Mains Q & A 2 February 2023

Q1. India’s constitution-writing process was a democratic fair. In this context, talk about how the constitutional morality of India has changed. (250 words)

Paper & Topic: GS II Indian Constitution

Model Answer:

Introduction:

A united vision for the future of the country was being developed by the Constituent Assembly, which was founded in 1946. Between December 1946 and December 1949, the Assembly met for 165 days, during which time it engaged in-depth debates and drafted the fundamental texts of our Constitution.

Body:

“Constitutional morality” is the practise of upholding the essential principles of the constitutional democracy. The Constitution’s ultimate goal—a socio-juridical condition that allows each person to completely express themselves as they see fit—is ensured by the definition of constitutional morality, which goes beyond simply abiding by the letter of the law.

It provides a moral viewpoint on how to perform governmental obligations. It specifies requirements for institutions to meet and behaviour that upholds both the letter and the spirit of the Constitution. It also holds governmental bodies and parliamentarians accountable.

Constitutional morality is not a new concept. The Constitution itself has detailed explanations of it in the Preamble, Fundamental Duties section, Directive Principle of State Policy section, and Fundamental Rights section, among other places (Articles 12 to 35).

Constitutional morality is based on the language of the Constitution, Constitutional Assembly deliberations, Constitution-making activities, case law history, and Constitutional Assembly debates.

The evolving limits of constitutional morality:

Constitutional morality is adherence to the fundamental principles of constitutional democracy. It is based on values that defend the rights to privacy, equality without discrimination, and the recognition of one’s identity with dignity rather than merely conforming to the language of the Constitution.

In the Supreme Court’s Sabarimala judgement, for example, the practise of barring women under a certain age from entering the Sabarimala temple in Kerala was ruled illegal, and the rights of women to worship and to religious freedom were completely reinstated. The Supreme Court rejected the “doctrine of essentiality” in order to defend constitutional morality. In this instance, constitutional morality was at odds with cultural morality, which discriminates against women based on biological aspects like menstruation.

In the ensuing cases, the Supreme Court has backed constitutional morality:

In the Kesavananda Bharati Case, the Supreme Court restricted the Parliament’s capacity to breach the Constitution’s Basic Structure.

In the Naz Foundation case, the Supreme Court expressed its position, saying that only Constitutional Morality should take precedence over Public Morality.

The Supreme Court referred to constitutional morality as a set of guiding principles in the Lt. Governor of Delhi case that “emphasise the imperative to sustain the faith of the population in the institution of democracy.”

In Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, the Supreme Court of India (SC) created a framework to reaffirm the rights of LGBTQ and all gender non-conforming people to their dignity, life, liberty, and identity.

Conclusion:

Constitutional morality thus ensures the establishment of the rule of law in the state by taking into account the changing objectives and values of society. It recognises the variety and diversity in society and tries to make individuals and communities more inclusive in how they conduct themselves, as envisioned by our Constitution.

Q2. The Pre-Legislative Consultation Policy resolves divisive issues on which the administration is making an effort to reach an agreement and supports the escalating calls for an open government. Examine. (250 words)

Paper & Topic: GS II Parliament related issues

Model Answer:

Introduction:

During the pre-legislative consultation process, residents can voice their opinions to the government about proposed laws and policies. An idea for a law is brought to the Parliament as a draught bill. The public is given the opportunity to comment on this proposed piece of law. The Union Government has listed 29 bills for the winter session of Parliament.

A number of rules were established by the Pre-Legislative Consultation Policy, which was passed in 2014. One of these rules stipulates that whenever the government enacts legislation, it must make a draught version of it available to the public for at least 30 days.

Body:

2014 pre-legislative consultation policy:

The policy also stipulates that a study on the bill’s social and financial ramifications should be posted alongside the draught in addition to a note explaining the law in plain language and supporting the proposal, as well as its financial ramifications, impact on the environment, and impact on fundamental rights.

The summary of all comments made on the circulating draughts for each department should also be uploaded.

It aimed to create a formal setting for citizen participation in legislative processes.

Importance of 2014 Pre-legislative Consultation Policy:

This policy provides a forum for citizens and relevant stakeholders to interact with the executive’s policymakers throughout the early phases of law-making.

Recent protests against laws like as the farm laws, the RTI Amendment Act, the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, etc. have demonstrated that the general public and significant stakeholders are unhappy about being excluded from the decision-making process.

Public conversations enhance transparency, accountability, and the development of a well-informed government where the people are treated as partners rather than as subjects.

For instance, after implementing extensive consultation and deliberation techniques, the Telecom Regulatory Authority addressed concerns raised by members of civil society (#SaveTheInternet campaign) in the drafting of the net neutrality principles.

Performance of pre-legislative consultation policy 2014:

During the 16th Lok Sabha, which ran from May 2014 to May 2019, 186 laws were submitted to Parliament, 142 of which were introduced without any prior discussion.

The 30-day limit was not met for 24 of the 44 initiatives that were made available for public discussion.

85 of the 115 legislation that were introduced to Parliament during the 17th Lok Sabha (from June 2019 to the present) were not subject to any prior consultation.

The 30 days were not followed by 16 of the 30 measures that were made available for public discussion.

Difficulties encountered:

The absence of a statutory or constitutional right has lessened the influence of an established policy, even though all government departments are required to follow its instructions.

For the policy to be properly implemented, future adjustments to executive procedural norms like the Manual of Parliamentary Procedures and the Handbook on Writing Cabinet Notes are required.

The public’s lack of comprehension of the pre-legislative consultation process is the government’s largest concern.

Public consultations are occasionally organised, but no responses are obtained.

On the other hand, massive amounts of feedback are usually not processed because of internal capacity limits.

Moving ahead:

For the policy to be properly implemented, future adjustments to executive procedural norms like the Manual of Parliamentary Procedures and the Handbook on Writing Cabinet Notes are required.

Make it a priority to incorporate pre-legislative consultation into the Cabinet, Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha, etc. practises.

Similar to this, when submitting the bill, ministers must be required to include an amendment note outlining the nature of the pre-legislative consultation.

The situation might be radically changed by a statutory and constitutional commitment to give citizens the ability to participate in pre-legislative debates.