The Constitution of India, which contains elaborate provisions for the successful working of the government in a democratic fold, is written, bulky, and partly rigid and partly flexible. The three wings, which are called the pillars of democracy, i.e., the Executive, the Legislature, and the Judiciary, get their respective power and jurisdiction mentioned in a clear-cut way in the Constitution. At a time when most of the provisions in certain constitutions of the world are unwritten and based on traditions, and the Constitution of India provides an elaborate framework almost leaving nothing unwritten, the frequent arguments and counter-arguments as to whether the Parliament, the President, or the Supreme Court is supreme in the context of India come as a surprise. Before discussing the matter, let us first have a look at the conditions prevalent on the eve of Indian independence which were kept in view by the framers of the Constitution;
- Vastness of the country — From Kashmir to Kanyakumari and from Mumbai to Dibrugarh, India is a vast country, and it is really difficult to administer such a huge mass of land. It is true that there are various States and Union Territories to share the responsibility of the administration. Still, the provisions of the Constitution must be such that they suitably cover and do justice to such a vast country with a sizable population.
- Diversity — India is not only vast but also diverse, with myriad castes, communities, creeds, languages, and religions. The framers of the Constitution just could not overlook this aspect and had to enshrine all these in it.
- Centuries of alien rule — India became free not all of a sudden but after centuries of alien rule. Indian culture and tradition were under pressure for so long, and the people had developed a different mentality totally.
- Degraded economy — By the time India was free, the economy of the country was almost in dilapidated conditions. The British government exploited the resources of the country for its own betterment. The degraded Indian economy, therefore, had to be revived.
- Religious tolerance — Despite centuries of alien rule, India still boasts of being a country of religious tolerance. On this holy land, almost all religions like Hinduism, Islam, Sikhism, Buddhism, Jainism, Christianity, and others have flourished in an atmosphere of religious harmony. The framers of the Constitution of India had to satisfy all the religious communities.
- The international scene — India, as a free country, could not survive in isolation. The international community must be kept pace with. English had become an international lingua franca, which was retained so that it could be a window for India to the outside world.
- Following a middle path — The framers of the Indian Constitution preferred to follow a middle path, keeping in view the conditions in the country and the newly born country pitted against an international community. The President of India has been made a titular head, while the Supreme Court of India strikes a balance between the power of the Supreme Court of the USA and that of Russia.
- Constitutions around the world — The framers of the Constitution of India had placed before them the constitutions around the world. They had to study them and derive points which could be beneficial in the context of India. Provisions like Fundamental Rights of the citizen and Directive Principles of State Policy were too important not to be inspired by the outside world.
- Striking a balance — The framers of the Indian Constitution have tried to strike a balance and followed a policy of checks and balances. The Executive, the Legislature, and the Judiciary have all been assigned their respective power and jurisdiction. They have tried to see to it that none crosses its line of power and jurisdiction.
Now let’s analyse the power and jurisdiction of the three wings of government;
Power and Jurisdiction of the President of India — The President of India is the nominal or titular head of the country, and administration is run in his/her name. Unlike the United States, the Constitution of India does not provide for a presidential form of government. Although the President of India has been vested with extensive powers and discretions, normally he or she acts upon the advice of the Council of Ministers headed by the Prime Minister. He is the supreme commander of the armed forces. He is bound to put his signature on bills passed by the Parliament of India. He/she appoints the Chief Justice and other judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts and issues orders for their removal upon an impeachment process duly ratified by the Parliament with a special majority.
Power and Jurisdiction of the Parliament of India — India has gone in for a parliamentary form of government, and obviously, it is a supreme body. The Parliament, consisting of the President of India and the two Houses of Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha, can make laws with respect to any part or the whole of the country. It can initiate a no-confidence motion against the sitting government and the impeachment process against the judges and Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and High Courts on grounds of ‘proven misbehaviour’ and ‘incapacity.’
Power and Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of India — The Supreme Court of India is the apex court in the country and runs judicial administration up to the lowest courts in the country. It safeguards the provisions of the Constitution of India and the rights of the citizens. It can declare any Act passed by the Parliament as null and void or ultra vires if it violates the provisions of the Constitution. It tenders legal advice to the President of India, which is not binding on him/her. In certain circles, the Supreme Court of India is considered to be the most powerful judicial body in the world.
Judicial activism — Judicial activism has caused a hue and cry in the country in recent times. The court interprets the Constitution and legal terms as they exist. But when a judge interprets them keeping in view his personal beliefs and values, it takes the form of judicial activism. Due to the appearance of judicial activism, it is seen that people have started flocking to the courts with PILs. Though judicial activism has been welcomed in certain circles because of its necessity in the context of changing societal values, it has been criticised on the ground of its encroaching upon the jurisdiction of the Executive and Legislature.
India has adopted the parliamentary form of government and wants that the Parliament should be the leader, with the President working as a nominal head and the Court acting as the protector of the Constitution. The Constitution of India also wants that all the wings should present an ideal picture of working in harmony without encroaching upon each other’s power and jurisdiction, which has almost been realised except for certain stray incidents here and there after independence. There have been debates, including views in social media, on the functioning of the three wings, which have been enlightening and at the same time confusing. Politicians and persons in high positions often make undesirable remarks knowing fully well the power and jurisdiction of the three wings of government, which have often created controversies. When the Constitution of India is clear-cut in the matter and knowledgeable persons are in position, there can be no room for undesirable and unwanted debate on the issue. What is required now in the context of India is an ideal situation where the three wings of the government work impartially, sticking to their respective power and jurisdiction. The functioning of Indian democracy since independence gives cent percent marks to the three wings of the government for their conforming to the tenets of the Constitution. Since certain freedom fighters and national leaders, who not only framed the Constitution but also held important posts after independence, tried to set examples so that generations in the future do not deviate from the system. This is what is expected from present-day leaders and dignitaries so that India presents a perfect system of democracy to the outside world.
(The views expressed are the writer’s own)
Mr. Prafulla Kumar Majhi,
Retired Asst. Director, A. I. R, is an eminent Scholar and freelance writer in English & Odia. His areas of interests are sociocultural, economic, literary, historical and analytical studies and writings.
Mobile.9861007190