Roman Saini is teaching live on Unacademy Plus
Mains GS Paper 2 2017:1-3 Roman Saini
Question 1: "The local self government system in India has not proved to be effective instrument of governance". Critically examine the statement and give your views to improve the situation. Answer: The local self government system was given constitutional status by the 73rd constitutional amendment act and was envisaged to be a harbinger of inclusive development via participatory and decentralised governance However it has not been able to achieve its desired goal due to: Problem of 3 Fs i.e inadequate funds, functions and functionaries and reliance on state legislature for the same. 1. Improper demarcation of powers between state legislature and local bodies resulting into overlap of functions and wastage of resources. 2. Lack of cooperation between different tiers and clash of interests of functionaries e.g between mayor and municipal commissioner hampering execution of projects. 3.
1. Lack of powers for revenue generation. 2. Lack of empowerment of gram sabha 3. Absence of transparency in the functioning of panchayats and accountability of representatives 4. Lack of awareness among tribals about PESA, it's provisions, powers and implementation. Measures: 1. Gradual and effective transfer of 3 Fs to PR institutions 2. Granting certain functional and fiscal autonomy to grab sabhas and some flexibility to design and implement policies to suit local needs. 3. Capacity building of panchayats-training of functionaries, expansion of ICTs and computerisation, awareness and education campaigns especially in PESA areas
Question 2. Critically examine the Supreme Court's judgement on 'National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, 2014' with reference to appointment of judges of higher judiciary in India. Answer: The 'National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, 2014 and the corresponding 99th Constitutional amendment act proposed the establishment of a constitutional body NJAC to replace the existing collegium system of appointing judges. This body would have representation from judiciary, civil society and the executive. Supreme court of India struck down NJAC giving the following reasons 1. It cannot risk being caught in the web of indebtedness towards the government because of excessive 2. The independence of Judiciary is an essential feature of the basic structure and hence NJAC is in violation 3. Inclusion of Law minister as a member of NJAC and the justice secretary as it convenor is not sustainable 4. The SC also pointed out the improper definition of eminent person could lead to paralysis of the representation of executive in the NJAC. of the basic structure principle and also the primacy of Chief Justice of India in the process. in law. appointment process
Counter Arguments: 1. The rejection of NJAC can be seen as an attack on the legitimacy and primacy of Parliament 2. This is a hurdle for creating a more transparent and accountable judiciary, which like 3. The NJAC judgement seems to imply mistrust in government and lack of respect to the will of as the law making body of the country. parliament and executive is a pillar of democracy the people shown through majority government at centre with unquestioned faith in absolute competence of judges which has no rationale in a democratic country like India. But the Supreme Court also agreed to the shortcomings in the collegium system and time is ripe for a deep introspection to improve the collegium system of 21 years. The Memorandum of procedure for appointing judges, agreed to by both the government and SC is a step in the right direction
Question 3. 'Simultaneous election to the Lok Sabha and the State Assemblies will limit the amount of time and money spent in electioneering but it will reduce the government's accountability to the people' Discuss Recently the ruling government has initiated a discussion on simultaneous elections for both Loksabha and state assemblies Arguments pro simultaneous elections: 1. Financially more prudent as massive expenditure is incurred for conducting separate elections. Expenditure and time saved for political parties too. 2. Frequent elections hamper long term policy making by both state and central governments. 3. Policy paralysis due to imposition of model code of conduct during election time. 4. Impact of delivery on essential services. . Burden on crucial manpower that is deployed during elections
Accountability of government to people: The fear of being thrown out by people compel politicians to address problems. Frequent elections ensure government does not implement majoritarian views and policies in a diverse country like India. Imbalance in federal structure as state elections becomes more aligned and related to central politics and simultaneous election will push country towards a more unitary structure. 1. 2. 3.