90 Days UPSC Mains Optional Answer Writing Initiative · Political Science – Paper 1 Question and...

1

NeoStencil – Live Online Classes - IAS/IES/GATE/SSC/PSC | +91 95990 75552 | [email protected]

90 Days UPSC Mains Optional Answer Writing

Initiative

Political Science – Paper 1

Question and Model Answers from Subject Experts

http://neostencil.com/

https://neostencil.com/upsc-answer-writing-practice-political-science

2


12-Nov-2018 - Question 1

Neo liberal theory of state (2017) - 150 words

Model Answer

Philosophy of neo-liberalism is usually considered as a modern alternative of classical economic liberalism. It is centred on the conviction in the self-regulating capacity of the market and correlatively the need to restrict the scope of action of the state. These two principals highlight the features of this ideological tradition i.e. 1.The autonomies of state and market on one hand 2.on the other hand, the autonomies of politics and economies The main scholars of this theory are Milton Friedman, Hayek, Nozick and Isiah Berlin etc. Thus neo-liberalism is a largely unregulated capitalist system with a set of economic policies that limits restriction on manufacturing, reduces barriers to commerce, reduces tariffs and free trade that came up to develop a nation’s economy. It is essentially about making trade between nations easier. It is also about free movement of goods,resources and enterprises to maximize profits and efficiency.

Policies of neo liberal state

1. Deregulation of economy 2. Allowing greater openness in international trade 3. Reduction in business taxation and trade union rights 4. Creation of flexible labour market 5. Cuts in public expenditure on social services. 6. Privatization of public sectors


3


Critical Analysis of neo-liberalism

The underlying assumption is that free markets are good for the overall development. However, neo-liberalism can affect the market in a negative way, influence and manipulate trade for certain interests.

One major factor responsible is global inequality. Global inequality on various indicators has grown, as it is influenced by politics. This is due to the reason that the economics can’t be separated from the politics

It promotes a lack of welfare purposes which affect the lower strata

It seeks to regulate society as the law of demand and supply.

Despite the good intentions of many policies framed due to structural adjustment, they often led to more harm than the good. In today’s context, structural adjustment is regarded as a failure as it has failed to bring third world countries out of poverty and has also resulted in causing major injuries to the poor.


4



Examine the concept of state in the ideology of Marxism. (2014) —250 words

Model Answer

The concept of the state has figured as the most defining theme of traditional political science. R.G. Gettel defined political science as the ‘science of the state’, while J.W. Garner claimed that ‘political science begins and ends with the state’. However, despite being the central theme, it has been one of the most contested and debated concepts of political science. This is so because several political thinkers and schools of thought like liberal, Marxist, feminist etc. have developed ideas about the nature and purpose of the state according to different points of view.

Marxist theory of state came as a challenge to the liberal view of the state as a neutral arbiter. It treats the state neither as a manifestation of the free will of the people nor as a neutral arbiter for a reconciliation of conflicting interests.

Marx maintained that it was illusory to hold that the state had a universal character that could harmonize the discordant elements of civil society. According to him, the state comes into existence when the society is divided into two antagonistic classes on the basis of the ownership of means of production. He argues that the state conducts its business in a manner conducive to the interests of the dominant class and thus, perpetuating it. He claims that the state is an executive committee of bourgeoisie class. Thus, the state is the instrument of the ruling class and is subordinate to the capitalist class. In this way, the Marxist conception of state claims that the state is not a neutral arbiter but acts to maintain the division of society into classes.

There are two approaches to the Marxist theory of the state

1.instrumentalist approach

2.relative autonomy approach/structuralist approach

Instrumentalist Approach – This approach was given in book communist manifesto by Karl Marx. According to this approach, the state was created to safeguard the economic interests and state was converted into an instrument used by the owners of the property. Marx has shown that without using the state as an instrument, the bourgeois class cant survive at all because its survival

depended upon its ability to accumulate and guard wealth.


5


Structuralist/relative autonomy approach – according to this theory, in general state is an instrument of bourgeois class but in some situations, the state may act independently or relatively autonomous.Marx has mentioned about this is in his

book ‘the Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte’

The society where multiple modes of production exist or where are more than one dominant class exist, society gets autonomy. The reason being competition among the classes to gain the support of the state. Thus state becomes powerful. Marx has used the term Bonapartism for such state. In most of the situation, the state may exercise independently but the nature of the state doesn’t change.In the crisis situation, the nature of the state becomes visible.In such situations, state favours the propertied class.

Thus the Marxist theory of state can be said as an important approach to understanding the real nature of the state.


6



Comment on following in about 150 words - post modernism (2017)

Model Answer

According to Nigel Blake post-modernism is an intellectual formation which offers the most radical challenge to a wide variety of settled assumptions concerning society, culture and questions conserving knowledge and truth. It is assult on Rationalistic certainites of Enlighenment.Post-modernism as a theoretical formulation, was originally developed as a reaction to modernism, with its major objective to deconstruct texts to expose the underlying power-knowledge relationship.

Modernism ,the cultural form of modernity, is characterized by foundationalism (i.e., there are certain fundamental principle which can be understood) and universalism (i.e., belief that it is possible to establish objective truths and universal values). By contrast, the central theme of post-modernism is that there is no such thing as certainty and universal values and truths. Although, by its nature, post-modernism does not constitute a unified body of thoughts, its critical attitude to truth-claims stems from the assumption that all knowledge is partial and local.

According to post-modernism, knowledge is subjective and the basis of knowledge is not observation but experience. Unlike modernism that supports meta-narratives, post-modernism favors local narratives or multiple narratives. Lyotard,Focault,Derrida and Karl Popper are the scholars of this approach

Lyotard popularized post-modernism in his book The post modern condition as ‘an incredibility towards meta-narratives’. By this he meant a skepticism about all creeds and ideas that are based upon universal theories of history which view society as a coherent totality. He talks about disbelief in grand theory.

Focault is influenced by Nietzsche,who is treated as father of post – modernism.According to Nietzsche,the will for truth is never seperable from the will to power.He also held that knowledge is power.So he gave the concept of discourse.According to him,’reality is too complex,that its not possible to identify the structures.’He also held that ‘we don"t discover the truth,rather invent the truth.’


7


Jacques Derrida, a post-modern thinker, has proposed ‘deconstruction’ as an approach to understand meanings. According to Derrida a particular text can have multiple meanings. It is also not possible that the other person receives exactly what is being communicated. Hence, there can be multiple interpretations of the text.

However, post-modernist thought has criticized of relativism and conservatism on the ground that a non-foundationalist political science offers no perspective from which the existing order may be criticized.


8



Post behavioural approach (2016)— 150 words

Model Answer

Post behavioralism approach is a modern approach to political theory.It came as an alternate to another modern approach i.e. Behavioral approach.

1960 was the decade of social movements in USA like black movement etc.In such a scenario,it was found that political scientists have nothing to offer.They engaged themselves with those area of research where scientific techniques could be applied.They neglected normative issues.Hence,political science came under crisis because of behavioralist.David Easton held that political scholars sitting in ivory towers perfecting their techniques.They have forgotten their responsibility.Social scientists has to guide the society.

Thus,David Easton proposed Creative Theory.It is a core idea of post behavioralism and the two parameters of creative theory are action and relevance.

According to him,technique is important but the purpose for which that technique is to be used is more important.Post behavioralism is not a break with behavioralism but it carries behavioralism forward.It provides necessity to deal with contemporary concerns.For Post-behaviourialist subject matter is more important than technique but it is not that scientific technique is not important.

For e.g. Rawls theory of justice,Amartya Sen’s capability approach,Machpherson’s theory of Democracy.

7 features of post – behaviourialism are as follows

1. Technique is important but the aim is more important for which technique is applied

2. The task of social scientists is more challenging than that of natural scientists

3. Post behaviourialism does not reject values rather invite values

4. Theory should have ability to solve the crisis


9


5. We should promote such values which contribute towards flourishing of human civilization

6. Political science is applied science more than pure science.

7. Political science is a useful discipline which needs to be supported and promoted by research foundations and universities

Thus we can conclufe if traditionalism is thesis and behavioralism is anti-thesis then post -behavioralism is synthesis.


10



Explicate the conception of justice in the critiques of communitarian theorists. (2014) - 250 words

Model Answer

Justice is a moral virtue establishing rational order and a collective name for the most important social utilities, which are conducive to fostering and protecting human liberty. According to Tom Campbell, Justice is the central and commanding concept of current mainstream normative political philosophy. Rawl’s book, “Theory of Justice” has started what has been rightly called as golden age in theorizing about justice. Communitarians are the person who give preference to community over individual.

Communitarians inspired by Charles Taylor and Hannah Arendt argued that individuals are always embedded in a network of social relationships, never the social isolated that liberalism assumes, and they have obligations to the community. Liberalism conception of individual as atomistic, abstracted or self-interested was criticized by communitarians as colossal mistake.

Michael Sandels in "Liberalism & limits of Justice" said while defining Justice, idea of good should precede Right unlike Rawls who called Rights prior to good & good within boundary of Rights. For Sandels, State need not be neutral but should promote conception of good which is beneficial to society. He calls Justice not as the art of integration, but art of differentiation. Sandels calls Rawls as highly individualistic and biased for describing concept of absolute Justice based on value system of USA.

Michael Walzer in "Spheres of Justice" recognises politics of differences and neglecting it will lead to homogenization which is detrimental to conception of Justice. He gave concept of Complex Equality: "Different goods ought to be distributed differently" in criticism of simple equality adopted by Rawls which says one size fits all. He says different spheres of Rights have different formula for Justice as no grand theory of justice exists. Hence, Justice is culture-specific concept. Walzer conceived a “post-liberal state” that accepted moral membership in a community as the greatest good and had a concern for the issue of complex equality.


11


Rawls in second book “Political Liberalism” responded to his Communitarian critics by wrestling with the problem of cultural heterogeneity within liberal states. Hence, conception of Justice by communitarians was significant and in

alignment with globalized times where multi-cultural societies are gaining ground.


12



Comment on difference principle in Rawl’s theory of Justice.(2015) — 150 words

Model Answer

John Rawls, considered as the greatest philosopher of the 20th century, has challenged the conventional ideas of equality and attainment of justice. Describing justice as the first virtue of social institutions, Rawls has equated justice with fairness. In Rawls conception, that social, economic or political arrangement is just which doesn’t create any scope of partiality, unfairness or inappropriateness. The guiding idea of ‘justice as fairness’ are given institutional form by Rawls’ proposition of two principles of justice emerged from negotiations under the condition of original position— (i) Each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive basic liberty compatible with a similar liberty for others. (ii) Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they’re both (a) reasonably expected to be everyone’s advantage (difference principle) and (b) attached to the positions and offices open to all (Fair equality of opportunity).

