself, see a group discussion as an extension of your everyday conversation. This would
enable you to think straight, and make sure you do not let negativity cloud your thought process.
A Group Discussion is not a seminar:
The most fundamental principle of participating in a Group Discussion is that you need to
speak; there is no escape to this bare minimum requirement of a group discussion. One simple
task is to take notes and generate a list of points to speak on; unless you are specifically asked
by the invigilators not to take a pen and paper inside. On the rough sheet of paper, prepare a
small little framework analyzing the topic from every angle and ensuring that you have
understood the multiple facets of the topic that are generally there.
The success of an interjection depends not only on assertiveness but also on the receptiveness of
others. If you interject when someone else has just begun speaking is unlikely that he will let you
have your way. On the other hand, if you wait till he has made at least some of his points, he will
be more amenable to letting you speak. A discussion has to flow naturally.
Prologue and Epilogue:
A lot of students generally think that opening the GD is the best way of entering one. But do
remember that this approach is fraught with dangers, and the risks and rewards of doings so are
generally very high. As far as time to speak in a GD goes, the opening speaker has the best
chance to speak for the longest duration of time. During the time the opening speaker speaks, the
others are still grasping the issue and coming to terms with it, and this gives him a chance to
dwell on the topic and illustrate his viewpoint. This also means that the evaluators get a good

1
look at time and can clearly listen to his views. But, the greatest challenge with opening a
discussion is that the speaker needs to do it well. If he fails to deliver quality content, he misleads
the group, as well as he earns negative points from the evaluators as full attention is placed on
him. All of a sudden, he would be viewed as someone who jumps the gun and does not provide
topics the kind of rational thinking they require. In a nutshell, speaking first has its rewards but
only if done well. If you make a meal of it, you are bound to entertain the wrath of the
invigilators.
Taking the Stage:
In a hostile environment, with a number of speakers putting across their points in a vociferous
manner, it becomes hard to enter a group discussion. The solution to this problem is not a cut and
dried one, and it requires a lot of practice to get over this problem. In such a scenario, making
your presence felt is absolutely essential. Here are some of the things that you could do in a loud
group discussion:
Enter the lows- GDs are peculiar in the sense that move like a wave, and have their highs and
lows. You are advised to note these patterns, and whenever you find that the noise levels have
reduced, that is your moment to enter the discussion. But do remember, at times, you would not
get such a chance at all. And if in the first few minutes of the GD, you observe that there are no
lows, you would be left with no choice but to barge your way in.
Interjecting in a discussion with a question- A good way to enter group discussion is to ask a
question from other participants. Questions attract the attention of the group towards you,
providing a vital chance to jump in the discussion and provide inputs. At this juncture, ask follow
up questions or give thoughts on the question that you raised.
Enter after a person has made his point - It is vital for you to understand that interjections
need to be made at the right moment. For example, someone has just started with his points and
you try to cut him short. It is rare that the other person would give you a chance to speak before
he completes his points. On the other hand, if you allow him to put across his points and then
enter the discussion by interrupting him, there is a greater chance you succeed.
Tips to enter the group discussion
Enter with a supportive statement- Generally, when we enter a group discussion, we do so by
interjecting the other person and contradicting his viewpoint. A street-smart way to enter the
discussion could be by supporting the point of another person. By using statements such as “I

2
agree with what my friend says…” or “I would like to add…”or “I think a point we could add
here…”
Enter by increasing volume-The popular way adopted to enter a loud GD is to increase one’s
volume. Though it a method that comes almost naturally and one is prone to shouting in such an
environment, this may contribute to the melee. It is in your best interest that you combine this
method with other mentioned in this section so that you are able to make an impact. Also, make
sure that even though with a raised voice, it does not pass the impression that you are shouting.
Generate supportive data:
Use facts and illustrations to add value. However, be very sure of the validity of any statistic you
quote. If you mention a wrong figure, someone in the group could point out the mistake. If that
doesn't happen, the evaluators might notice the mistake. A fact or a statistic cannot be an
argument in itself. It can only support a point you are making. So do not quote a fact and let it
land. Follow it up with some sort of inference or conclusion that can be drawn from it.
Be an active listener: Listen carefully to others' contributions to avoid pitfalls. Listening will
benefit you in the following ways:
 It will prevent you from repeating something already said
 It will give you new areas to think about since a participant may have introduced an
excellent point, which you had not thought of
 It will help you take the discussion forward, taking on from where another participant has
left
 It may even help you understand a topic, which you were ignorant of, before the first
speaker defined it.
Be assertive, not aggressive:
It is a myth that successful managers are aggressive. They are not aggressive, rather they are
assertive. There is a fine dividing line between assertiveness and aggressiveness. An aggressive
person is someone who puts forward his point and tries to dominate others. He raises his voice,
does not listen to or understand other people's viewpoint, takes it as a personal affront if others
disagree with him and ends up offending others. On the other hand, an assertive person puts
across his point strongly and rationally. So, do not be aggressive in your next GD. Instead, be
assertive.
Make Friends:

3
Building allies is often an important aspect of a GD. Being heard is one thing and getting a
positive response to your arguments is another. Get people on your side and ensure that they are
receptive to your arguments. They will not only allow you to interject in the discussion, but they
will also support your arguments. When supporting someone else's arguments does not just say
"I agree". Try to add value by adding points of your own that extend the argument. You could
build allies by giving others a chance to speak when they are in agreement with you (but only
after you feel you have made your point). The final weapon at our disposal is your body
language. Try and appear friendly, not intimidating. Smile, it often works! Speak clearly, speak
sense and also let others speak. In a GD, you must speak, but you must also be heard by the
other participants. Other participants will listen to you IF:
o Your voice is audible and clear
o Your contribution is relevant and made at the appropriate time
o You listen to others; you let them speak and you are not too aggressive. This does not
mean that you should only let others speak. You must let them speak and also speak yourself.
Quality of Content:
More important than the amount of time you speak for, is the quality of what you have said and
the impact that it has on the group. You do not have to dominate the GD by speaking for a long
period of time. You have to influence a group by providing it direction, highlighting the crucial
issues and putting forth persuasive arguments. There is no formula to calculate the right
duration of participation in a GD. In a 15-minute GD in which there are 12 participants, if you
are able to speak for two minutes spread across four or five occasions, it should be enough.
Value-Additions: You can add value to a discussion keeping the following in mind:
o Provide a structure that enables the discussion to carry on
o Provide analysis that helps in distilling the discussion
o Provide new facts and details
o Examples should be rational and clear
o Avoid flimsy repetition of thought
o Do not lose focus and discuss trivial issues
o Try to provide a summary to the discussion

