Polity – Medium Level – GK Questions

Lokpal Act, 2013: PM under jurisdiction but with safeguards: (a) No inquiry into allegations relating to international relations, external security, public order, atomic energy, space, (b) Inquiry requires approval of full bench of Lokpal, (c) Proceedings held in camera, (d) Frivolous complaints dismissed. Balances accountability of highest office with practical governance needs in sensitive strategic areas.

Rule of Law (A.V. Dicey; embedded in Indian Constitution): Core elements: (a) Supremacy of law over arbitrary power, (b) Equality before law (Article 14), (c) Predominance of legal spirit (judicial review). Constitutional Morality operationalizes rule of law: executive actions must have legal basis, laws must comply with Constitution, courts must check excesses. Foundation of accountable, predictable governance.

Section 33A, R.P. Act (inserted per ADR case, 2002): Candidates must file affidavit with Returning Officer disclosing: (a) Criminal cases pending, (b) Assets/liabilities of candidate and spouse, (c) Educational qualification. Affidavits made public on ECI website. Aims to promote transparency, enable voter scrutiny, deter corruption. However, verification and enforcement of disclosures remain challenges.

Whistle Blowers Protection Act, 2014: Aims to: (a) Protect persons making public interest disclosures about corruption, misuse of power, criminal offences by public servants, (b) Provide mechanism for inquiry into disclosures, (c) Penalize victimization of whistle blowers. However, not fully notified due to debates on national security exemptions. Highlights tension between transparency/accountability and legitimate confidentiality in governance.

Code of Conduct for Union Ministers (1964, revised): Sets ethical standards: (a) No use of official position for personal gain, (b) Avoid conflict of interest, (c) Declare assets, (d) Post-retirement employment restrictions. Enforced by PMO; violations can lead to resignation/removal. Similar codes exist for State Ministers, civil servants. However, enforcement depends on political will; debate continues on independent ethics oversight mechanism.

Third Schedule: Contains forms of oaths/affirmations for constitutional functionaries. Article 75(4) (Union Ministers) and Article 164(3) (State Ministers) require oath as per Third Schedule. Oath includes: (a) Bear true faith to Constitution, (b) Uphold sovereignty and integrity of India, (c) Faithfully discharge duties, (d) Maintain confidentiality. Formalizes ethical commitment of public office holders to constitutional values.

Constitutional Morality (articulated in Navtej Singh Johar, 2018 and other cases): Means fidelity to constitutional values beyond mere legal compliance. Includes: (a) Respect for pluralism and diversity, (b) Protection of minority rights against majoritarian impulses, (c) Commitment to rule of law over rule of men, (d) Balance between individual liberty and social responsibility. Guides interpretation of constitutional provisions in evolving societal context.

Residuary powers comparison: (a) India: Article 248 - Parliament has exclusive power to make laws on residuary subjects; includes power to impose residuary taxes. Gives Indian federalism unitary bias, (b) USA: 10th Amendment - Powers not delegated to US nor prohibited to States are reserved to States or people. Reflects US federalism's State autonomy tradition. India's design prioritizes national unity and coordinated development in diverse, post-Partition context.

Fundamental Duties comparison: (a) India: Article 51A (11 duties) added by 42nd Amendment (1976), inspired by USSR Constitution, (b) Other democracies: Most (USA, UK, Canada) don't have codified citizen duties in Constitution; duties implied through laws/citizenship oaths. Indian approach: Rights and duties are correlative; duties promote responsible citizenship, national unity, environmental protection. However, duties are non-justiciable; enforcement through moral/political pressure, not courts.

Constitutional supremacy: (a) India: Article 13 declares laws inconsistent with Fundamental Rights void; Supreme Court exercises judicial review (Kesavananda Bharati), (b) USA: Supremacy Clause (Article VI) establishes Constitution as supreme law; Marbury v. Madison (1803) established judicial review. Contrast with UK: Parliamentary sovereignty - Parliament can make/unmake any law; courts cannot strike down Acts of Parliament. Constitutional supremacy protects fundamental values from transient legislative majorities.