The ‘difference principle’ in Rawls’ notion of justice implies 2 things--- (i) Those who possess fewer natural assets deserve special consideration & compensation. (ii) Those who’re advantageous should willingly contribute to the disadvantaged citizens. Rawls acknowledged that natural endowments and social circumstances or positions, which can disadvantage or privilege some, are both matters of brute luck. Thus, Rawls argue that the basic structure of the society can be so arranged

that these differences or inequalities can work to benefit the least fortunate.

According to Will Kymlicka, Rawls suggested that such a system is only possible if the society is arranged in accordance with the difference principle. In simple words, Rawls argued that natural differences and social contingencies require compensation. It requires that those who’re favoured by nature may gain from their good fortune only on terms that improve the situation of the least advantaged.

Rawl’s difference principle in the conception of justice is based on two core ideas— (i) Human dignity i.e., equal respect for everyone. (ii) Social stability and cohesion – Rawls argued that a principle allowing some citizens advantages or inequality that do not benefit the worst-off implies that the latter are not equally

worthy members of society.


13


However, critics of Rawlsian principles of justice argue that even if the social structure is designed to maximise the benefit of the least advantaged, what the least advantaged can get from the favourable policies is still less than what they can get through hard work. Thus, it cores more about the absolute gain of the least advantaged than their relative gain.

According to G.A. Cohen, in his book “Rescuing Justice and Equality”, accommodation of inequality ,for reasons of incentives, limit the reach of Rawlsian theory. On the contrary, he claimed that a society that can be seen as perfectly just shouldn’t have the impediment of incentive-based-inequality. The difference principle is also criticized as a primary distributive principle on the ground that it ignores the idea that people with greater talents and hard work deserve greater rewards than other, even if it doesn’t benefit the least advantaged.


14



What do you understand by three generation of human rights? (200 words) - 2018

Model Answer

Human Rights are the rights inherent to all human beings irrespective of their nationality, ethnicity, gender, religion, language or any other status. These rights are universal, inalienable, interdependent, indivisible, equal and non-discriminatory. The rights are often expressed and guaranteed by domestic laws, international treaties, general principles and other sources of international law. Though the rights were first emphasised in UDHR in 1948, Czech jurist Karel Vesak proposed its division into three generations at the international institute of human rights in 1977.

The first generation of rights focuses on civil-political rights like traditional civil and political liberties, freedom of speech, religion, press etc. It was result of democratic revolutions in Europe and USA at the end of 18th century. These rights are strongly individualistic which presupposes a duty of non-interference of government towards individuals.

The second generation focuses on socio-economic rights like right to work, food, social security etc. These rights came to the fore during fight for economic and social rights at the end of 19th century and beginning of 20th century. These rights require affirmative action on part of the government for their realisation. These are exercised by all people collectively or set of people and is reflected in Mexican constitution, German constitution and USSR constitution.

Third generation of rights are “collective developmental rights” of the people like right to development, right to peace, right to healthy environment etc. These are the most recent inclusion to the set of rights and its realisation is predicted not only upon affirmative and negative actions of the state but also upon behaviour of each individual.

Thus three generation of human rights are very necessary to achieve a life of dignity to every human being.


15



Difference between Participatory and Deliberative Democracy. (2015) - 200 words

Model Answer

Democracy is the belief in freedom and equality between people, or a system of government based on this belief, in which power flows from the will of the people.James Bryce in his work “Modern Democracies” chiefly called democracy as the rule of people expressing their sovereign will and majority opinion determining legislation.

Participative democracy and deliberative democracy are two models of democracy. The difference between them is as follows Participative model of democracy is also known as direct democracy, grassroot democracy and radical democracy. Deliberation means discussion,debate and dialogue.

It means increasing participation of people in governance because good governance is not possible without participation of people while according to deliberative democracy , democracy is not a game of no. For them , It is based on the assumption of individuals as antonymous and the social relationship as relation of mutual influence through reasoned arguments and persuasion.

Since participative democracy is also known as radical democracy and radical democracy emphasises on the role of social movement and civil society protest. While according to deliberative democracy , It values open and public deliberations and discussions on issues of common concern and there is no need of hyphenation of deliberation and democracy because democracy in itself , should be deliberative.

Participative democracy is a form of self-government in which all collective decisions are taken through participation of the citizens themselves. Thus, the cornerstone of participative democracy is the direct and continuous participation of citizens in the decision-making process. According to Rousseau, direct participation of people ensures their freedom or autonomy as they obey laws which they themselves have made.


16


According to Aristotle, the important aspect of direct democracy is the mechanism that ‘all command each and each in his turn all’. Thus, its modern manifestations are mechanisms such as initiative, referendum and recall. ‘Gram Sabha’ as envisaged in the 73rd constitutional amendment, is an instance of direct or participatory democracy in the rural India.

Despite the fact that participatory democracy creates a better informed and capable citizenry, it has criticized on the ground that ordinary people lack time and specialist knowledge to rule wisely on their own behalf. Moreover, to consult the general public on each and every issue threatens to paralyze the decision-making process.

Deliberative Democracy

Although democracy in its substantive form, contains an element of deliberation in itself, the modern societies witness a loss of deliberative character of democracies. This is primarily due to emergence of representative form of democracy. For some scholars, representative democracy gives illusion of democracy. Civic disengagement and unresponsive nature of modern government are the major demerits of representative democracy. This led to the emergence of deliberative theory of democracy. Amartya Sen links ‘Public reasoning’ to good governance. Until and unless, there is a civic participation and public debate, it is not possible to have good policies which are responsive to the needs of citizens.

There are 2 important components of deliberative democracy

Public reasoning: It involves discussion and debate on public policies to canter any form of unresponsiveness of the policies designed. Amartya Sen talks about public reasoning as a way of arriving at sound policies.

General will: It represents the aggregation of the people’s will to achieve common good. Participation in deliberation should aim at collective good rather than individual good.

Thus it can be said that in recent times, there is revival of participative & deliberative democracy but the essence of democracy is not number but ARGUMENT.


17



critically examine Macpherson's view on democracy. (250 words) - 2018

Model Answer

Democracy is the belief in freedom and equality between people, or a system of government based on this belief, in which power flows from the will of the people. James Bryce in his work “Modern Democracies” chiefly called democracy as the rule of people expressing their sovereign will and majority opinion determining legislation.

1. C.B. Macpherson has conducted an exhaustive study of existing theories of democracy and existing models theory – it is found in the works of Locke, Mill ,Bentham etc They have described democracy as form of government where power lies with the people. They call it as normative theory means philosophical view of democracy

2. Modern theory – the nature of these type of democracy is empirical , scientific , behavioural and descriptive. They describe the real world of democracy. There are two types of modern democracy – elitist theory of democracy and pluralist theory of democracy

Elite theory of democracy is based on elite theory of power. Oligarchy is iron law. Whether in capitalist country or socialist country , power remains in hands of the elite.

Pluralist theory of democracy – according to it , power remains in hands of people’s association. But there also exists deformed polyarchy i.e. there is no fair distribution of power among different associations.

Macpherson says that there is not much difference between pluralist and elitist. Both look at democracy from the procedural point of view and overlook the normative aspect of democracy.

His theory of democracy -It rejects the monopoly of capitalism on democracy. It is wrong to consider that only capitalism country can be democratic. Capitalism was not democratic from the beginning. Initially capitalism supported absolute, monarchs.


18


According to him , there can be other models of democracy too. Socialist country can be considered as democratic subject to the condita ion that they bring intraparty democracy.

He says that even in third world country, there can be democracy – if there is mass support for the programme of ruling party.

Macpherson observation on democracy in capitalist countries is that it is inegalitarian and do not fulfil ideal of democracy. The ideal of democracy is empowerment. The purpose of empowerment is for development and not coercion, ability to do what one wants. Macpherson calls it as creative freedom.

There are two aspects of power – extractive power and development power . For capitalist both these powers are hundred percent while for workers , it is zero. This shows that these countries are not meeting ideals of development. They should move towards society where no class has extractive power and all classes to have maximum equal developmental opportunities.

Thus we find his ideas near to that of Amartya Sen. We should never forget the normative aspect of democracy


19



Analyse the relationship between natural rights and human rights. (2013) - 200 words

Model Answer

Rights are product of individual’s social nature and emanates from their membership of the society. According to Bosanquet, rights are claimed recognized by society and enforced by the state. T H Green defines rights as power necessary for the fulfilment for man’s vocation as a moral being. There are many types of rights like human rights , legal right , natural rights , moral rights etc.

Definition : Human rights are international moral and legal norms that aspire to protect all people everywhere from severe political, legal and social abuses. Examples of human rights are the right to freedom of religion, the right to a fair trial when charged with a crime, the right not to be tortured and the right to engage in political activity. Natural rights possessed in the state of nature are called as natural because they don’t owe their origin to social existence and are present in pre social stage.

Source :The main source of the contemporary conception of human rights is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and the many human rights documents and treaties that have followed in its wake. The theory of natural rights has been advocated mainly by Hobbes (Leviathan), Locke (Two Treatise on Government) and Rousseau (The Social Contract). These social constructivists hold the view that there were natural rights possessed by men in the state of nature (condition of human life in the absence of organized political authority) .

Types of rights : According to Locke, in the state of nature, men are in perfect freedom and have a natural right to life and property within the bounds of law of nature, provided that he doesn’t interfere with any other men’s enjoyment of the some conditions. He envisages state for the protection of their natural right to life, liberty and property.Thus 3 types of right are right to life , liberty and property.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) sets out a list of over two dozen specific human rights that countries should respect and protect. We may group these specific rights into six or more families:


20


I. security rights that protect people against crimes such as murder, massacre, torture and rape

II. liberty rights that protect freedom in areas such as belief, expression, association, assembly and movement

III. political rights that protect the liberty to participate in politics through actions such as communicating, assembly, protesting, voting and serving in public office;

IV. due process rights that protect against abuses of the legal system such a imprisonment without trial, secret trials and excessive punishments;

V. equality rights that guarantee equal citizenship, equality before the law and non-discrimination; and

VI. welfare rights (or 'economic and social rights') that require the provision of education to all children and protections against severe poverty and starvation.