4
What are the blunders in a GD?
There are a number of candidates who commit common blunders in GDs. Going through the
following section, you can explore all the common problems and make sure you do not commit
any such error. The most common ones are:
1. Aggression:
Being too aggressive is one of the most common mistakes in GDs. While trying to make
presence felt and acknowledged, students commits the mistake of being over-aggressive in the
GD. Actions such as over-animation, dramatizations, banging the table, entering in one-to-one
discussions or criticizing others unfairly are some of the misplaced manifestations of aggression.
Why does this happen? Most students think that aggression is considered a virtue and hence must
be displayed at any cost. It needs to be clearly understood that aggression in thinking is required,
not in behavior. A candidate who is polite but firm wins the day.
2.Negativity:
The words you select to express yourself are indicators of your personality. A negative approach
is highlighted by negative words and body language. Of course if you have observed yourself
using negative language a little too often, you need to do some self-analysis and sort out your
attitude related problems. Nervous body movements, having your hands folded across your
chest, carrying skeptical expressions, constantly moving and fidgeting, evasive eye movements,
etc. are all indicators of a negative personality and should be avoided at all costs.
3.Unfocussed Behavior:
Instances like trying to fit your example/knowledge of data to every GD topic, using examples or
quoting facts, figures and data that have no relevance to the discussion, etc. can only lead to a
negative assessment. Try to avoid jargons and technical language that seemingly makes you
learned; these can only do more harm than provide any extra brownie points.
4.Telling Wrong Facts:
One thing about factual data is that it can provide extra-points to you but if you get a fact wrong,
you can be stuck with someone explaining that you need to check your facts. In case you are not
sure about something, you can always say that you are quoting that piece of information
approximately. You could use phrases such as: “I think” or “Probably/Approximately” or “If I
remember correctly”. Do not jump the gun and make a blunder that you cannot correct later.
Also, you should not judge someone who has made such an error; do not jump into the

5
 discussion and berate him. If you need to make a factual correction, do so in the most polite and
humble manner.
5.Being Highly Individualistic:
Being a strong independent personality is a good virtue to possess. But, you should remember
that the hallmark of a good manager is the interpersonal skill he possesses. Make sure that you
provide a good reflection of yourself in a group as your social interaction is being evaluated. The
goal has to be achieved in teams and therefore your interpersonal skills are extremely vital. In
fact, one has to strike the right balance between individual performance and group excellence.
Group Discussion Etiquettes
Know the rules to display appropriate manners and etiquettes in a Group discussion.
Group Discussion forms an important stage of admission process in top B-schools. Apart from
the knowledge and communication skills, candidates are judged on the basis of their mannerisms
and etiquettes. Candidates are required to present their personality traits in a limited time. A
successful group presentation demands a certain degree of decorum. Here are certain things to
keep in mind to enhance your score in a group discussion:
 It is very important to dress formally and arrive on time. The way you walk to your allocated seats
speaks about your personality. Be confident but not arrogant.
 Take a pen and a notepad. It makes you look organized.
 Listen to others carefully, jot down the relevant points and list down your own points.
 Organize your thoughts before you speak. This will help you express with confidence and clarity.
 Pay attention while others are speaking. This will enable you contribute to the discussion in a
positive way.
 Do not to deviate yourself from the topic. Talking about unrelated things puts a bad impression.
 Do not interrupt the speech of other participants and wait till they complete.
 Maintain a balance in your tone while objecting to the points made by other participants. Avoid
raising your voice too much or shouting.
 Respect the opinion of others. Agree and acknowledge what you find good points expressed by
others. Use phrases like “What you have said here, sheds light on another aspect...”.
 Express your disagreement in a polite, dignified and convincing manner. Do not use negative
comments like ‘‘this point is wrong" or "your argument doesn't make any sense." Instead use
phrases like “You have a good point but there’s another aspect to it… ”.

6
 Do not try to dominate other participants. It is a discussion and not an argument or debate.
 Keep your body language positive. Table thumping, pointing fingers, looking here and there, etc,
are negative gestures.
 If someone becomes openly antagonistic to you, and says things directly contradicting your
points of view or makes personal attack, stay calm and relaxed. A situation like this is a good
opportunity to demonstrate your conflict handling skills and maturity.
o If the counter-argument is valid, concede to the point gracefully using statements like "I think
you have an important point there that I did not think of".
o If the counter-argument is not valid, use statements like “let’s seek the opinion of other
participants” and turn to others, seeking their opinion with statements like "we seem to have
different views here…what do you feel?"
o If the attack is directed against you as a person, then the best strategy is to just ignore it and get
on with the discussion, without any animosity towards the attacker. This is hard to do but if you
manage, it will be the best advertisement for your maturity.
o "Losing" an argument is not bad - even if you are convinced about the correctness of your stand,
don't stand on it - let the other person "win" it by saying "I know that you may disagree, but my
point is…, however, we need not keep debating this, maybe we need to proceed". Losing an
argument does not lead to loss of points. Sometimes, it helps demonstrate your flexibility and
maturity.
Finally, your team skills are evaluated on the basis of the way you carry on with the other
participants. It doesn’t matter how long you speak but what you spoke and how you put your
opinion into words.
5 tips for starting a GD
Group Discussion forms an important stage in the admission process of top B-schools. The
candidates are evaluated on the basis of their knowledge, communication and group skills.
Initiating a group discussion is sure to enhance your score in a GD. Given below are the five
important points to consider before initiating a GD:
Carefully craft the opening gambit
 Well begun is half done : This age old adage is convincingly verified in the opening part of the
GD. If you start on a good note and are able to impart the right direction to the group, it places

7
 you on a comfortable pedestal. It builds the right momentum for the entire group and earns you
the tag of a leader.
 High risk high return situation: Starting the discussion is a powerful role to play in a GD. It
imparts directional inputs to the group members and demonstrates your initiative. However, the
downside attached to it is also quite intimidating: you may start the discussion assuming it would
enable you to leverage the potential benefits, hoping that other members would join in. But
sample a possibility when nobody else pitches in and you alone have to hold the fort – it puts you
in an embarrassing position!
 Projects goal setting ability : The first speaker showcases an ability to set the goal for the
subsequent discussion. This is even more true in case of an abstract topic, where the foremost
challenge is to decode the topic in multiple ways and identify a tangible path for discussion.
 Demonstrates high initiative : Being the first speaker is reflective of your ability to take
the first step in the right direction, and indicates clarity of thought and high confidence levels.
Use Key Word Approach
 Identify the key words in the topic : Identifying the key words in the topic serves as a
good strategy as it helps you to start in an easyyet sequential manner. For example, if the topic
for discussion is ‘Is guessing an act of intelligence?’, then applying the key word approach
helps you to identify ‘guessing’ and ‘intelligence’ as the key words in the given topic.
 Define the key words : Having identified the key words, the next challenge is to define
these words in a simple and empirical manner. In the above example, this will entail a quick
definition of the words ‘guessing’ and ‘intelligence’, which is not a very difficult task!
 Correlate the key words to pan out the scope of the topic for discussion : This step
requires you to bind the key words in a meaningful and progressive way, enabling you to pan
out a flowchart for the ensuing discussion.
Apply Shock Strategy
 Shock and un-shock the group :People love to be taken aback; they value surprises! This

approach propounds the need for doing something unpredictable to spell bound the group
and then helping them to wriggle out of the surprise spell. If handled well, it will create
an awe factor for you to ride on!
 Shock can be created in different ways:-

