BPSC MainsGeneral Studies Paper IIndian PolityPractice question

Suitability of Parliamentary Democracy in India

The Constitution of India functions in accordance with parliamentary democracy (Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha). Is parliamentary democracy the best system for India?

Evaluate~250 words3 min readmedium
Attempt it first, timed · optional

Write the answer on paper, as in the exam. Start the timer, keep to the word target.

00:00/ 11 min · 250 words

Done writing? Photograph the sheet and see how it scores against this model answer, with feedback on what to fix.

Upload your answer sheet

How to approach

Introduce the parliamentary form of government as established by the Indian Constitution along with its historical roots. Explain its functioning through bicameral legislative balance and executive accountability. Evaluate whether it is the most suitable system for India by examining constituent rationale and representation, balance it against emerging operational challenges, and conclude with the necessity of institutional reforms over systemic change.

Model answer

457 words

Introduction

The Constitution of India establishes a bicameral parliamentary system under Article 79, echoing ancient democratic traditions such as the Licchavi republic of Vaishali in Bihar. Designed to ensure executive accountability and popular representation, the parliamentary framework relies on the dual chambers of the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha to balance democratic legitimacy with federal integrity.

Functioning of the Parliamentary System

The Indian parliamentary model functions through defined institutional mechanisms that foster collective deliberation, popular participation, and checks and balances:

  • Legislative and Federal Balance: The Lok Sabha embodies the direct popular mandate of the electorate, while the Rajya Sabha represents the states, safeguarding federal interests. Legislative bills passed by both houses become law only after obtaining presidential assent under Article 111.
  • Executive Accountability: Under Article 75(3), the Council of Ministers is collectively responsible to the Lok Sabha. This creates continuous legislative oversight through instruments like question hour, zero hour, and no-confidence motions, contrasting sharply with the rigid tenure and separation of powers found in presidential systems.

Rationale and Suitability for India

The parliamentary system was consciously chosen over presidential alternatives based on structural and demographic factors unique to India:

  • Preference for Daily Responsibility: Dr. B.R. Ambedkar articulated in the Constituent Assembly that the drafting committee preferred a system offering 'daily assessment of responsibility' over mere periodic stability. This ongoing accountability is vital to prevent authoritarian tendencies in a deeply diverse society.
  • Accommodation of Diversity: India's immense linguistic, regional, and socio-religious pluralism requires a platform capable of accommodating regional aspirations. The parliamentary system facilitates coalition governance and decentralised state representation, as exemplified by state assemblies like the Bihar Vidhan Sabha, which marked its centenary in 2021 while shaping transformative local legislation.
  • Prevention of Executive Gridlock: Fusion of legislative and executive powers prevents frequent legislative deadlocks that often characterise presidential forms, facilitating faster policy enactment.

Operational Challenges

While structurally robust, the practical execution of parliamentary democracy in India confronts critical challenges:

  • Criminalisation of Politics: The integrity of parliamentary deliberation is compromised by the rising entry of candidates with criminal antecedents. According to Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) data, 46% of MPs elected to the 18th Lok Sabha face criminal charges.
  • Declining Deliberative Standards: Decreasing sitting days of Parliament and frequent disruptions have curtailed genuine policy scrutiny, leading to laws being passed with minimal debate.
  • Anti-Defection Constraints: The Tenth Schedule has curtailed intra-party dissent, reducing individual lawmakers to party whips rather than independent representatives of their constituencies.

Conclusion

Parliamentary democracy remains the most suitable and resilient framework for India due to its unparalleled capacity to mirror national diversity and enforce continuous accountability. Rather than switching to an alternative system like the presidential model, the need of the hour is addressing systemic flaws through robust electoral reforms, de-criminalisation, and revitalising parliamentary debate.

Key facts to remember

quote
The Constituent Assembly chose the parliamentary system because it preferred a system of daily assessment of responsibility over periodic stability.
Dr. B. R. Ambedkar on Executive Responsibility
statistic

46% of newly elected Members of Parliament in the 18th Lok Sabha face criminal charges.

Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR, 2024)
example
Centenary of Bihar Vidhan Sabha

The Bihar Legislative Assembly celebrated its centenary in 2021, illustrating the institutional longevity and federal deepening enabled by parliamentary democracy at the state level.

Frequently asked questions

Why did India choose a parliamentary system over a presidential system?

The framers preferred a system ensuring daily executive accountability to the legislature over presidential stability, while accommodating India's vast religious, linguistic, and regional diversity.