Another family that might be included is group rights. The UDHR does not include group rights, but subsequent treaties do. Group rights include the protection of ethnic groups against genocide and the ownership by countries of their national territories and resources.

Issues :Now every question of social justice or wise governance is a human rights issue. For example, a country could have too much income inequality, inadequate provision for higher education, or no national parks without violating any human rights. Deciding which norms should be counted as human rights is a matter of some difficulty. And, there is continuing pressure to expand lists of human rights to include new areas

the theory of natural rights has been criticized on the following grounds:

• Rights cannot be natural simply because they were the possession of men in the state of nature. There can never be rights before the emergence of society. Thus, the notion of pre society natural rights is contradictory.


21


• Rights pre suppose the existence of some authority to enforce and protect them. It is in contradiction with idea of natural rights in the state of nature as there is no authority.

• The idea that natural rights existed in the state of nature is wrong in the sense that it makes them absolute and unrestricted.

• The theorists of natural rights treat individuals as the end and the state as the means to protect the natural right to life, liberty and property. In this way, the natural rights theory attacks the political sanctity attached to the institution of state.

• Utilitarian like Bentham criticize the doctrine of natural rights as a “rhetorical non-sense upon stills”.

Thus while human rights are contemporary , natural rights are very old. Both have their own significance. But in today ‘s time human rights should be given more importance.


22



comment on : substantive democracy. (150 words) - 2014

Model Answer

Substantive democracy is a form of democracy in which the outcome of elections is representative of the people. In other words, substantive democracy is a form of democracy that functions in the interest of the governed.It is contrary to procedural democracy.This comes in contrast of procedural democracy. Although a country may allow all citizens of age to vote, this characteristic does not necessarily qualify it as a substantive democracy. For example: North Korea's official name is the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. While its constitution might pay lip service to elections and the importance of the people, it has no substantive democracy. This is common in many dictatorships where "elections" are held and the dictator is conveniently elected by 99% of the people for the 50th year in a row. It's easy to have laws and a constitution (the framework or procedures) which proclaim democracy as the guiding principle of government, but that doesn't mean a county actually operates democratically (that the country is democratic in substance). Similarly, countries like the US and South Africa whose constitutions say certain things and certain procedures are followed, but in practice are not substantive. This can be seen, for example, anytime a national poll shows the general public support X by a huge margin, yet the elected officials oppose it or ignore the will of the people. Thus,In a substantive democracy, the general population plays a real role in carrying out its political affairs, i.e., the state is not merely set up as a democracy but it functions as one as well. This type of democracy can also be referred to as a functional democracy. There is no good example of an objectively substantive democracy.


23



The implementation of human rights is regarded as a matter of changing the conduct of States. (2016) - 200 words

Model Answer

The idea of Human rights developed out of the ‘Natural rights’ theories of the early modern period. By the 20th centuries, the decline of religious belief had led to the secularization of the natural rights theories, which were reborn in the form of ‘Human rights’. Human rights are rights to which people are entitled by virtue of being human. They are, therefore, ‘Universal’ Rights in the sense that they belong to all human being rather than to members of any particular race, religion, gender, caste, etc. they are also ‘fundamental’ rights in the sense that they are inalienable. Human rights have emerged as one of the most powerful and influential ideas of the contemporary times as it can bring some significant changes in the quality of individual and social life. It determines the behavioural way in which people in a democratic society should be dealt with. In simple terms, it provides scope for freedom from any form of exploitation. However, despite being a potential and influential discourse, there are many practical and conceptual dimensions with respect to the implementation of human rights. One of such problems in implementation. However, despite being an influential discourse, there are many practical and conceptual concepts with respect to the implementation of human rights. One such problem is a lack of consensus over the meaning of ‘Human’ and what should constitute the universal human rights regime. Another problem in contemporary times is the increasing trend of politicization of human rights. This is commonly evident in the third world countries. In such countries, any attempt to implement human rights produces a complex situation as these countries suffer from issues like an insurgency. Thus, a proper implementation of human rights regime requires an honest effort to depoliticize the human rights discourse only when international community prioritizes rights over their geopolitical interests, the legitimacy of the global


24


human rights regime would be continuously threatened. In addition, human rights associations, advocacy groups working in non-western societies should adopt a more neutral approach in implementation of human rights.


25


10-Dec-2018 - Question 1

John Stuart Mill is a ‘reluctant democrat’. - C. L. Wayper. (200 words) - 2018

Model Answer

J.S.Mill, one of the greatest exponent of liberty and freedom of speech and expression, considered democracy is the best form of government. He was the democrat because he regarded democracy is an ideally the best in which sovereignty invested in the entire aggregate of the community.

He considered democracy as a sole means to achieve the end of the liberty of thought, expression and action, which, in turn, would develop, enrich and expand personality of individual in the fullness. However, being a thinker of transitional phase, there are elements of inconsistency in Mill’s theory as it suffers from the presence of many logical contradictions in it. In the context of his views of democracy, although he considered democracy as the best form of government which makes people self reliant, he was distrustful of democracy and aware of the faults from which it is an apt to suffer. It is in this context, Wayper called Mill a “Relevant Democrat”. The revolutionary in Mill’s idea on democracy is evident in Mill’s argument that democracy is not a free gift to be distributed and thus, like liberty, is not suitable for all peoples.

According to Mill, there are certain pre requisite for democracy and democracy without a democratic culture results into a “False Democracy”. Based on his conception of democracy, he argued that there will be a valid apprehension regarding future of democracy if it is only applicable where people are matured enough to develop a democratic culture. In the context of colonial administration, Mill suggested “Benevolent Despotism” as the ideal form of government.. In this same plane is that of Machiavelli, who held that a republican form of government can be introduced only where people are virtue. In addition, Mill recognized that democracy can be transformed into “tyranny of majority” or “mobocracy” based on the numerical strength of the least educated class.

To overcome this, Mill suggested reforms such as proportional representations, plural voting and women franchise. Thus, while Mill, as a champion of democracy, describes the superiority of democracy and representative government, he was equally fearfull about future of democracy due to its inherent defects. It is this


26


element of inconsistency or contradiction that projects Mill as a “Reluctant Democrat”.


27



Nothing against the State, nothing over it, nothing beyond it." – Mussolini (150 words) - 2018

Model Answer

The above statement is Mussolini view of the state in Italy. State is the core concept of analysis in political science. J.W. Garner said that political science begins and ends with the state.

Mussolini established authoritarian rule in Italy. It is also one of example of fascist state along with that of Hitler in Germany. Fascism has been categorised as totalitarianism by scholars like Karl Popper and Hannah Ardent. Mussolini himself was the philosopher of fascism. He said no one be it individual or institution can be against state

It is characterized by a totalitarian organization of government and society by a single-party dictatorship. A fascist state seeks ‘total power through politicization of every aspect of social and personal existence. The totalitarian elements of fascist state is based on the belief that human existence is only meaningful if determined by community and, thus, state is recognized as ‘universal’ everything for the state.

According to him, individual has no rights but only duties towards the state. One should ready to sacrifice oneself at the alter of the state. He used to say Leader is superman and even he is above the constitution and unquestionable obedience towards it.

Fascism was against democracy. According to him, democracy is the luxury of rich nations and parliament is talking shop. He had glorified the war.

He had elitist view towards masses that masses don’t understand. They don’t have enough capacity. He established regimented society in Italy where every sphere of life was controlled by the state.

Gandhi said it is manifestation of Machiavellianism. Influenced by social Darwinism (survival of the fittest) and national superiority, fascist nationalism


28


became inextricably linked to imperialism and militarism, because fascism asserted that national superiority over other can be established only through expansionism, war and conquest


29



John Locke is the father of liberalism. Explain. (2018) - 200 words

Model Answer

Locke is called as the Father of The Liberalism as he propounded the cardinal principles of modern day liberalism like recognition of Rights, Democracy, Limited State, Toleration etc.

Locke is greatly known for his Theory of Natural Rights. According to Locke nature as gifted us with three inalienable rights like Right to Life, Liberty and Property. Locke recognized the absolute right to property and hence some people call him as scholars of Possessive Individualism.

Locke on the origin of private property suggests that initially in the state of nature all human beings possess equally but it is foolish to expect that it remains the same. As time passes, common property transforms into Private Property. The men who are enterprising, hard working, laborious will become rich and others who are fanciful, lazy will remain poor. Thus, it is the labour of a person that determines his property. Like Aristotle, Locke also believes that property reflects the one’s personality. Man should have complete ownership over his labour and property. Thus, in the words of Locke man as complete ownership over his labour, labour of his horse and labour of his slave.

Moreover, Locke imposes three limitations on right to property like not to waste property, no one is deprived of right to acquiring property, property should not be earned by unfair means. If we observe closely, there are no limitations rather they serve the interest of the propertied class. Macpherson calls Locke as a scholar of “Bourgeoisie Class as Locke justifies the Absolute Right to Property.


30



Critically examine Machiavelli’s views on religion and politics.(200 words) - 2018

Model Answer

Machiavelli in the west, represents the first clear break from idealism and morality and, thus, considered to be the first modern thinker. According to Lerner, the whole drift of Machiavelli’s work is towards a political realism, unknown to the formal writing of his time. Bacon praised Machiavelli for his realism and pragmatism and the fact that he wrote about human nature, the nature of political society and its actual operations, with a concern about how things ‘are’, rather than how they ‘ought to be’. Machiavelli's’ ‘Prince’, a product of the prevailing conditions of his time, is a memorandum on the art of Government and state craft for a successful ruler ship.

According to Butterfield, Machiavelli’s science of statecraft (or maxims to the ruler) developed out of ministerial correspondence, study of history and its lessons, the ancient wisdom and from examples of great and noble deeds. Deviating from medieval principles and theories, Machiavelli suggested that politics is different from religion and ethics. Proposing the ‘power view of politics’, he held that politics is the management of power. Thus, he suggested the Prince that he should aim at acquisition and extension of his princely powers and territories.

The two basic means for success for a ruler are- the judicious use of law and physical force. Thus, a prince must combine in himself rational as well as brutal characteristics- a combination of “Lion” and “Fox”. In addition he argued that the prince will be judged by the end he achieved. As ends will be justified by the means to be employed, Prince should not suffer from dilemma in opting the means. Instead of preaching about idle state or fullest moral development of political men, Machiavelli was mainly concerned with the security of the state. For Machiavelli a well-ordered state ensures the wellbeing and security necessary to combat social conflict in radical selflessness of human nature. Behind his suggestions and advice to the Prince, the freedom of the country, a desire for reservation of the state and common good was the core theme.