8
 o Share a story : Stories are a powerful way of putting across your point of view. It also
serves as an anchor during the critical opening part of the discussion. You are advised to
be familiar with a variety of stories which can be quickly plugged in to suit the occasion.
Motivational stories find a particular use here.
o Use quotes : Quoting what someone said once upon a time, may be of significant help to
build the opening pitch for the discussion. It is conducive in building up the momentum
for the occasion.
o Wield data : Stating relevant facts at the beginning of the discussion is a convincing way
of impacting people and making them value your point of view. It adds authenticity to
your content.
Follow Patenting Approach
 Patent is a legal right : The first speaker takes it all! If you can think quickly and

creatively, this strategy works for you. It is particularly useful where the topic is abstract
and offers multiple opportunities for a lateral treatment.
 Use divergent thinking to come out with as many implications of the topic as possible :
Look at the topic in an unorthodox manner and try coming out with diverse implications
thereof. As the first speaker pan out the various dimensions of the topic and then invite
the group for a discussion on one or more of these.
 Depends on the given topic; factual topics may not offer as much flexibility for divergent
thinking : This strategy may not be applicable to every topic. For example, an abstract
topic is likely to offer more patenting opportunities as compared to a factual one!
 Be fluent enough to exercise this approach : The success of this approach depends on the
pace by which you can communicate multiple ideas, and hence fluency is a great
facilitator in this approach.
Avoid the following…..
 Repeating the topic at the onset : Repeating the topic is an indication of your need to buy

more time to think. It is advised that you should not indulge in such a redundant
technique.
 Speaking for the sake of speaking : This is a superficial way of participating and both the
panel and the group will realize the lack of content in your speech.
 Taking an affirmative stand at the very beginning : It is suggested that you should not
begin with a verdict/opinion. The idea is to evolve by means of a discussion and not be

9
 seen as an opinionated/judgmental person who is dampening the spirits of other
participants.
 Getting into a conflict with a parallel speaker : Getting into an undesirable conflict
without any logic, may be of detrimental consequences. However, it should not hold you
from constructive arguments.

GD FAQs: Communication

How to effectively communicate during group discussion

Q. Does the use of certain words affect ones performance in a Group Discussion?
Filler Words: Within our own language we need to remove the filler words. These words give
us time to think, but these words de-emphasize what we are trying to say. These phrases include.

 Um…
 Sort of…
 Type of …
 Well, you know…
 You know what I mean…

Inappropriately used, they rob our speech of the power of persuasion.

Link Words: There are times when people want to soften the impact of what they want to say
and they start with a seemingly incidental and important piece of information and then use a link
word or expression before they say what they really mean. If you watch out of these, you will
know how to focus on what someone is really trying to communicate

 By the way…
 But…
 However…
 Incidentally…
 On the other hand…

Emphatic Words: Words that can be used to emphasize the ideas that follow them:

 Definitely

10
  Honestly
 Must
 Actually
 Frankly
 Literally

However, we need to think carefully about using these words. At times their use might imply
that the information that follows is untrue.

Q. My spoken English is poor and GDs are just round the corner. Is there any quick-fix
solution to maximize my chances?
What is important is "effectiveness" rather than the ability to speak fluently or use big words. For
example, if someone uses grammatically incorrect English but is still able to express a good idea,
this is still accepted. Similarly, people who deliver their points effectively using simple language
are appreciated when compared to those who do the same with complex constructs. You can
practice some simple statements like the following:

To give your opinion/ agree with an opinion

 "I think we should ….."

 "I think the correct approach is to ……"
 "I am in agreement with what has just been said."
 "I would like to add the following ……"

To disagree
 "I don't agree with the idea that ….."
 "I differ on this issue. I think we should ….."
 "May be we should consider the following….."
 "I feel we should do/ should not do this…."

To seek clarification
 "Could you please restate what you just said?”
 "I did not understand you. Can you please repeat?"

11
Apart from the above, you can try the following:
 Practice speaking out loud whatever thoughts cross your mind on a subject, to overcome
your inhibition.
 Practice reading out loud from books and newspapers.
 Watch news on popular English news channels.
 Form groups with others and speak in English as much as possible.
There are also audio tapes available (typically meant for TOEFL and TSE) which can be useful
for this purpose.

How do I say what I have to say?

The following are the important characteristics of Effective Communication:-

P - Pitch
I - Inflection
C- Courtesy
T - Tone
U - Understandability
R - Rate
E - Enunciation

Pitch: The different pitches we use in our voices will change the meaning of our messages or
words. Approximately 38% of our communication is contained in the HOW of what we say. A
high-pitched voice can sound irritating, while a low-pitched voice can sound more authoritative
and can be particularly effective where we are trying to persuade others to our point of view.

Inflection: If we talk in a monotone then we will make it difficult for our listeners to concentrate
on what we are saying. The group members will get bored and their minds will meander off into
self dialogue or self talk.

Courtesy: It is all too easy to forget to include everyday courtesy in our conversations. We
should remind ourselves to be courteous to everybody. Use of "Thank you" and "Sorry" does not
harm anyone in anyway. This needs to be remembered in a GD as well.

Tone: The tone we use can emphasize the meaning of the words used. For example, say the
following words using the tone that matches the word. (i.e. a sincere tone for the word sincere),
sincere, pleasant, happy, sad, confident, believable.

Understandability: We should avoid talking with anything other than our tongue and teeth in
our mouths. Chewing- gums etc. should be avoided. Also, avoid using slangs and jargons.

12
Rate: Rate stands for the rate or speed at which we speak. If we speak too quickly, our listeners
may not be able to follow the content. Similarly if we speak too slowly, then people will try and
finish off the subject of the conversation. It is the variety of “speeds” which gives power to our
conversation, slowing down to make a particular point, speeding up to add emphasis and
excitement. This change in rate gives feeling and enthusiasm to what we say.

Enunciation: We need to be careful how we enunciate what we say. We must speak clearly to
avoid misunderstandings. Some people struggle more with numbers than with words, so we
should take care to cite them clearly to avoid confusion. The letters T and D are often confused,
as are P and B. Speaking clearly is the only way to speak if we wish to ensure that what we say is
understood.

13
Solved GD-1: Should we allow incurably diseased persons to live or not?
Points In Favour:

If we feel sad to kill even an animal or a bird, how can our conscience allow us to kill a fellow
human being just because he is incurably ill? Moreover he has done no harm to society and his
illness is not because of his fault. Therefore, we must provide him proper treatment and allow
him to live as long as nature has willed it

God has gifted us life. So, he alone has the right to take it back. No human being has a right to
interfere in His scheme of things. Once on this earth, every man has a right to live as long as God
does not want him to die.Therefore,the reasoning that just because a man is suffering from an
incurable disease, he should be put to death is untenable and beyond reason.

It is not always the case that incurably diseased persons spread contagious diseases as some
might argue. Even in those rare cases where it may be true, these persons are not real health
hazards because it is medically established now that all incurable diseases are not contagious.
However, as a precautionary measure, we should open separate hospitals or isolation wards for
persons suffering from incurable contagious diseases and thus quarantine them.

Killing an incurably diseased person will put an end to research work in medical science. Even
otherwise, suffering people have been the subject of research work quite less. Now new vistas of
progress have been opened in medical sciences and alternative medicine like Acupuncture,
Acupressure, Reiki Pranik healing, Touch therapy, Herbal therapy, Diet therapy, etc. hold a ray
of hope for the so called incurably diseased persons. So, why snatch life from them?

Points against:

This world is governed by Darwin's survival of the fittest principle. An incurably diseased person
is weak and has no value whatsoever to the society. Moreover, he has no means to live.
Therefore, it would be in the fitness of things to kill him even against his wish.

