Parliamentary Form of Government in the Indian Constitution

The parliamentary form of government is one of the defining features of India’s political structure. It establishes the relationship between the executive, legislature, and the judiciary, drawing significant inspiration from the British system. The system ensures accountability of the executive to the legislature, ensuring that elected representatives guide the governance of the country. The Indian Constitution, which came into force in 1950, adopted the parliamentary form of government with certain modifications suited to the Indian context.

This article explores the concept, features, merits, challenges, and historical background of the parliamentary system as outlined in the Indian Constitution, along with its relationship to the functioning of the Indian Parliament.

Historical Background of the Parliamentary System in India

The roots of India’s parliamentary system can be traced back to British colonial rule. During British rule, India was governed by the Parliamentary system, and this model was adopted by the Indian framers of the Constitution after independence. However, the choice of a parliamentary form of government was not without debate.

The Constituent Assembly, responsible for drafting the Constitution, discussed several options, including a presidential system, an Indian variant of the parliamentary system, and a purely Indian model. Ultimately, the parliamentary system was adopted due to its practicality and the fact that it ensured greater accountability. This system was viewed as the best model for a diverse country like India, where stability, collective responsibility, and effective governance could be ensured.

Prominent members of the Constituent Assembly like Professor K T Shah and Shri K Hanumanthaiya argued in favour of the parliamentary system. Shah highlighted the system’s advantage of creating a “link between the executive, legislative, and judiciary,” ensuring checks and balances within the framework. Hanumanthaiya emphasised that the system was better suited to the Indian context, as it promoted greater political stability and accountability.

The Parliamentary System in the Indian Constitution

The Parliamentary system in India is embedded in Part V of the Indian Constitution, which deals with the Union Executive. Articles 74 and 75 specifically deal with the structure and powers of the Prime Minister, Council of Ministers, and the President.

In a parliamentary system, there is a clear distinction between the head of state and the head of government. The President of India, as per the Constitution, serves as the ceremonial head of state, while the Prime Minister acts as the real executive, holding most of the power in decision-making.

The system is designed to ensure that the executive derives its legitimacy from the legislature, meaning the Council of Ministers, headed by the Prime Minister, is accountable to the Lok Sabha (the lower house of Parliament). If the Council loses the confidence of the Lok Sabha, it must resign, and new elections may follow.

Key Features of the Parliamentary System

The Indian parliamentary system is characterised by several unique features, including:

Dual Executive System

In the parliamentary system, there is a distinction between the real executive and the nominal executive. The real executive is the Prime Minister, who is the head of government and exercises most of the executive powers. The nominal executive is the President, who holds a ceremonial position and performs functions that are mostly formal and symbolic. 

This distinction ensures that while the President acts on the advice of the Prime Minister and the Cabinet, the actual decision-making power lies with the Prime Minister and his ministers.

Collective Responsibility

One of the most fundamental principles of the Indian parliamentary system is collective responsibility. This means that the Council of Ministers is collectively responsible to the Lok Sabha. 

If the Lok Sabha passes a motion of no confidence against the government, the entire Cabinet, including the Prime Minister, must resign. This system ensures that the executive is directly accountable to the legislature and the people.

The Role of the President

While the President of India is the ceremonial head of state, their powers are largely confined to formal duties. The President appoints the Prime Minister and other ministers but acts only on the advice of the Prime Minister. 

This feature ensures that the real power in the executive lies with the Prime Minister, reflecting the will of the people as expressed through their elected representatives in the Lok Sabha.

Parliamentary Sovereignty

The Lok Sabha is the primary legislative body in India, with the majority of legislative power resting with it. Members of Parliament (MPs) are directly elected by the people, which ensures that the government derives its legitimacy from the elected representatives. The government can only survive as long as it retains the confidence of the majority in the Lok Sabha.

Accountability of Ministers

Ministers are collectively accountable to the Lok Sabha. They must regularly attend Parliament and participate in its proceedings. If a minister fails to perform their duties adequately, they can be questioned in Parliament and even removed by the Prime Minister. This system ensures that the executive branch remains answerable to the people.

Dissolution of the Lok Sabha

The Lok Sabha can be dissolved by the President, typically when the government loses the confidence of the house. This feature is unique to the parliamentary system, as it allows the electorate to reassert their opinion through general elections if the government no longer enjoys support.

Merits of the Parliamentary System

Accountability and Transparency

The parliamentary system ensures that the executive is held accountable to the legislature. Since the Council of Ministers is responsible to the Lok Sabha, it must explain its policies, decisions, and actions to the people’s representatives. This leads to transparency in governance and prevents the concentration of power.

Flexibility and Stability

The system allows for greater flexibility in leadership. In case of a loss of confidence, the government can be replaced without a full-scale upheaval. For instance, the Prime Minister can be replaced without dissolving the entire government. This flexibility ensures that the government remains responsive to the people’s needs and concerns.

Collective Decision-Making

Decisions are made collectively by the Cabinet, which ensures that diverse views are considered before major policies are adopted. This collective responsibility fosters greater cooperation and coordination among ministers, who represent different sections of society and have varying expertise.

Encourages Political Participation

By design, the parliamentary system fosters greater political participation. Political parties have a critical role in forming governments, and the electorate plays a direct role in choosing their representatives. This system empowers the people to hold their elected officials accountable through regular elections.

Promotes Cooperation Between Executive and Legislature

In the parliamentary system, the executive and legislature are not separate entities but are closely linked. The Prime Minister and the Cabinet are drawn from the legislature and must maintain the confidence of the majority in the Lok Sabha. This relationship ensures greater cooperation between the two branches, which is essential for effective governance.

Challenges Faced by the Parliamentary System

While the parliamentary system in India has numerous advantages, it also faces several challenges, particularly in the context of a growing and diverse nation.

Instability and Frequent Disruptions

One of the key criticisms of the parliamentary system in India is its potential for instability. Coalition governments, which are common in India due to the multi-party system, often face difficulties in maintaining majority support in the Lok Sabha. This leads to frequent changes in government, lack of policy continuity, and at times, inefficient governance. 

The Role of the Opposition

A healthy parliamentary system requires a strong and effective opposition to keep the ruling party in check. However, India has witnessed an absence of a robust opposition in some periods, leading to one-sided governance. The inability of the opposition to effectively challenge the ruling party raises concerns about the democratic functioning of the system.

Personality-Based Politics

Indian politics, in many cases, has become overly reliant on personalities rather than policy-based debates. This focus on individuals rather than ideas can undermine the democratic processes and lead to the centralisation of power within political parties. The rise of personality cults around certain leaders has often overshadowed the importance of collective decision-making within the Cabinet.

Lack of Expertise

In some cases, ministers may not have the necessary expertise in their portfolios. While the Cabinet is collectively responsible, the effectiveness of the system relies on the competence of individual ministers. The lack of subject matter expertise can lead to poor decision-making and inefficient governance.

Conclusion

The parliamentary system of government is an integral part of the Indian Constitution, designed to ensure democratic governance, accountability, and political participation. While it has its challenges, especially concerning stability, opposition effectiveness, and governance disruptions, it remains the best-suited model for India’s diverse and complex political landscape.

In conclusion, while the parliamentary system in India has its flaws, it is still a reflection of the will of the people, ensuring that the government remains answerable to the electorate. The effectiveness of the system, however, depends on how well it adapts to the challenges posed by changing political dynamics and the evolving expectations of the Indian electorate.