31


Machiavelli was against church because church was corrupt and obstacle in the path of unification of Italy. He was not against the religion. He just wanted that religion don’t become main obstacle in the path. He has utilitarian approach towards religion. Religion can be used in national interest. Religion has utility . It has disciplinary force. Prince should not display in the public that he is not religious. It is always advantageous to appear religious.

According to Jones, Machiavelli’s insight that the state can be understood only in terms of human lust and appetites, and his supplementary recognition that successful ruler must learn to control these forces, make an approach in political thinking and constitute the basis for the whole modern development.


32



Discuss Ambedkar’s ideas on ‘annihilation of caste’.(250 words) – 2018

Model Answer

Amongst the galaxy of thinkers in modern India, Ambedkar assumes a great importance and stands on a pedestal quite different from the others. This is because his personality exemplifies the unique saga of a fight against massive social disabilities. The socio-political thought of Ambedkar basically revolves around the idea of understanding the dynamics of the caste system in India and waging a tireless crusade against the curse of untouchability. A/Q to Dhananjay Keer, Ambedkar is the tallest leader among Dalits as no one before him or after could achieve what he could do for the members of his community at a time when a seemingly ordinary respectful life for an untouchable appeared extremely difficult.

In his book ‘annihilation of caste', he gave a call to put dynamite on Vedas and Manusmriti. He calls Hinduism is nothing but Brahmanism and it is impossible to abolish caste system as long as one follows Hinduism. According to him, Hinduism is nothing like madness, which asks people to touch cowdung but not allow to touch fellow human beings, deprive people of education.

He started Mooknayak magazine and Bahiskrit Bharat newspaper to build consciousness Dalits. He

established All India Dalit Federation which has been renamed Dalit federation of India.

He gave a call for Dalits not to join Harijan Sevak Sangh started by Gandhi. He compared it with Putna. He was not satisfied with Gandhi because Gandhi started fast unto death to stop separate electorate for Dalits but not for the abolition of untouchability.

Ambedkar held that it is not his choice to born as Hindu but it is not his choice to die as Hindu. He converted to Buddhism because he tracked Brahmin hegemony to Hinduism to endogamy and caste hierarchy, which is impossible to abolish.


33


Thus it can be said that Ambedkar has done remarkable work in the upliftment of Dalits and even not hesitated from disowning Hinduism and converting to Buddhism.


34



Everywhere, inequality is a cause of revolution - Aristotle. Comment.(200 words) -2018

Model Answer

Aristotle has been regarded as the father of Political Science as he was the first to analyse, critically and systematically, the subject matter of politics and identified its core elements such as Sovereignty of law, constitutionalism, faith in moderation, proportionate equality, and causes and remedies of revolution.

As instability and transformation has been the most characteristic feature of Greek Political life, Aristotle has examined the cause for instability, change and revolution, and prescribed remedies against unnecessary and incessant change. For Aristotle, Revolution meant any change in the political system such as change from a moderate to an extreme form of government, modification of a constitution, replacement or change in institution or a set of a person etc. In other words, for Aristotle, every constitutional change was a social and political revolution.

Unlike Plato, Aristotle perceived multiple, general and particular causes for revolution, rather than simply regime’s prominent deficiency. Among the general causes, feeling of inequality, dissatisfaction with the existing state of affairs, universal passion for power and privileges, fearlessness and corruption of ruling classes and their arrogance are the prominent causes for revolution in all form of government.

In addition, Aristotle also examine the specific causes of revolution in various form of government. In democracy revolutions are usually caused by the policy of demagogues in attacking the rich, individually or collectively. In oligarchies, they are partly due to the unjust and oppressive treatment of the masses and class. Revolution in aristocracy arise because of the jealousy created by narrowly restricting power and privileges to a small circle of people.

According to him, justice demands distribution of officers, rewards etc. According to the contribution based on merit of the citizens. He held that persons who are equal and possess equal merit ought to be treated equally. In other words, those


35


who contribute more to the performance of good action in services of the state thus show greater civic excellence deserve more from the state than those who contribute less. Therefore, Aristotle’s theory of justice is based on ‘proportional equality’, which means that people should receive from the state, in the way of just rewards, proportionately to their merits.

In this way, Aristotle does not support absolute equality, is being injustice with the person who is more talented and meritorious. He held that if a state will give equal treatment to those who are unequal in their merit and talent, it will give rise to the feeling of injustice, which ultimately results into revolutions and seditions. Therefore, injustice for Aristotle arise when equals are treated unequally, and unequals equally.

He held that it was necessary to distinguish between the deserving and the undeserving. In this way, Aristotle regarded equality is crucial to Social justice and stability. However, merit can one of the criteria of justice, but it cannot be the sole Criterion of Justice.

According to John Rawls, as authority on Idea of Justice, fairness is the most important characteristic of a just society. The constitution of India reflects the idea of justice based on the principle of fairness. in Indian context, as a level- playing field does not exists, merit alone cannot insure justice in the true sense.


36



Revolt of 1857 is a sepoy mutiny or first war of independence .(150 words)- 2018

Model Answer

Revolt of 1857, which led to the removal of British Company Rule in India, is the display of utter hatred and anger in Indians towards the Foreign Rule. It was the most severe outburst of anger and discontentment accumulated in the hearts of the various sections of the Indian society ever since the inception of the British rule. As Jawahar Lal Nehru in his famous book, Discovery of India has written, “The very fact that a country with such a great illustrious past, should be ruled over by a handful of people from a distant island is something that makes me wild” clearly shows the resentment of the people and basically showcased their inner feeling about the entire rule. British historians called it a “Sepoy Mutiny” and the Indian historians called it “The First war of Independence”

Some say that the Revolt of 1857 was just a mutiny initiated by the Indian Sepoys and hence the name Sepoy Mutiny .The soldiers were discriminated on the basis of racism and were paid low salary. But this kind of outbreak happened only when the soldiers were given cartridges which had a coating of grease that was made up of Cow and Pig fat. It was against the religious views of both Hindu and Muslim community. They were given false hopes by the company that all of this is rumour but when it came out to be all true, the soldiers lost their temper and resulted in an event where a soldier called Mangal Pandey 9 a soldier in the 34th Infantry stationed at Barrackpore), on March 29, 1857 fired at his commander for forcing the Indian troops to use the controversial rifles. Indians constituted a large part of the British army (almost 95%) and the violence against British quickly spread. Hence leading to the movement being called as SEPOY MUTINY. Discontent and Resentment against the British rule was growing among the Indians and only a spark was needed to set the country ablaze and that spark was provided by as small thing as a rifle cartridge. He was hanged and this incident sparked off a general mutiny among the sepoys of Meerut. Words like Cartridges, Soldiers, British campaigns etc. described the Revolt of 1857, clearly showing the approach of the people. The British and others believed that more this Sepoys were driven by grief more than patriotism for the country. People feel that this revolt was not of national character as there weren’t considerable amount of people who united


37


together to actively fighting against the British. The rulers of the princely kingdoms and the Maharaja’s were more worried about getting their kingdom back and going back to ruling hence there being no unity. Another reason which people give for calling it a mutiny is that this revolt was suppressed by the British armies of different regions which consisted of many Indian Sepoys who were not a part of the revolt. A discordant note was however, struck by R.C. Majumdar. He refused to recognize 1857 as a war of Independence. His view was that “to regard the outbreak of 1857 as either national in character or a war of independence of India betrays a lack of true knowledge of the history of Indian people in the nineteen century.”

Others say that the Revolt of 1857 was a result of discontent which was prevailing inside every Indian for Colonialism. The East India Company ruled India for a period of over 200 years but it was for the first time when someone revolted against this oppression in 1857.The British Expansionist Policies and unjust laws (Heavy taxation, evictions, discriminatory tariff policy against Indian products), Economic Exploitation ( farmers were forced to grow crops like Cotton and Indigo which served as raw materials for European Industries and these farmers were paid excessively low rates for their work) , Military Discrimination between Indian and British soldiers (they were paid low as compared to British counterparts, no rising in position above the rank of Subedar and were racially discriminated) , Social Reforms ( Reforms like Sati, legalization of widow remarriage, extension of western education to woman were looked upon as examples of interference .Other say that the Revolt of 1857 was a result of discontent which was prevailing inside every Indian for Colonialism. [interference in the social customs and tradition) and Political Dominations ( Policies like Subsidiary Alliance and Doctrine of Lapse angered the ruling section of the society. Also, Annexation of Awadh on the grounds of misgovernment and further actions led to become the political causes of this revolt where leaders like Nana Sahib and Rani Lakshmi Bai were active participants). Due to such broader array of causes, historians believed that this Revolt should be known as First War of Independence as it included different sections of the society. In India, the term “First War of Independence” was first popularized by Vinayak Damodar Savarkar in his 1909 book The History of the War of Indian Independence. Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of India, insisted on using the term “First War of Independence” to refer to the event, and the terminology was adopted by the Government of India. This revolt was basically the mother of the events which took place in the history leading to the


38


achievement of Independence finally after 90 years of struggle. Due to the anger which was inside the hearts of people because of the steps taken by the East India Company, the revolt saw the participation of a large number of individuals ranging from the Kings and Queens of different states to the peasants and soldiers. Many people said that the outburst should be known as Sepoy Mutiny but this theory was challenged by Benjamin Disraeli, the conservative leader, in July 1857. He said: “The decline and fall of empires are not affairs of greased cartridges. Such results are occasioned by adequate causes and by the accumulation of adequate causes“. Then he enquired: “Is it a military mutiny or is it, a national revolt?”That marked the beginning of the phase where this revolt was looked from a different point of view resulting in this name of India’s first war of Independence. People started looking and examining the entire terminology and came to different conclusions. V.D. Savarkar, in his book, The Indian War of Independence of 1857, gave a nationalist interpretation to the uprising, asserted that the revolt of 1857 was the “Indian War of Independence”. Savarkar’s views were supported by S.B. Chaudhary, who in his writings demonstrated that 1857 was a “rising of the people.”In fact, the historiographic tradition in India soon accepted this line of argument.

But taking in consideration both the point of views, both titles are apt and can be used so as to describe this revolt. Because of the entire act done by one soldier, Mangal Pandey, the soldiers initiated the cause as it was a grave mistake for them to hurt their religious sentiments. So, they took off this fight and ignited this flame which shifted its focus from greased cartridges to oppression of the British. But it acted as a First war of Independence when other people like peasants, kings and queens started taking part in the revolt so as to show their anger and to fight against the suppression.