An incurably diseased person is the cause of constant worry to his family, his demands are
unending and notwithstanding the best possible attention, care and treatment given to him, he

14
always remains dissatisfied and disgruntled. This adversely affects peace of mind and comfort of
the family members. Therefore, the best way out of such a situation is to put an end to his life.

These days we are saddled with the responsibility of reducing our burgeoning population. The
many diseased persons constitute a good part of it. Even otherwise their contribution to society
being nil and burden great, it would be justified and reasonable not to allow them to drag on their
agonizing life.

Conclusion:
Defining gray areas is something which any amount of legislation can never achieve. Our
policies need to ensure that the group of people taking a decision to terminate the life is doing so
in the best interest of the patient and society.

Solved GD-2: Should Capital punishment be abolished?

In Favour Of Abolition:
Man is supposed to be a rational animal. But can a rational being kill a man for a man? No.
Because it would be savage and barbarous. Besides, by killing a murderer the dead cannot be
brought back to life, nor would he or his family be compensated. So, instead, we should reform
the killer, make him realize his sin and follow a virtuous life.
If we kill the murderer, his troubles are over. But his family is made to suffer for no fault of
theirs. We should instead give him some other punishment, say, for example, life imprisonment
so that he has to face his own conscience and repent for what he has done. Alongside, he should
be given psychological treatment and an opportunity to lead a normal citizen's life.
Instances are many where instead of being given capital punishment to even hardened criminals,
they were just imprisoned or put in a reformatory with the result that they realized and regretted
their wrong doings, their terms of sentences were reduced as a reward. Such acts enabled them to
serve their innocent families and they even turned towards social work. This shows their capital
punishment is not the only remedy to take care of criminals.
We observe today that in spite of capital punishment being very much there on the statute,
heinous crimes are not decreasing. It goes to show that capital punishment is no deterrent for
criminals. Therefore, we must think of changing the method of punishment.Over 30 countries in

15
the world have abolished capital punishment but none has reported any increase in crime.
Therefore, death punishment is not justified from any angle.
The reason capital punishment should be abolished is based on the fact that sometimes
judgments go wrong,and,consequently, innocent people are hanged. This is because of the
legalistic juggling of clever lawyers. Even otherwise instances are not rare when corrupt police
officials are brought over through money and political power to file patently cooked up charge
sheets in the court and magistrates in turn pass doubtful judgments. The only way to preclude the
possibility of error is to abolish capital punishment itself. “Benefit of Doubt” is an important
point of law and rightly so because law holds that 99 guilty can go unpunished but even one
innocent should not be punished. In the same spirit our Supreme Court has held that death
penalty should be awarded only in “rarest of the rare cases”.
We have no right to destroy what we cannot create. It is for God to give or take one's life. Mercy
is higher in his eyes than punishment. It is barbarous to hold the doctrine of “tooth for tooth” and
“limb for limb”. Great soul like Jesus Christ even say “If a man slaps you on one cheek, show
him the other cheek also”. Our own Mahatma Gandhi forgave the person who stabbed him and
would surely have pardoned Nathuram Godse who killed him.Nehru ignored the plea of several
true Gandhians for Godse's life by saying, “The law will have its course.” But isn't it true, as
Charles Dickens said, that “the law is an idiot?”
Against Abolition:
The time is not yet ripe to abolish capital punishment. There is no letup in crimes. Capital
punishment is an effective deterrent for would be offenders and murderers. Those who argue that
despite capital punishment being there on the statute book crime in on the increase fail to
understand that it is because of our faulty justice delivery system where justice delayed is justice
denied, and not the other way round.
There are certain kinds of hardened criminals who are beyond reform. It is futile to teach them
sanity. Killing others has become their second nature and they have dozens of murder cases
pending against them. It would only be for the good of society that they are sent to the gallows
and thus their career in crime is stopped.
If a murderer is not put to death but instead allowed to live on, he is tempted to repeat the crime
in future. It often happens that murderers set at large through police connivance or legal trickery

16
of lawyers indulge in more heinous crimes for fun or contract killings until they are caught and
killed.
In some Muslim countries like Pakistan, Iran, Dubai, etc. where laws are rigid and even petty
criminals are awarded harsh punishments, crime is rare. Similarly in Fascist countries where
death penalty is awarded for negligence of duty or other offences, efficiency and honesty are
found in abundance. Jawaharlal Nehru once favored capital punishment for blackmarketeers as
well. “I do not want to harm the meanest insect but it would give me the greatest pleasures of all
blackmarketeers are hung up by the neck till death.”
Punishment must be proportional to the crime. One who takes a life, should pay for it with his
own life. That alone can have a deterrent effect on the criminals. It is both ethically and
practically wrong to show any leniency to hardboiled criminals. We would be excusing or
placating criminals only at our own peril because then they would feel emboldened to commit
further crime. Therefore, though 'an eye for an eye' and 'a tooth for a tooth' appears brutal but it
is the demand of true justice.
A murderer not only kills a human being but also makes the life of his victim's dependents
miserable, because in most such cases their breadwinner is snatched from them and in some
extreme cases they might go after the blood of the murderer and might kill them. Therefore, it is
advisable that a murderer is put to death by the arm of the law itself.
Crime is contagious. Hence quick dispensation of justice and award of capital punishment to
hardened criminals,as they do it in Pakistan, Bangladesh and in some other countries, can surely
nip this contagion in the bud and prove helpful in improving the law and order situation in our
country.
Conclusion:
What crimes are amongst the rarest of the rare? Definitions of crime are subjective. Human life
is invaluable both the victim's and the murderer's. Society needs deterrents to crime. The best
policy would be to deter crime with the lowest possible harm to members of society.
Solved GD-3: What is desirable - love marriage or arranged marriage?
In Favour Of Love Marriage:

Young people should be allowed to choose their own partners because nature has so made them
that upon reaching the age of consent young boys and girls feel naturally attracted towards the
member of opposite sex whom they find to be Mr. Right or Miss Right for themselves.

17
In arranged marriages, parents are not in a position to know the girl well enough; that is, they
may not be aware of her personality traits. In arranged marriages, we generally get to know about
the family background and outward appearance of the girl or the boy, their educational
attainments, career plans, etc. and in the case of girls, their interest and proficiency in household
affairs cooking, knitting, tailoring, etc. But success or failure of married life depends on the basic
temperament, nature and compatibility or otherwise of the partner. Therefore, to make marriage a
success, young men and women should be supported in selecting partners of their choice suiting
each other's temperament.

The presumption that love is blind and hence a young girl or boy will just pick up for a husband
or wife, the first boy or girl they come across when they are grown up is not justified. We cannot
say with certainty that a young boy or girl will not take all aspects into consideration before
embarking on a love affair. They are not Romeo and Juliet of our Bollywood variety who
convert their first love affair into a marriage. Now we have the concept of dating gaining
currency in which a young man gets engaged to his girl friend only when he has fully understood
her and the same is the case with young girls who now feel more confident to speak their mind in
matrimonial matters. During their courtship, they get enough opportunity to study each other and
can easily break off the relationship if either side is not found to be as expected.
Love marriage may have its defects as well, but we must admit that it has come to stay. Today
educational facilities have spread and are easily and equally available to girls, too. Besides, there
are greater employment opportunities for girls than in the past. These together ensure that there is
more intermingling of members of the opposite sex and the parental influence is diminishing.
Therefore, boys and girls are getting more free in the choice of their spouses. In these
circumstances, it would be better for the elders to take it easy and not to come in the way of their
children's happiness. Yes, of course, they can still play the role of marriage counsellers than that
of match-makers. Young people, on their part, would do well generally to respect the wishes of
their elders while deciding to go steady with their boy or girl friend.
Love is the main factor that binds two individuals. Saints and poets alike have praised it.
Therefore love marriages have more chances of success because there is pre-marital
understanding between the would-be couples. More often, unpleasant consequences arise only
when love is obstructed or the period of courtship is very short. If love is given way to and the
latter is taken care of, love marriages succeed and nothing else.