Upper House comparison: (a) US Senate: 100 members (2 per State), directly elected by citizens, 6-year term, equal State representation regardless of population, (b) Indian Rajya Sabha: Max 250 members (238 elected + 12 nominated), elected by State Legislative Assemblies via proportional representation, 6-year term with 1/3 retiring every 2 years, representation based on State population. Rajya Sabha represents States in federal structure; Senate represents States as equal sovereign entities.

DPSP comparison: (a) India (Part IV, Articles 36-51): Non-justiciable; fundamental in governance but not enforceable by courts (Article 37), (b) Ireland (Article 45): Also non-justiciable; 'general guidance to Oireachtas (Parliament)' for law-making. Both treat socio-economic goals as aspirational directives, not enforceable rights. However, Indian courts use DPSP for interpreting statutes and FRs, giving them indirect justiciability (Minerva Mills case).

Executive system comparison: (a) Presidential (USA): President is head of State (ceremonial) AND head of Government (executive powers), directly elected, fixed tenure, not responsible to legislature, (b) Parliamentary (India/UK): President is nominal head of State, PM is real head of Government, Council collectively responsible to Lok Sabha, can be removed by no-confidence motion. Parliamentary system emphasizes executive-legislative coordination; presidential emphasizes separation of powers.

Judiciary comparison: (a) Constitution: UK - Unwritten (conventions, statutes, case law), India - Written (single document), (b) Judicial Review: UK - Parliament sovereign (courts cannot strike down Acts of Parliament), India - Constitution supreme (SC/HCs can strike down laws violating Constitution), (c) Appointment: UK - Independent Commission, India - Collegium system. India's judicial review protects constitutional supremacy and Fundamental Rights.

From Soviet Union (USSR), India borrowed: (a) Fundamental Duties (Article 51A, added by 42nd Amendment, 1976), (b) Ideals of justice (social, economic, political) in Preamble, (c) Five-Year Plans for economic development (via Planning Commission, now NITI Aayog). Fundamental Duties remind citizens of obligations alongside rights, promoting responsible citizenship and national unity.

From France, India borrowed: (a) Ideals of Liberty, Equality, Fraternity in Preamble (inspired by French Revolution motto 'Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité'), (b) Concept of Republic (head of State elected, not hereditary). These ideals guide constitutional interpretation: Liberty (Fundamental Rights), Equality (Articles 14-18), Fraternity (single citizenship, fundamental duties). Reflects India's commitment to democratic, egalitarian values.

From Australia, India borrowed: (a) Concurrent List (List III in Seventh Schedule) where both Union and States can legislate (Union law prevails in conflict), (b) Freedom of trade, commerce and intercourse throughout the territory (Article 301, subject to reasonable restrictions), (c) Joint sitting of both Houses to resolve deadlocks (Article 108). These features balance federal autonomy with national economic integration.

From Germany (Weimar Constitution), India borrowed Emergency provisions: (a) National Emergency (Article 352) for war/external aggression/armed rebellion, (b) Suspension of Fundamental Rights during Emergency (with safeguards added by 44th Amendment), (c) Executive powers during crisis. However, Indian Constitution includes more safeguards (Parliamentary approval, judicial review, non-suspendable rights) to prevent misuse like in Weimar Germany.

From Canada, India borrowed: (a) Federation with strong Centre (quasi-federal structure), (b) Residuary powers with Union (unlike USA where States have residuary powers), (c) Appointment of State Governors by Centre, (d) Advisory jurisdiction of Supreme Court. These features give Indian federalism a unitary bias, enabling strong Centre for national unity while preserving State autonomy in defined areas.

From Ireland (Irish Constitution, 1937), India borrowed: (a) Directive Principles of State Policy (called 'Directive Principles of Social Policy' in Ireland), (b) Method of election of President, (c) Nomination of members to Rajya Sabha by President. DPSP are non-justiciable guidelines for State policy, aiming to establish social and economic democracy, complementing justiciable Fundamental Rights.