39



The success of Mahatma Gandhi lay in transforming both political and non-political movements into a unified national movement( 150 words)- 2017

Model Answer

Mahatma Gandhi was the most significant person who played a major role in the freedom movement. The method of nonviolence, satyagraha, truth used by Gandhi during freedom struggle played a major role in transforming both political and non-political movement into a unified national movement.

He showed his leadership skills first in South Africa where he fought against the rights of migrated Indians. At the time of his return to India, he was not fully familiar with the social pattern prevalent in India, and his own lifestyle was different from the majority of Indians. At this juncture, a bit of friendly advice from G.K. Gokhale, whom Gandhi later acknowledged as his mentor and political guru, to undertake a journey across India to understand the people and politics, changed Gandhi’s outlook towards the Indian freedom struggle and transformed his personality, lifestyle and thought process. It brought to the forefront of Gandhi’s mind, the realities of India’s caste system and the divisions created by it in society. He realised that a large portion of India’s population had been excluded from the freedom struggle on parochial issues and on the basis of their socio-economic background.

At the political level, he started Champaran satyagraha, Kheda Satyagraha and Ahmedabad mill strike to brought farmer and worker into mainstream politics which led to broadening the base of Congress party. Non-cooperation movement and Khilafat movement lead by Gandhi strengthened political consciousness of Indian people. He also played a major role in empowering women, declared untouchability as a sin and brought oppressed class into mainstream society. Gandhi’s ashram played constructive work for the upliftment of downtrodden and poor people.

He also preached religious pluralism, no discrimination on the basis of caste. Civil disobedience movement and individual satyagraha started by Gandhi brought Indian masses into freedom struggle which followed by quit India movement gave the final blow on British rule in India.


40


He followed the policy of struggle – a truce – struggle. In the truce period, he emphasised on the developmental works like eradication of untouchability, promotion of cottage industry, enhancement of the status of women and vocational education.

Gandhi’s ethical method of nonviolence, satyagraha and truth still relevant to promote peace and unified whole humanity to fight against a threat like radicalization, terrorism, extremism environmental degradation.


41



Differentiate Modern Nationalism from Extremist/Militant Nationalism In term of their objectives and means. ( 2017) - 200 words

Model Answer

Dadabhai Naoroji ,S N Banerjee , Gopal Krishna Gokhle were some foremost modern nationalist. Moderates received their support from the intelligentsia and urban middle class. Moderates had a narrow social base. Most of the moderate leaders were inspired by the ideas of western philosophers like Mill, Burke, Spencer, and Bentham. Moderates imbibed western ideas of liberalism, democracy, equity, and freedom.

The method adopted by moderate were constitutional and peaceful to achieve their aims. The Early Nationalists had full faith in the British sense of justice, fair play, honesty, and integrity . They believed that British rule was a boon for India. The method like resolution, persuasion ,sending petitions and appeals were used to convince British government .Moderates Believed political connections with Britain to be in India’s social, political and cultural interests .Moderates wanted more Indians in the administration and not to an end of British rule. They also demanded self-rule and more participation of Indian in government formation. Thusmoderates aimed at administrative and constitutional reforms Even SN Banerjee said that India is not a nation but nation in making, and British rule is imperative to make India as a nation.

On the other hand extremist nationalist were Lala Lajpat Rai, Aurbindo Ghosh, Bipin chandra Pal, Bal Gangadhar Tilak etc. Extremist drew their supporters included peoples from all sections including the lower middle class, workers, and farmers. Extremists thus had a wider social base. Extremists drew their inspiration from India’s past. Extremists revived the Ganapati and Sivaji festivals to arouse the masses. Extremists wanted to inculcate pride in India’s glorious culture to generate the spirit of nationalism. Extremists invoked goddesses Kali or Durga for strength to fight for the motherland

They demanded complete freedom from the British rule. Extremist were radical in their approach. Demand of extremists were aggressive. Extremists believed in militant methods including swadeshi and boycott. Extremists aimed at nothing


42


short of swaraj as it existed in the United Kingdom and its self-governing colonies. Tilak said, “Swaraj is my birth right and I shall have it”. They believed in self-reliance or atma shakti as a weapon against domination. They believed that British rule was the responsible for the backwardness and poverty of the Indian people. They wanted to inculcate pride in India’s glorious culture to generate the spirit of nationalism. They believed that the methods of the moderates were nothing but political mendicancy. Extremist denounced British rule and defied it. Many of them(Extremists) Were arrested because of anti-British activities.

Both modern and extremist nationalist played vital role to strengthen nationalism in India. According to historian Bipin Chandra , moderate nationalist deep-rooted the nationalist idea among Indian which led the foundation of successful freedom movement and also made India as one of the largest democracies of the world. Like wise, the role of extremist is significant and cant be belittled.


43



Analyze the arguments in favor and against the lateral entry into higher civil services in India. (2018) - 200 words

Model Answer

There has been much sound about the need for induction of talent from outside into senior positions in the Government of India at the level of joint secretary and above. Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT) has been asked to prepare a proposition on lateral entries into civil services that deal with economy and infrastructure.

Arguments in favour of Lateral Entry

The 21st century economy needs specialized skills and knowledge for policy-making and administration. The first ARC had pointed out the need for specialization .The present system of ‘frequent and arbitrary transfers’ hinder gaining of the relevant experience by incumbent officers Domain experts have been brought from outside the services to head various committees and organizations like Nandan Nilekani, Montek Singh Ahluwalia, Vijay Kelkar, Arvind Subramanian and Raghuram Rajan .Both the Niti Aayog and the Planning Commission had allowed for lateral entry. Jharkhand is also experimenting with it as well. There is shortfall of IAS cadre officers. The Baswan Committee (2016) has shown that Bihar, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan have a deficit of 75 to 100 officers and their unwillingness to sponsor officers to Centre on deputation .There is a need for a shift from the uniformity of centrally planned economic policy to the diverse demands of competitive federalism. Thus there is need to make way for talent pool outside the government. Outside talent from the private sector is more likely to be target - oriented, which will improve the performance of the government. Lateral entry has been adopted by Australia, Belgium, New Zealand, the UK, the Netherlands and the US. When civil servants are made to compete with outside talent, the lethargic attitude will diminish and induce competition within the system. More competition will encourage career civil servants to develop expertise. Recommendations

In 2005, the second Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC) recommended lateral entry at both the Central and state levels. Surinder Nath Committee in


44


2003 and Hota Committee in 2004 also recommended for it. The ARC recommended a paradigm shift from a career-based to a post-based approach to senior government jobs. The ARC highlights that performance appraisals may be adopted from the armed forces, which could aid in weeding out non-performers. In the armed forces, only 3 per cent of officers make it to the grade of brigadier and above — and promotions are based entirely on merit, which fuels excellence.

Arguments against Lateral Entry

The width and depth of field experience which the civil services provide is not available with outside talent. External talent cannot bridge the gap between policymaking and ground level implementation than the career civil servants. Private sector who ran Air India, Indian Airlines and Vayudoot proved to be failures. Performance is vitally influenced by the enabling environment and the best managerial capability cannot deliver results in an adverse operating environment. Interests and motivation vary from person to person. Therefore, short term entry of officers( 3 to 5 years) through lateral entry might lead to corrupt practices. Large-scale lateral induction would amount to a vote of no-confidence in the government personnel management system. The best talent can be attracted only if there is reasonable assurance of reaching top level managerial positions.

A good managerial system encourages and nurtures talent from within instead of seeking to induct leadership from outside. The remedy lies not through lateral induction but through more rigorous performance appraisal and improved personnel management. India’s civil services need reform like insulation from political pressure and career paths linked to specialization . The government can consider lateral entry to head certain pre-identified mission-mode projects and public-sector entities where private-sector expertise actually matters. It should be a mix up of both private sector and civil servants. A credible statutory agency like UPSC or an autonomous agency like the Bank Board Bureau, established to hire heads of public-sector banks, should be entrusted with the responsibility of recruitment. Liberalised norms that allow civil servants to work outside government with multilateral agencies, non-profits and corporations for short periods so that they get exposure to market practices and fresh ideas.


45



Indian Constitution is a Lawyer’s paradise. Ivor Jennings (2018) - 150 words

Model Answer

Indian constitution is called as living constitution. The Indian constitution is the supreme law of India. It defines fundamental, political principles, establishes the structure, procedures and duties of the government institutions and sets out fundamental rights, directive principles and duties of citizens. However, a criticism against the Indian Constitution because of its length and elaborate legal language is that it is “A Lawyers’ Paradise”.

Making a general comment on the Constitution, one member in the Constituent Assembly observed, “The draft tends to make people more litigious, more inclined to go to law courts, less truthful and less likely to follow the methods of truth and non-violence. If I may say so, the Draft is really a lawyers’ paradise. It opens up vast avenues of litigation and will give our able and ingenious lawyers plenty of work to do”.

Many members of the Constituent Assembly were "lawyer-politicians" for eg. Sardar Patel, Jawahar Lal Nehru, Amberkar, Rajendra prasad etc. Therefore it was maintained that because the Drafting Committee was consisted of mostly lawyers and as lawyer’s minds are prone to verbiage, arguments, twisting and bending of words, they deliberately made the Constitution a long and complex document. They have made the constitution not only long, but also extremely complicated.

Ivor Jennings has described our constitution as a 'lawyer's paradise'. Jennings said that a constitution should be intelligible to common people, but they fail to clearly understand the Indian constitution which is very complex. Every article of this constitution can be interpreted by the higher judiciary, and lawyers, while interpreting, different articles, further complicate the constitution.

It is true that the Constitution is a long and complex document. The long size and the complexity was the result of many contributory factors. But the fact that it is a long document and therefore it is prone to be a source of litigation is not correct.


46


Indian constitution is praised as a living constitution and the cornerstone of our country. It has given justice and the life of dignity to its many citizen. It also helped make India largest democracy.


47



Right to privacy is an intrinsic part of right to life. (150 words) - 2017

Model Answer

Unanimous judgment by the Supreme Court of India (SCI) in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy vs Union of India was a resounding victory for privacy. The ruling was the outcome of a petition challenging the constitutional validity of the Indian biometric identity scheme Aadhaar.

The judgment's ringing endorsement of the right to privacy as a fundamental right marks a watershed moment in the constitutional history of India. The one-page order signed by all nine judges declares: The right to privacy is protected as an intrinsic part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 and as a part of the freedoms guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution.