18
In Favour Of Arranged Marriages:

The much talked of understanding in love marriages is not so easy to have when the two meet for
the first time because love takes place at “first sight” and not after due deliberation. Moreover,
love marriages mainly result in divorce or are the cause of quarrels with parents and thus
unpleasantness in relationships. As against them, arranged marriages are based on more solid
foundations. Here, experienced people have their way and they naturally choose a partner who is
sure to prove more faithful, devoted, mature and with predictable.
Parents are more rational, mature and experienced to deal with such matters and they are always
capable of selecting suitable life partners for their children. Loves being blind, young people
usually do not give a thought to the suitability and compability of their love. They generally lack
sound judgement and are carried away by passion.
In arranged marriages, boys and girls are weighed in their totality. Their family background,
character, temperament, compability, all are taken into consideration, for marriage is supposed to
be a union of two families and not just two individuals. Naturally, girls coming from families
which cherish harmonious relationships are more likely to make better wives than those coming
from broken homes. The latter may have their own psychological problems.
All this new-found love for love marriages is because of the influence of Western films and
culture on our life. Whether love or arranged one, marriage is a gamble either way. Even much
trumpeted love marriages have been seen to be foundering on the rock of reality. Hadn't our
fathers, grandfathers and their forefathers all enjoyed arranged marriages? Is our culture or
society any the worse for it? If we compare both love and arranged marriages we find that
chances of success in the latter are much more for they are finalized after due consideration of
various aspects of a happy and successful married life.
Conclusion:
What is important in marriage is “love”, whether it develops before or after the marriage.

Solved GD-4: Is Science a curse or a boon?

Science Is a Curse:

Scientific inventions in the field of military technology and hardware have brought about mass
destruction. Previously, only armies would fight on the front and even unarmed or sleeping
soldiers were not killed, not to speak of civilians. But today, chemical, biological and nuclear

19
weapons, as also missiles and aircrafts, have extended the area of conflict right into the heart of
the opposing countries. The entire industrial civilization infrastructure can destroyed in a fraction
of a second. Remember the savagery of World War II when Hiroshima and Nagasaki were
completely wiped out, its citizens physically maimed and mentally deformed? Also remember
what happened in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan?
Can we ever forget the avoidable destruction of human lives caused by leakage in the Chernobyl
nuclear plant in the former USSR and by methyl iso cynate (MIC) gas leakage in Bhopal (India)
a few years back? Aren't thousands of people dying in road, rail and air accidents today, mostly
because of human failure in anticipating disasters or deliberate sabotage by terrorists?
Those who regard science as a boon would say the industrialization and automation have made
production on a mass scale possible and less strenuous, but they fail to realize that it has created
large-scale unemployment. Besides, the immigration of rural workers towards industrial centers
in the cities has adversely affected our joint family system, not to speak of the psychological
problems and diseases it has spawned in the city based village workers who are uprooted from
their moorings.
Man in his quest for so-called science aided advancement and urbanization has destroyed huge
jungle tracts thus causing harm to ecological balance. Toxic gases and biologically non
degradable waste material from factories are causing air and water pollution, blaring
loudspeakers create noise pollution so much so that even out Supreme Court have to step in to
order closure / shifting of factories in and around Delhi and to fix permissible decibel limit for
fire crackers during Dipawali celebrations.

Granted that science has enabled us to fight diseases more effectively and lead a more healthy
life but more and more deadly diseases, unknown to our forefathers, are affecting us today.
Moreover side-effects of several medicines are more dangerous than the cure, and wrong
medication / diagnosis may render us permanently incapacitated. The recent report that Dolly,
the artificially created sheep is suffering from T.B., is an eye opener for the defenders of science.

Today cheap, easy and mechanical transport, scooters, cars, buses, trains and aeroplanes, has
reduced distances for us but the pollution it causes cannot be overlooked. Besides, our
dependence on them has made us lame. Not only this, other luxuries and comforts of modern

20
science have made us so soft that we do not want to do physical work and thus suffer from
several ailments and posture diseases.

Science has taught us to conquer the moon and stars but failed to ennoble man himself. While
machines have been humanized, man has been mechanized and dehumanized. Starford
Wingfield has rightly said in his monumental book 'History of British Civilization', the trouble
with science is that it has improved the circumstances of man but not the man himself. So what is
the fun of improving the outer surroundings of man if he himself is not bettered?
Science Is a Boon:
Science is always a boon for mankind. Ever since man's appearance on the planet Earth he has
endeavoured to conquer the forces of nature to lead a happy life. Science and civilization are one
and the same. A civilized nation is one which has achieved scientific progress. We call the
African nations uncivilized; they are not versed in the ways of science.
Fast means of transport like aeroplanes, and trains have made the world a global village.
Telephone, TV and satellite communications, as also, Internet, have made it possible to get the
latest information from anywhere in the world in no time. This has helped in the spread of
education through satellites and TV networks. Satellite photography has enabled us to explore
new areas of mineral deposits and early warnings from satellite pictures of an impending cyclone
make it possible to take countermeasures.
Science has given us new medicines to fight diseases and increase the span of life. Radiological
progress, ECG, CT Scan, MRI, etc. help us in detecting and diagnosing severe ailments.
Transplant surgery and micro-surgery have shown hope for the hopeless. Now the human
genome project has succeeded in mapping genes of the human body which holds the hope of
identifying culprit genes for man's diseases and replacing them.
From cradle to grave man have tasted the fruits of science: a Caesarian operation brings him into
the world, an electric crematorium disposes him off and in between his electric lights and fans,
washing machines, fridges and other gadgets ensure that he lives a comfortable life.
While our forefathers had to live a life full of hardships, we, because of science lead a luxurious
and comfortable life. Even the poor can avail of fast transport, bio-engineered food, a variety of
modern entertainment and the like. Test tube babies have long become a dream come true for the
issueless couples. Deadly diseases like cancer and AIDS are going to be completely controlled in

21
the future. Different vaccines have already been developed for eradication of Hepatitis B, Small
pox, Polio, etc.
Agriculture and farming have been revolutionized by science. Big dams to channelise water and
distribute it to the desert have turned arid areas into greenery. Isotopes have helped improve the
quality of seeds, which not only increased food production but also caused resistance to plant
disease. Cross breeding of animals and poultry too has increased yield. Biotechnology has made
us self sufficient, even surplus, in food production.
Our education system has been revolutionized with the help of science and technology. Gone are
the days of yore when man could rest contented with learning of only humanities; teaching of
science and technology has opened new vistas before him. He has more job opportunities. Not
only this, he is more and more in command over the forces of nature and with the aid of science
and technology he is using his resources for mankind. With great strides in paper and printing
technology and the knowledge explosion in general, even an average person is able to get the
needed information and can exercise his right of choice in our democratic polity.
Electronics and computers have changed our thinking and living radically, computerized
machinery turns out products much faster and of better quality. Computers have replaced manual
labour with better performance and electronics has made it possible for the handicapped to lead a
normal life.
It might sound ironic but it is a fact that because of thermonuclear weapons with colossal
destructive power in their armoury, the two superpowers, the US and the erstwhile USSR, could
not go to war fearing MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) and lived with entente during the cold
war era. Even today, post December 13 attack on our Parliament and not withstanding warning
of using nuclear power, both India and Pakistan are desisting from carrying out their threat
because of the nuclear pressure.
Conclusion:
Sustainable development will allow us to benefit from science, yet help pass the planet to the
next generation in the same shape that we inherited it in.
Solved GD-5: Seniority, Not Merit, Must Be The Criterion For Promotions
In Favour Of Seniority:
Entry in a job can be on merit, for that is an objective criterion for a start, but once a person joins
an office, his actual experience alone must count in allowing his promotions. This experience

22
enables him to gain true knowledge of the practical working of his office. We cannot deny the
fact that seniority makes a man proportionately experienced while mere merit takes into
consideration only bookish knowledge.
By merit we generally mean securing high marks in written examinations and intelligently
convincing the examiner or the interviewer. But the fact is that even duffers can secure high
marks by cramming a few important answers and get through the interview by chance or
recommendation. On the contrary, only practical experience can give us the true knowledge of
theory and practice of a particular line.
From our own experience in India we find that our old system of hereditary practice of a
particular trade or profession enables young boys to gain much more experience than today's
newly recruited young men who are given higher position, salary and status. An ordinary mistry
working under an engineer knows more about the intricacies of a machine than the meritorious
engineer. It would be in the fitness of things, for us, therefore, to give higher ranks and salaries to
the humble mistries and make new recruits work under them as apprentices, so as to bring about
quick industrial development.
There being no absolute and infallible test for computing one's merit on the basis of an objective
criterion, the system of promotion by merit allows for subjective assessment by superiors and
thus leads to favoritism and corruption. On the contrary, seniority being quite obvious,
promotions based on it leaves no scope for corruption or favoritism.
We must see to it that even a peon after a number of years is made a junior officer, then a senior
and eventually head of the department, provided, of course, he has gained sufficient knowledge
through experience. This system operates in some advanced western countries quite successfully
for it offers incentive to old hands.
In Favour Of Merit:
Promotions in offices and factories should be based on merit alone, for, it seniority were to be
given weightage in promoting one to higher posts , every Tom, Dick and Harry who has put in a
specified years of service would start claiming promotions just because of his duration in service.
Can we grant promotions to a peon who dusts books and carries files in a library without even
caring to read their contents? Can his seniority make him more able or capable? The fact is that
only time applied in useful purposes has educative value. In this respect, we have the shining
example of Gangadhar Yadav, a gardener in his early 20's at IIM, Lucknow. He so involved

23
himself in doing some extra work in the office there, that in the year 2000 a visiting Vice
President of a reputed multinational got impressed with him and offered him the job of Sales
Executive!
The greatest progress in nations of the world has been achieved where promotions and honours
have gone to the meritorious alone. Here we have the most spectacular case of China and the
former Soviet Union. In China, they followed Confucian teachings since ancient times and
recruited their government officers accordingly on the basis of a competition. Today we know
where China stands! In the case of the Soviet Union too, their greatest progress in science and
technology was made possible by encouragement given to merit. That is why they could put first
Sputnik in the orbit and build a huge military industrial complex. An ordinary factory worker
could hope to become a manager one day.
Granted that people with seniority are sometimes more knowledgeable than new recruits who
come on the basis of examinations and competitions but they are exceptions. Majority of them do
not make any serious attempt to know or learn more and do better. However, the few who
improve themselves do get an opportunity for promotions,on the basis of both merit and
seniority.
The requirements of the present day make old people outdated, because of rapid technological
advancement in factories and new work culture. Therefore, if merit alone is taken into
consideration while promoting, the knowledge of the latest devices and design can be
meaningfully tested in a candidate who keeps himself abreast of them.
We now witness worldwide skill upgrading, computerization, government downsizing, more
mechanization and automation. What does it indicate? Only that we are moving towards
meritocracy- a kind of government where all jobs is available on the basis of merit and academic
qualifications alone. In such a situation, seniority is bound to be left irrelevant and only merit as
proved through technical and practical knowledge will count.
Conclusion:
Loyalty and Genius both need to be rewarded. Policy needs to ensure that there are exceptions
for the career paths of exceptional people, without making so many exceptions that it gets
converted into a “rule”.
Solved GD-6: Are Reservations In Jobs Justified?
No, They Aren't:

24
The very idea of providing reservations to any segment of the population is based on negatives.
It allows for preferential treatment without a thought being given to the caliber or eligibility
aspect. Just about any individual from the reserved castes scheduled castes, scheduled tribes and
backward castes can get a Government job or admission in an educational institution on a much
lower eligibility criterion for percentage of marks and a higher age. This lowering of standard
breeds inefficiency, discourages the really meritorious and negates the very concept of quality of
opportunity. 49.5 percent reservation means that half the administrative machinery has inbuilt
inefficiency, while Article 335 of our Constitution lays down that reservation should be
consistent with the maintenance of efficiency of administration.
By rejecting people of higher competence from general category and accepting the reserved
category with lower competence, the reservation policy acts as a disincentive to the meritorious
and more capable. Thus inhibits healthy growth or development of an individual. Such brilliant
students, victims of unfair favouritism of our reservation policy, get frustrated and leave for
foreign countries which favour merit alone. This brain-drain adversely affects the intellectual
capability of our country. Not only this, the system of reservation, says Justice Chinnappa
Reddy, has in many cases paradoxically generated “a spirit of self-denigration” - each
community of caste competing to be more backward than others.
Private enterprises, being interested in efficiency alone, do not follow the retrograde policy of
reservation. Their sole criterion of selecting people is merit and ability to deliver the goods. This
is why they are doing extremely well.But, of late, demands for introducing reservations in
private sector has been raised in some influential quarters.Should this come about, God save
whatever efficiency we still have in at least a few segments of our administration and economy.
It is a shame that in this computer and space age we, by institutionalizing our reservation policy,
admit that we are a decadent society based on caste. What image does it convey in the
international field? Can casteism be done away with by having caste based reservations? Should
we not follow economic criterion instead so that only a few families do not benefit perpetually
by this unfair policy? The criterion of creamy layer is patently humbug, for it is so applied that
even those with sufficient means and standing in society succeed in getting the benefit of
reservation. All this breeds discontent and occasions social unrest. Therefore, the sooner we do
away with reservations the better for the nation.