The right to privacy in India has developed through a series of decisions over the past 60 years. Over the years, inconsistency from two early judgments created a divergence of opinion on whether the right to privacy is a fundamental right

During the hearings, the Central government opposed the classification of privacy as a fundamental right. The government's opposition to the right relied on two early decisions—MP Sharma vs Satish Chandra in 1954, and Kharak Singh vs State of Uttar Pradesh in 1962—which had held that privacy was not a fundamental right. In Maneka Gandhi vs union of India , 1978 case the supreme court held the due process of law over procedure established by law. It was one of the first step in right to privacy .

The judgment will also have ramifications for a number of contemporary issues pending before the supreme court. In particular, two proceedings—on Aadhaar and on WhatsApp-Facebook data sharing—will be test grounds for the application and contours of the right to privacy in India.

The recent Navtej Singh Jouhar vs union of India was also test for right to privacy. Thus we can privacy , which is a manifestation of dignity , is saved by supreme court in recent cases.


http://supremecourtofindia.nic.in/supremecourt/2012/35071/35071_2012_Judgement_24-Aug-2017.pdf

http://supremecourtofindia.nic.in/supremecourt/2012/35071/35071_2012_Judgement_24-Aug-2017.pdf

http://www.livemint.com/Opinion/CTEJVl3bEVNe1JKPOHxQeM/The-good-and-the-bad-of-the-privacy-ruling.html?utm_content=buffer278d7&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1306519/



48


07-Jan-2019 - Question 1

Has the 73rd constitutional amendment empowered women in panchayat in India? Discuss.(2017) - 250 words

Model Answer

The 73rd Constitutional Amendment has served as the institutional breakthrough towards ensuring equal access to and enhanced participation of rural women in the inclusive development through the participation of women in the local government at grassroots level. It is, here, attempted to highlight dynamics of the opportunities envisioned and outcomes realized; and the challenging realities encountered in the exercise of empowerment of rural women.

Women as women have been historically disadvantaged under the triple burdens; gender and caste/religion, overlaid with the power of patriarchy. The multiple disadvantages that mark the conditions of rural women, therefore, necessitated the process of empowering them.

In the backdrop of this, finally, in April 1993, the 73rd Constitutional Amendment Act came into effect. First time in the political history of India that one-third of the total seats in its local self government institutions have been statutorily reserved for women. This Amendment brought bright epoch in the life of deprived eight lakh rural women who were brought into mainstream of power

The 73rd Constitutional Amendment is a historic step in enhancing the participation of rural women in politics by provisions of giving reservation to women in one third seats for members and chairpersons including women from schedule castes and schedule tribes...

This provision of one-third reservation for women is indeed a historic step, as it guaranteed representation and participation for women as group in Panchayats

several states have been introducing the reservation of seats for women as per the principles of the 73rd Constitutional Amendment and in many states it exceeds the national reservation. The states like Maharashtra, Bihar, Jharkhand, West Bengal, Madhya Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan etc. provide reservation for women upto the fifty percent mark in all levels of the Panchayats.


49


The election of women is not only generated by the reserved seats, they have won from the unreserved seats as well. The recent study conducted by the Ministry of Panchayat Raj (2008) on ‘Elected Women in Panchayati Raj Institutions’ indicated that the proportion of women getting elected tended to be significantly higher than the reserved quota, with women from the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes often securing election to a higher proportion of seats and chairpersonships than women from the socially and economically better off classes.

The participation of rural women in Panchayati Raj Institutions as elected members has provided them with an opportunity for their formal involvement in the development and political processes at the grassroots level thereby enabling them to influence the decision making process in the local governments. Panchayati Raj Institutions in Karnataka observed that the large percentage of women members had secured development benefits to the people of their villages mainly in the field of agriculture, public works, welfare and education. The assistance secured by the women members to the people was economic in nature and this reflects upon the basic needs of rural communities. The effective function of an organization depends upon the extent to which its members carry out their roles. Participation of rural women in Panchayati Raj Institutions has indeed enabled them to emerge as effective leaders and also to act as catalytic agents by inspiring confidence and providing stimulus for social change among rural women

Representation of women in Panchayati Raj Institutions also enables women to take part in public life, interact with different sections of rural population, development personnel and higher-level leaders without the consideration of traditional barriers. This guaranteed representation has also made the women including those belonging to the disadvantaged groups contrary to macro myth, performed remarkably well. Mutka Banerjee had highlighted how even an elected woman belonging to a backward social origin, with personal grit and determination through ‘group efforts’ coupled with some innovative and creative ways could be a high achiever. This is an implication that rural women provided with the right type of orientation and opportunity can play a more meaning and effective role in the local government


50



Examine the provisions of Panchayat Extension Services Act (PESA), 1996.

Model Answer

PESA, short for Panchayat (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996, is the most important law meant for the Adivasis that can radically change the socio-political landscape of India, only if it is implemented honestly. It can achieve three things simultaneously: (1) deprive the Naxal of the fertile ground of backwardness and poverty in the “Red Corridor” and make them baseless; (2) assimilate the 8 percent tribal Adivasis into the mainstream political current through self governance; and (3) preserve forests and local ecology because they only know their land and its resources the best. But unfortunately, state governments lack willpower, honesty, and far-sightedness to grasp the profound impact its proper implementation will have for the future development.

Village level democracy became a real prospect for India in 1992 with the 73rdamendment to the Constitution, which mandated that resources, responsibility and decision making be passed on from central government to the lowest unit of the governance, the Gram Sabha or the Village Assembly. A three tier structure of local self government was envisaged under this amendment.

Since the laws do not automatically cover the scheduled areas, the PESA Act was in-acted in 1996 to enable Tribal Self Rule in these areas. The Act extended the provisions of Panchayats to the tribal areas of nine states that have Fifth Schedule Areas.

The PESA Act gives radical governance powers to the tribal community and recognizes its traditional community rights over local natural resources. It not only accepts the validity of “customary law, social and religious practices, and traditional management practices of community resources”, but also directs the state governments not to make any law which is inconsistent with these. Accepting a clear-cut role for the community, it gives wide-ranging powers to Gram Sabhas, which had hitherto been denied to them by the lawmakers of the country.


https://socialissuesindia.wordpress.com/2011/08/04/panchayat-extension-to-scheduled-areas-act-or-pesa-1996/

51


The full-fledged implementation of PESA will give Rs 50,000 crore to tribal communities to develop themselves. Nothing would deal a bigger blow to the Maoists than participative development by, for and of the tribal communities. Of the 76 districts highly infected by the Maoists, 32 are PESA districts. Hence, honest implementation of the PESA Act would empower the marginalized tribals so that they can take care of their developmental needs. This would deprive the Naxals of their ground support coming from the misguided and helpless tribals.

Looking at the performance of State governments in implementation of PESA and their tendency to by-pass it, the Central government should issue a notification that all other laws will be subordinate to PESA in the fifth schedule (or PESA) areas.

Land litigations are another headache of tribals who have been rendered landless by the rich or powerful. In order to restore speedy justice, follow the recommendation of the B.D Sharma Committee. It suggested issuing notification of a date, when all pending cases in any Court of Law in which the land of a tribal is alleged to have been illegally transferred or occupied by any person or body, shall stand transferred to the Gram Sabha in whose jurisdiction the land is situated.

Only PESA has the real potential to deal a fatal blow to the leftwing extremists thriving on their backwardness, ignorance, and isolation. The “Original Indian People” of India deserve a life free of exploitation, poverty, and fear


52



weather judicial activism has undermined or strengthened Parliamentary Democracy in India. Discuss. (2018) - 200 words

Model Answer

Judicial activism means that instead of judicial restraint, the apex court and other lower courts, become activists and compel the authority to act. There are also instances where the court has encroached upon the role of the legislature by way of making laws

Judicial review undermining or strengthening the idea of parliamentary democracy is the idea related to the separation of powers. In India, separation of power is not in strict sense and with this purpose, these three bodies executive , legislature and judiciary can cooperate with each other if there is a decline or crisis at any point of time. For e.g. In India procedure established by law is followed which means law makers want parliament to play a greater role. In our original constitution, judicial review was not explicitly mentioned. Only article 13 and article 32 were there from which judicial review was derived.

Judicial review strengthened the parliament democracy

This happened only when there was in crisis in legislature and executive. For e.g. when the decline of legislature or hung parliament was there ,executive was not long lasting the corruption was increasing , criminal participation was in increase, judicial activism came in picture . In era of 90s, when huge social transformation was taking place , executive and legislature was not in the position to deliver, then judiciary delivered for eg. Vishakha guidelines were the product of same.

The constitution empowers Supreme Court to protect the Fundamental rights of people. Over decades, judiciary has played a significant role in protecting fundamental rights, striking down irrational laws and executive orders. Expansion of Right to Life under Article 21 is one of the important examples of judicial activism. It led to inclusion of dignity in livelihood, a comfortable livelihood, right to environment etc


53


National Green Tribunal is the cornerstone for protection of environment. It recently banned the registration of diesel vehicle in Delhi and Kerala. NGT directed the governments of States and Union to ensure river basin protection, check air and water pollution. Judiciary had recently banned selling of fireworks during festivals and directed the government to renew the licenses.

But after 2001, when an era of coalition politics started and executive and legislature became relatively strong and performing their roles, now they came in conflict with each other for banning liquor from 500 meters from highways . Recent incident of Lodha Committee to reform the Board of Cricket Control of India has once again raised the issue of judicial activism and overreach. Supreme Court appointed committee proposed many reforms to improve the governance of sports in country to which the board has objected being an independent society.

However, judicial overreach is criticized for being antithetical to democracy. It allows judiciary to supersede the elected representatives which is the base of democracy. It makes judiciary all powerful which can be misused by courts to further their interest. Potential long term threats in disturbing the balance of power between the three organs would lead to breakdown of democracy.


54



Differentiate parliament supremacy from parliament sovereignty .Would you consider the Indian Parliament as a Sovereign Parliament ?Examine. (2017) -250 words

Model Answer

Parliamentary sovereignty is a principle of the UK constitution. It makes Parliament the supreme legal authority in the UK which can create or end any law. Generally, the courts cannot overrule its legislation and no Parliament can pass laws that future Parliaments cannot change.

In India, parliament supremacy has been followed which was challenged by judiciary in 1973 by Keshwanand Bharti case, in 1978 by Maneka Gandhi vs union of India case, in 1980 by Minerva Mill case and in latest by scrapping of National judicial appointment commission bill. Philosophically they extend their power going towards basic structure of doctrine(Keswanand Bharti) , clubbing due procedure of law with procedure established by law( Maneka Gandhi) , judicial review is a basic structure of constitution (Minerva Mill case) . These three are the cases which puts limit to the parliament supremacy in India. In recently NJAC bill, struck down by judiciary, they even denied the separation of power which was given in the original constitution.

In original constitution, parliament was given the supreme role because law makers kept procedure established by law. Because the validity of law depends upon the procedure and not its content. While , in due process of law it more depends upon the content. Even Champakam Dorairajan was the classical case in 1951 in which parliament supremacy was clear in which they talked about the literal interpretation of procedure established by law.

India derived its parliamentary system from the British Parliamentary System but unlike the British parliament, Indian Parliament is not a fully sovereign body. This can be inferred from the following provision:


55


1.System of Judicial review-

The laws made by British Parliament can't be brought before the Judiciary for review whereas ,in case of Indian Parliament, the legislation passed by it are subjected to judicial review and can be struck down if found violating 'basic structure of the Constitution'.

2.Written Constitution

Unlike British Constitution which is not a written constitution, India has a written constitution and parliament has to abide by it whereas British Parliament is guided by the unwritten conventions, rule of law and current socio-economic conditions.

3.Federal system of government

Legislative power in India has been divided between union and the states and the Parliament can only legislate within the ambit of the union subjects whereas In Britain, the parliament exercises all the powers.

4.Fundamental rights

Our constitution defined certain fundamental rights to the citizens that greatly control the legislative making power of the executive.

Other informal channels like NGOs and press also keep eye on activities of Parliament.

Keeping in mind the diverse nature of the country in terms of culture, religion, language etc, to avoid the arbitrary usage of the power by the Executive, framers of the Indian constitution maintained a fine balance between Parliamentary democracy and Judicial Supremacy. This is why the Indian Parliament is not a fully sovereign body.


56



How is the president of India elected? Outline the salient characterstics of the electoral college of Indian president. (2017) - 200 words

Model Answer

The President is indirectly elected by means of an electoral college consisting of the elected members of the Parliament of India and the Legislative assemblies of the States and the Union Territories of Delhi and Pondicherry. The number and value of votes are based on the population in 1971 rather than the current population, as a result of the 42nd Amendment, and extended by the 84th Amendment with the intention to encourage family planning programs in the states by ensuring that states are not penalized for lowering their population growth.

The presidential electoral college is made up of the following:

elected members of the Rajya Sabha (upper house of the Parliament of India);

elected members of the Lok Sabha (lower house of the Parliament of India);

elected members of each state Vidhan Sabha (lower house of the state legislature); and

elected members of each union territory possessing an assembly (i.e., Delhi and Puducherry)

The value of votes cast by elected members of the state legislative assemblies and both houses of parliament are determined by the provisions of article 55(2) of the Constitution of India. As per the 84th Amendment, the 1971 census is used, and will continue to be used until 2026.

The president ‘s election is held in accordance with the system of proportional representation by means of single transferrable vote and the voting is by secret ballot. This system ensures that successful candidate is returned by absolute majority of votes. A candidate, in order to be declared elected to the office of president , must secure a fixed quota of votes. The quota of votes is determined by diving the total no of valid votes polled by the no. Of candidates to be elected(here 1) plus one and adding one to the quotient.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_India

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indirect_election

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_college

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliament_of_India

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vidhan_Sabha

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/States_of_India

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_Territory

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delhi

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pondicherry

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forty-second_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_India

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_planning

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajya_Sabha

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lok_Sabha

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vidhan_Sabha

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_India

57


Some members of constituent assembly criticised the system of indirect election for the post of president as undemocratic and proposed the idea of direct election. However the indirect election of president is in harmony with parliament system of government envisaged by the constitution.


58



Do the lieutenant Governors has more power than the Governors of the states?explain. ( 2018) - 250 words

Model Answer

The powers a Governor has in the state they administer is equivalent to that of the President. They can appoint Chief Ministers, Ministers, the State Election Commissioner and judges of the District Courts. They also serve as Chancellors of all the universities in the state.

The Governor can also dissolve the state Assembly if they see the need, and if the Assembly is not in session, they can promulgate ordinances. Based on the recommendation of the Election Commission, the Governor can also disqualify a legislator.

Another power the Governor holds is to rule the state in case the ruling party loses its majority in the Assembly, as in Jammu and Kashmir now.

A Lieutenant Governor also has the same powers. Only three Union Territories — Andaman and Nicobar, Delhi and Puducherry — have Lt. Governors.

These powers are in place to ensure checks and balances for the state government and its functioning.

In an observation made in November 2017, the Supreme Court said that the Lt. Governor of Delhi has more powers that the Governor of a State — he does not have to listen to the advice of the Council of Ministers. While, the governor of a state has to more or less act on the aid and advice of the government expect in the case of discretion that could be exercised by the office. In the case of Delhi, since portfolios like land, police and public order fall under the domain of the Centre, of which the Lt. Governor is a representative, he holds more powers than a Governor. The LG has complete discretion to decide upon any of these matters.

The court dictated that the state government and the LG ought to work collectively, with the LG working on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers,


59


except on matters which are outside the legislative powers of the state government.

The state government, on the other hand, must seek the acceptance of the LG on all the decisions, though not mandatory.

After the judgement, the raucous regarding the unclear dimensions of the powers of the Lieutenant Governor in Delhi will come to an end. The Supreme Court has, by clearly pronouncing the extent of the LG’s powers, put to rest the highly contentious issue in the UT. Consequently, this will limit the encroachment of the government and the LG in each other’s functional spheres.


60



Examine the role of national commission for minorities in preserving,promoting and protecting the rights of minorities in India. (2017) - 200 words

Model Answer

NCM was established by an act of Parliament with an aim to promoting and protecting minority rights. It is supposed to be an important constituent of human rights enforcement mechanism in India.

NCM, in discharge of its statutory obligations has been taking steps in terms of various actions, interventions and recommendations done for the benefit of minorities in India. As part of its duties, it has to involve itself in a number of activities affecting the life, property and rights of the minorities.

The Commission had identified a number of issues affecting minority communities as subject of study and analysis particularly in respect of socio-economic conditions of minorities and implementation of 15 Point Programme for their welfare. However it has been handicapped in this regard for lack of necessary staff and funds. In spite of this, the Commission conducted some studies through its chairman and members.

The Commission took a number of opportunities to render its opinion on important legislative matters. On question of Uniform Civil Code raised in Saria Mudgal case by Justice Kuldip Singh putting government in the dock, the Commission took considered view of the matter. It resolved that time was still not ripe to legislate Uniform Civil Code. It however opined that Personal laws could be rationalized as to bring them in tune with the requirements of assuring human rights and human dignity to remove gender injustice. Legislation on Uniform civil code will have to await enactment of separate rational personal laws of minority communities.

India has a long history of communal riots involving minority and majority communities. The issue of creating communal harmony has been high on the agenda of the National Commission for Minorities since early days. In this connection the Commission has organised several conferences, seminars and lecture by academicians and policy makers. It has also been examining the


61


incident of communal violence occurring in different parts of the country suggesting effective steps to check escalation of disturbance, recommending compensation and rehabilitation measure to the governments. The efforts made by the Commission and follow up action taken by the concerned authorities on its recommendation have produced positive results in certain cases.

In addition to this, the Commission also sent its team on fact finding mission to many troubled cities and places where atrocities on minorities were committed.On the basis of information gathered by its fact finding team, the Commission has prepared report and made recommendations on the riots in Dumka (Bihar) in September 1997, involving attack and humiliating treatment of the Vice Principal of St. Joseph School in Manoharpur and Ranalai (Orissa) in January 1999, involving murder of Graham Stains and his two innocent children, and large scale destruction of properties belonging to the Christians in Manglore and Surathkhal (Karnataka) in December, 1998 and January 1999 and on riots in Gujarat in 1998 and 2002 involving increasing anti minority violence.

The National Commission for Minorities as it exists today represents a model of Institutional arrangement which was visualised and promised by the founding fathers of our Constitution to ensure constitutional guarantees of protection for Minorities


62



Religion is still an important factor in Indian Politics. Discuss. (2017) - 200 words

Model Answer

Religion is a way of life, an integral part of Indian tradition, permeating every aspect of life, from chores to food to education and politics A census in 1991 showed Hindu’s made up 82% of the Indian population, smaller percentages are taken by minority groups such as Buddhists, Jainists, Christians and Sikhs, while the largest minority group, calculating for approximately 101.5 million members of the population, are Muslims.

The secular character of the State is under threat from the practitioners of religion based politics. The majority of Indians are believers of religion and in a multi-religious country the believer of one religion follow the path of distance from the believers of other religions. Another face of Indian reality is reflected by religious hostility and opposition against the believers of one or the other religion. Thus Secularism and communalism are the realities of India and these two ways of life are involved in confrontation with each other. The rudest shock comes from the manner in which the government and the country are allowing themselves to be pushed off the edge of secularism into the abyss of communal reaction, falling back to the frightening atavism of stagnant, dark and medieval ethos of the Hindi speaking areas. If we go into the historical background of the problem then we find that there was a close interaction between religion and politics from the Indus valley civilization to the advent of Islam, the second from the advent of Islam, to the Indian Mutiny of 1857, the third from 1857 to India's Independence in 1947 and the fourth from 1947 onwards. While there was close interplay between religion and politics during all these phases, the nature, the intensity and the dynamics of this interaction was different during each of these phases

Religion is one of the most outstanding determinants of voting behaviour with growing participation and relevance. Scholars like Noah Feldman believe that keeping religion out of politics in a society like India where character and identity is largely shaped by religion is very difficult.


63


The supreme court verdict On Section 123(3) of Representation of People’s Act ,1951 clarifies that use of religion is strictly prohibited both by politician and its agent in manner of appealing to vote. Indian secularism is also enshrined as basic structure doctrine in Indian Constitution.

Each Hindu linguistic area have their own traditions, way about their different lives and their own God’s. with an existence without unification how can India politically aspire to social change and reform? As Gunnar Myrdal states, “Religion has, then, become the emotional container of this whole way of life and work and by its sanction has rendered it rigid and resistant to change.”