25
Reservations were supposed to be an interim arrangement for 10 years as per our constitution so
that the low caste people could come up socially. But encouraged by our shortsighted politicians
with their sights fixed on this sizeable vote-bank, its beneficiaries have formed it into a habit to
claim reservation as a matter of right. Instead of striving hard to excel, they seek the shortcut of
reservations and the vested political interests perpetuate it. This vicious circle can be broken by
the Government by having a firm cutoff year for reservations and spreading education among the
depressed classes on a priority basis. But can we do so by assigning low priority to education
with a mere 4 percent budget allocation for it?
Instead of facilitating spatial growth of education and development among the depressed classes,
reservations have spawned a new elitist group a mere 5 percent among them, which has cornered
all the benefits meant for 22.5 per cent. The same is going to be the fate of the most backwards
among backward classes.
A further reservation of 27 percent to the other backward classes has aggravated the employment
problem and has formed caste animosities and hatred. This retrograde step is not going to do any
good to the nation. In the name of social justice, an injustice of the worst type is being
perpetrated because of the accident of birth in a higher caste. Moreover, the argument that since
the new reserved categories have suffered injustice through centuries at the hands of upper caste
people, the latter should atone for that, is beyond comprehension. How could a young boy or girl
be held responsible and guilty for an alleged crime supposed to have been committed by his or
her forefathers? Two wrongs do not make one right?
The only hope of the children of ordinary families for a better future is through education and
open-to-all competitive examination. This has been shattered by the additional 27 per cent job
quota for other Backward Class (BC) candidates following acceptance of the Mandal
Commission Report. That is why they resorted to agitation and even self-immolation, but to no
avail. It has further fractured our caste-ridden society. The author of the Mandal Commission
Report himself admits that the system followed by the Commission in compiling the list is
unscientific.
It is really damaging to the nation as a whole that instead of tackling our population problem
largely due to the illiterate, backward and superstitious people of backward classes, we give them
the lollipop of reservations! In spite of their wretchedness and poverty they produce more
children and make the life of these innocents more miserable than theirs. Therefore, if at all

26
reservations are to be given they must be linked with adoption of family-planning methods. This
will prove to be an effective deterrent against population explosion and will also benefit these
classes themselves.
Yes, They Are:
The obnoxious caste system might have served some purpose when it originated centuries ago
but now it is a hindrance to our social progress. The claim of the apologists of caste system that
caste was changeable according to merit and competence of the individual and was not strictly
hereditary is disapproved by the story of Karna in the Mahabharat who inspite of being equal to
or even more in valour, skill, warfare and charity than the Kshatriyas was made to suffer
humiliation for being a Sut Putra (Son of a Shudra) till his death. Again we have the story of
Eklavya, a low-born. Dronacharya, the teacher of Arjun, the great archer of the epic Mahabharat,
demanded his thumb as Gurudakshina (Fee), even though he had refused to teach him archery
fearing that he might surpass. Thus centuries of oppression and untouchability cannot be undone
in just a few years of honest and sincere efforts. Therefore, the makers of our Constitution
stipulated reservation for scheduled castes and tribes for a period of ten years but it had to be
extended again and again because they could not come up in such a short time. It is only fair and
just to reserve some seats for these deprived and oppressed people, who could not enter even
temples and educational institutions. The question of any inefficiency creeping in or harm or
injustice being done to others does not arise because one, these classes too must fulfill certain
basic minimum educational or technical qualification, and, too, some states like Tamil Nadu,
Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka have over 50 percent reservations yet their efficiency is second to
none. Again, no hue and cry of lowering efficiency or standards is raised when a son of a rich
father gets admission in a technical or professional course in spite of lower marks. Then why
these double standards?
Our constitution lays down equality among equals and not among un equals. Through the policy
of reservation, our depressed and backward class people are sought to be brought to the status of
equality with others. It is really shameful for a modern civilized society like ours that even after
55 years of independence, a scheduled caste barat party is not allowed to go through a Rajput
dominated village near Agra, young lovers belonging to higher lower caste are hanged in village
panchayats in broad daylight without a whimper of protest! Hence, reservation is an affirmative
action to bring about socio-economic betterment of these classes and must, therefore, continue.

27
Being a Welfare State, we owe it to the weaker sections to ensure their well-being through
governmental action.Their economic backwardness, poor state of education and social
deprivation are all due to our society which even at this late hour should not prevent their
upliftment. It is because of this oppressive, humiliating and torturous caste system and resultant
deprivation that has led thousands of scheduled castes people (From Dr. Ambedkar to Ramraj
now Uditraj) to get converted en masse into other religions. Resort to such conversions as a
means of escape from caste-based oppression is a shame on the entire society.
If the Brahmins can work as pujaris and act as agents of God for all auspicious occasions like
births, marriages,deaths, etc. as a birthright, why should the Hindu society not view some
reservation for backward class people with charity and generosity.
Even now the total reservation is only 49.5 percent for about 76.5 per cent of the population
while over 50 per cent seats are available for about 23.5 per cent candidates of higher castes.
Besides, true social justice can come with a price and reservations are the prices that are
privileged classes should be willing to pay so that the accident of birth is no more used against
their lowborn brethren.
Mahatma Gandhi once said, “Swaraj for me means freedom for the meanest for our countrymen.
I am not interested in freeing India merely from the English yoke. I am bent upon freeing India
from any yoke whatsoever.” It goes to prove that Father of the Nation would ensure individual
freedom for one and all. But can such freedom be possible for the exploited and oppressed
weaker sections?
The depressed and backward class people cannot fare well in an open competition because of
centuries of suppression and deprivation, and, hence, they cannot develop themselves. In this
modern age of knowledge explosion through mass media, they may get alienated from the main
stream of our society. This can generate dangerous consequences for the nation as a whole.
Therefore, to avoid such an eventuality, we should accept our downtrodden brethren with an
open arm and give them a helping hand in realizing their potential. This way only we can achieve
our common destiny, for didn't our ancient seers proclaimed “Sarve Bhawantu Sukhinah ma
Kashchid duhkh bhag bhavet”. (Let all be happy, let no one be miserable).
Conclusion:
Inequalities will always exist. Society will always try to set right these inequalities in some ways.
Policy checks here should be to see if the solution is working in the long term or not.

28
Solved GD-7: What form of Democracy is better - parliamentary or presidential?
Parliamentary:
India adopted the Parliamentary form of democracy after getting Independence in 1947 because
India had been familiar with its working during the days of the British rule. Since then 13 general
elections have been held to the Lok Sabha on the basis of universal adult franchise, and barring a
few violent incidents during the polls, there has been peaceful transition of authority from one
political party to the other. Moreover, while in a parliamentary democracy, the Executive is
responsible to the legislature and therefore, the opposition always keeps it alert. For it “always
lives in the shadow of a coming defeat.” As Laski points out, in a Presidential democracy the
President does not have to fear any opposition because he is not responsible to the legislature. It
can make him autocratic. Hence Esmein calls the system “autocratic, irresponsible and
dangerous.” So, would it be advisable for us to hand over the destiny of our vast country with
abundant resources and population to the whims and caprices of a dictatorial President?
Since the majority party or a majority coalition of several parties comes to power in a
Parliamentary democracy, there is bound to be co-operation and harmony between the Executive
and the Legislature. It ensures easy implementation of plans and policies of the ruling party for it
can have its own way, no matter what the opposition parties in the Lok Sabha say.In the
Presidential form, on the contrary, the system of separation of powers between the Executive and
Legislature often leads to conflict: more so, if these two wings of the government are controlled
by different parties. This leads to delay, confusion and procrastination. Therefore, it is advisable
for us to continue with the present system which has unity of responsibility, direction and power.
It is always possible to remove a failed Prime Minister and replace him with a new competent
and acceptable individual as per the wishes of the people. This happened in the United Kingdom
during World War II when Chamberlain proved to be a timid Prime Minister and Churchill
replaced him without any commutation taking place. But a President cannot be thus removed
before the expiry of his tenure except by an extremely difficult process of Impeachment. Thus
this system being rigid does not mould itself easily to abusing circumstances. Therefore, there is
no point in having a Presidential democracy where even a persona non grata has to be tolerated
for the remaining tenure of his office.
Bryce maintains that the Parliamentary form of Government secures swiftness in decision and
vigor in action because cabinet can easily get the measures it deems essential passed through the

29
Legislature. In the Presidential form, inordinate delay is caused in arriving at decisions, for the
Legislature is to be convinced of major policy decisions.
“Power corrupts, Absolute power corrupts absolutely” says Lord Acton. This applies to the
position of a President vested with the entire administration and absolute power who might on
his own take drastic action at home and in foreign policy and bring about great suffering to the
people. We should therefore, maintain the status quo of Parliamentary Government,
notwithstanding its shortcomings and faults, which has several heads to solve national problems
in the form of the cabinet.
Parliamentary democracy suits us because here persons fit to be members of the Executive make
known their sagacity, political acumen, grasp and common sense, and the Prime minister will
always be one who has undergone a long and strenuous period of political apprenticeship. This
state of affairs does not obtain in a Presidential democracy in the United States any person
without adequate political experience can hope to become the President. He very often comes
from obscurity and goes into obscurity again after his term of office is over and he is 'a leap in
the dark.'
If the ruling party fails to deliver and carry the majority with it in a Parliamentary democracy, the
opposition more than merely exposing its drawbacks, loopholes and blunders, tries to step into
his shoes without necessarily having to force the ritual of a fresh election. A fixed tenure of
office for a President does not make this possible in a Presidential democracy.
India has been the most stable nation of Afro Asia. The main factor contributing to our stability
has been the holding of periodic general elections. Government seeks to correspond to the
desires of the electorate. Members of the Legislature who represent prevailing tendencies and
opinion of the nation apprise the cabinet of them.Cabinet or the ruling party can ignore or brush
aside them only at its own peril. Presidential democracy, on the other hand, has nothing much to
care for a shift in public opinion because the fixed term of office of the President makes him
secure in office for the stipulated number of years. This may make him unresponsive to the
wishes of the people and rule as a dictator.
Presidential:
The time has come for us to switch over to the government of experts, as the Presidential
government is called instead of the government of amateurs or the Parliamentary democracy.
The President is authorized to appoint the members of his cabinet irrespective of party affiliation.

30
He can even obtain the services of nonparty experts. A Prime Minister, on the other hand, is
bound to appoint only members of his party or of parties supporting him. And he has to take into
consideration their caste, region, religion and their following, notwithstanding their otherwise
unsuitability for the post. In India, we have had, in the past and have even today, several persons
as ministers not because of their intrinsic quality but due to parochial considerations.
Presidential system ensures that the President has a national image. He does not belong to this or
that group or faction in the Legislature. Since he is elected for a fixed term of office, stability is
inbuilt in this form of government because he is not dependant on the vagaries of the Legislature.
In Parliamentary Government, on the other hand, the Prime Minister has to please both his party
men and the opposition to continue in office. The instability of this form of government becomes
more obvious when a single party does not hold a majority in the Legislature and a coalition
government is formed, as was the case in France prior to the inauguration of the 5th republic, and
in India during the Janata Party rule (1977- 80), National Front Governments in 1989-91 and in
1996-98. The BJP led coalition government had to resign in just 13 days and 13 months
respectively and the NDA Government had to put up with the tantrums of this or that coalition
partner.
In a Presidential democracy, the Legislature is less likely to be dominated by party spirit and the
individual members can vote independently on the issues presented to them, as the fate of the
government does not depend on them. This phenomenon is so much in evidence in the classic
case of United States that the two main parties the Republican and the Democratic are called
'same wine in different bottles'. Contrary to this the Parliamentary system “intensifies the spirit
of party and keeps it always on the boil” says Lord Bryce. Even if there are no important issues
of policy before the nation, there are always the offices to be fought, for one party holds them,
the other desires them and the conflict is unending for immediately after defeat, the beaten party
begins its campaign to dislodge the victors. While the opposition criticizes Government policy
regardless of its merits, the ruling party avoids putting unpopular measure, however important
they may be, and resorts to populism ignoring the need of the nation. Don't we witness this
happening here in India? Should, then, we still continue with this irresponsible state of affairs?
The fusion of executive and legislative functions in a parliamentary democracy like ours has
made the cabinet usurp the functions of parliament, for the Union Legislature is now in session
for about 3 months in one year while during Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru's time it used to be in session

31
for more than 4 months. Moreover, rule by ordinance tends to bypass the authority of Parliament.
In the Presidential system, on the other hand, there is separation of the Executive and the
Legislature. Hence, no wing can usurp the powers of the other. This ensures that no legislation is
enacted in haste or without, in-depth deliberation.
In a presidential democracy, a continuous and consistent home and foreign policy can be
followed because the chief executive enjoys security of tenure and cannot be easily removed.
This fact is established by the Rooseveltian era in USA. Contrary to this, in a parliamentary
democracy, there is no continuity or consistency of policies because of instability of
Government. A new cabinet may even reverse the policy followed by its predecessor.
In a presidential system, bureaucratic appointments are made by the president, and in some
cases, with the approval of the legislature. They are responsible for their acts of omission and
commission. In the Parliamentary Government, on the other hand, there is a fixed tenure for
bureaucrats who thrive under the cloak of ministerial responsibility. In India, we witness an over
bureaucratization of the entire administration, which causes red-tape and avoidable delay.
Bureaucracy even hijacks the well meant policies of the government.
With a multiplicity of political parties spawned due to personality clash of egoistic leaders and
helplessness of even anti defection law, floor-crossing and horse-trading have become the norm
in our parliamentary practices. The politician-bureaucrat-businessman-criminal nexus has
debased the parliamentary institution, interfered with the judiciary, created law and order
problems and encouraged terrorism and separation on a wider scale. Even violence inside the
legislature has bought them into disrepute. Instead of being a government by discussion,
parliamentary democracy has descended to the low level of pandemonium and bedlam in the
houses of the legislature.
Low calibre, casteist and communal elements, able to exploit the illiterate and poor masses a
considerable vote bank, get elected to the legislatures. Thus with their immense bargaining
power they are able to get ministerial berths? The result? Jumbo cabinets unmanageable in States
like U.P and Bihar where ministers have practically no work to do in some cases but are a burden
on the Exchequer. Thus we are caught in a vicious circle of all-round deterioration. It is,
therefore, high time that we abandon the Parliamentary system and adopt the Presidential
democracy where ministerial posts need not be given to elected representatives, the candidate is

32
more important than the party and, hence, corruption, inefficiency, vested interests and
paralyzing interference from politicians can be easily removed.
Conclusion:
The form of government is specific to a cultural and social context. Aspects that aid efficient
government need to be reinforced, irrespective of the form of government.

33