64



India has moved from one party dominant system to one party led coalition. Discuss(2017) - 250 words

Model Answer

The phrase “the one-party dominant system” was originally fashioned by the noted political analyst Rajni Kothari to capture a phenomenon peculiar to electoral politics in India, and to the Congress party in particular. India’s electoral system, wrote Kothari in 1970, approximates neither to the established model of the two-party or multi-party system, nor to that of the one-party system.

For almost two decades after independence, the Congress, which had led the freedom struggle in the country, controlled the central as well as state governments. The domination of the Congress and the lack of a viable opposition in Parliament could have caused concern, as the one-party system did in many Sub-Saharan countries. Kothari, however, rescued Indian democracy from the negative connotation attached to one-party rule in closed and authoritarian systems. He suggested that the Congress was an umbrella party; a coalition of interest groups that often opposed each other within the party. Party decisions were therefore the outcome of a compromise between different and incommensurate views, forged through Intricate processes of mediation and arbitration within the party. The opposition was there, within the party, even if it was not a significant presence in Parliament.

According to Kothari, the features of the one-party dominant system are

(a) an open and competitive party system,

(b) a fractured opposition that cannot provide an alternative to the government, but which can press the government to do certain things, or not do these things, and

(c) a democratic and consensual dominant party

It is well known that since the 1920s the Congress brought together a number of interest and identity groups to forge a broad coalition. The party leadership was


65


however dependent upon a network of “big men”, large landowners, the middle peasants, industrialists, professional classes, caste and religious communities, women and youth organisations, workers and peasants. This network of big men, who exerted both material and symbolic power, mediated the relationship between the Congress leaders and the rank and file of the party on the one hand, and competing points of view on the other.

Since 1989, sets of coalitions and minority governments in New Delhi is an important aspect of the paradigmatic shifts in the Indian political system in terms of political federalization and economic liberalization in the 1990’s. The coalition and minority governments at the Centre appeared after a long spell of Congress dominance until 1989. Although coalition governments at the Centre formally began in 1989 and have continued since, but the Janata Party (1977-79) in power at New Delhi also was a de facto coalition. The decade (1989-99) featured a series of unstable coalitions and minority governments, following each other like a game of musical chair. In India, the coalitions and minority governments are the outcome of the failure of the parliamentary system to satisfy the norms of getting absolute majority of seats in the Lower House (Lok Sabha) to form government. Since 1989, no single party has succeeded in winning comfortable majority in the House except in 2014 Parliamentary Elections when the Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) could secure 282 seats. In 2014 elections, BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) claimed a historic victory when it secured 336 seats (including 282 of the BJP.)

Political coalitions, being compulsions of power-sharing and political accommodation need to be seen as emergence of a new level of political consciousness and maturity of Judgment, on the part of the voters. Instead of treating coalitions as a path towards political instability, they have to be seen as a sign of the electorates’ dissatisfaction with the dominant role of one single party leading to dissents, protests and extremism. It is a symbol of the voters’ maturity if they prefer political accommodation and power-sharing on the part of political parties, rejecting rigid postures and unitarian forces .Coalition government consisting of two or more political parties to serve the government signifies the fulfilment of these conditions


66



What do you understand by Green revolution?Do you think that a second Green Revolution is needed to adequately address the agrarian challenges in contemporary India?Examine. (2017)- 200 words

Model Answer

The phrase “the one-party dominant system” was originally fashioned by the noted political analyst Rajni Kothari to capture a phenomenon peculiar to electoral politics in India, and to the Congress party in particular. India’s electoral system, wrote Kothari in 1970, approximates neither to the established model of the two-party or multi-party system, nor to that of the one-party system.

For almost two decades after independence, the Congress, which had led the freedom struggle in the country, controlled the central as well as state governments. The domination of the Congress and the lack of a viable opposition in Parliament could have caused concern, as the one-party system did in many Sub-Saharan countries. Kothari, however, rescued Indian democracy from the negative connotation attached to one-party rule in closed and authoritarian systems. He suggested that the Congress was an umbrella party; a coalition of interest groups that often opposed each other within the party. Party decisions were therefore the outcome of a compromise between different and incommensurate views, forged through Intricate processes of mediation and arbitration within the party. The opposition was there, within the party, even if it was not a significant presence in Parliament.

According to Kothari, the features of the one-party dominant system are

(a) an open and competitive party system,

(b) a fractured opposition that cannot provide an alternative to the government, but which can press the government to do certain things, or not do these things, and

(c) a democratic and consensual dominant party


67


It is well known that since the 1920s the Congress brought together a number of interest and identity groups to forge a broad coalition. The party leadership was however dependent upon a network of “big men”, large landowners, the middle peasants, industrialists, professional classes, caste and religious communities, women and youth organisations, workers and peasants. This network of big men, who exerted both material and symbolic power, mediated the relationship between the Congress leaders and the rank and file of the party on the one hand, and competing points of view on the other.

Since 1989, sets of coalitions and minority governments in New Delhi is an important aspect of the paradigmatic shifts in the Indian political system in terms of political federalization and economic liberalization in the 1990’s. The coalition and minority governments at the Centre appeared after a long spell of Congress dominance until 1989. Although coalition governments at the Centre formally began in 1989 and have continued since, but the Janata Party (1977-79) in power at New Delhi also was a de facto coalition. The decade (1989-99) featured a series of unstable coalitions and minority governments, following each other like a game of musical chair. In India, the coalitions and minority governments are the outcome of the failure of the parliamentary system to satisfy the norms of getting absolute majority of seats in the Lower House (Lok Sabha) to form government. Since 1989, no single party has succeeded in winning comfortable majority in the House except in 2014 Parliamentary Elections when the Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) could secure 282 seats. In 2014 elections, BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) claimed a historic victory when it secured 336 seats (including 282 of the BJP.)

Political coalitions, being compulsions of power-sharing and political accommodation need to be seen as emergence of a new level of political consciousness and maturity of Judgment, on the part of the voters. Instead of treating coalitions as a path towards political instability, they have to be seen as a sign of the electorates’ dissatisfaction with the dominant role of one single party leading to dissents, protests and extremism. It is a symbol of the voters’ maturity if they prefer political accommodation and power-sharing on the part of political parties, rejecting rigid postures and unitarian forces .Coalition government consisting of two or more political parties to serve the government signifies the fulfilment of these conditions


68



Political personalities are more significant than political parties in INDia. (150 words) – 2018

Model Answer

Political parties are the essential components of representative government and are considered to be indispensable for the successful working of modern democracy.

According to Paul Webb, parties offer citizenry a meaningful degree of choice b/w and control over political elites and are important in building civic & political orientations in the country through their ideology & programmes

In the Indian context, political parties do represent enduring ideology and are distinguished from other parties on ideological issues such as secularism vis-a-vis nationalism etc. • However, with the increased political competitions, there has been a tendency within political parties to give priority to ‘winnability’ over allegiance to ideology. The imperative of security electoral victory has led parties to launch a wide search for candidates or political activist (Personality) using ‘winnability’ as the key criterion.

The preference given by political parties to the criteria of ‘winnability’ over ‘ideological cohesion’ is evident in the following manner-

(i) Identity-Politics In a multi-ethnic like India, political parties follow an exclusivist

strategy that deliberately seeks to divide people on ethnic fault-lines, with an aim to capitalize on several social cleavages. This form of political mobilization is known as identity politics. As Indian states are typically linguistic and cultural entities, the parties that reflect such social cleavages flourish therein. For e.g. - BSP aggressively promotes lower-caste political consolidation against upper- caste Hindus. (ii) In india during General Elections whether of Assembly or of Lok Sabha people of India has to vote for MP/MLA of their constituencies and have to choose them according to the need of the society, but on contrary they vote to those party’s MP/MLA keeping in mind their favourite political personality whom they want to become the CM/PM.


69


The politics on the name of personality is embedded in India from the past 70 years and is still continuing as congress is currently running in their 4th generation.

But this legacy has to be end for the better governance of the India as this type of politics do not bring quality representative but only creates nepotism which is like a poison for the country


70



Discuss asymmetrical federalism in India. (2018) - 200 words

Model Answer

One of the major concerns about the Indian federalism that it is asymmetric. By “Asymmetric” we mean that Indian federalism is based on unequal distribution of powers in political, administrative and fiscal sphere. Further, this asymmetry is both vertical {between centre and states} and horizontal {among states}.

Asymmetry in vertical {between centre and states}

Generally, the federations are seen as “indestructible units” of “indestructible states”; and neither of the constituent unit has power to make inroads into the defined territory of other. In India, this is different. Here, India is considered to be an indestructible union of destructible states. There is considerable domination of the union over states, and the later have no territorial integrity defined.

Asymmetry in horizontal {among states}

Firstly, there is a universal asymmetry affecting all units. For instance, States in India are represented by Rajya Sabha not on the basis of formal eqality between states {as in United States} but has on the basis of their population. Due to this while UP has 31 seats in Rajya Sabha, States like Meghalaya, Mizoram, Manipur and Goa, and UTs like Pondicherry have just one seat each. Some UTs have no representation in Rajya Sabha.

Secondly, there are specific asymmetries with regard to the administration of tribal areas, intra-state regional disparities, law and order situation and fixation of number of seats in legislative assemblies in relation to states of Maharashtra, Gujarat, Assam, Manipur, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Sikkim, Arunachal Pradesh, Goa under article 371.

Thirdly, the Union Territories also represent a kind of asymmetry. They were created on varied reasons They were either too small to be full states or too diverse and difficult to merge into the nearby states.

Fourthly, the greatest of all asymmetries is because of article 370. Article 370 provides different constitution for Jammu & Kashmir; and part-VI is not


71


at all applicable to that state. The most notable feature that marks the relationship of Jammu and Kashmir with the Union of India is that an Act of the Parliament does not automatically apply to this State unless and until it is endorsed by the State legislature.

Reasons for the Asymmetric Federalism in India

1 Historic reasons

Before Independence Indian provinces were ruled differently by British and Princes, the regions which were under accession of British were wholly controlled by British and the other which are under control of Pinces (Princely states) had some autonomy.

2 After independence

Dynamics created by the end of single party rule in the centre and states.

Emergence of coalition government at centre.

Regional dominance of regional parties in the coalition.

Despite of the Asymmetry in the Indian federalism the continuity of the democracy in India, regular elections, unity among people, and no army control over India is the sign of success for India.


90 Days UPSC Mains Optional Answer Writing Initiative · Political Science – Paper 1 Question and...

Documents

Transcript of 90 Days UPSC Mains Optional Answer Writing Initiative · Political Science – Paper 1 Question and...