Introduction
Articles 74 and 75 of the Constitution establish India's parliamentary democracy, founded on the principle of collective responsibility of the Council of Ministers to the Lok Sabha. However, evolving political dynamics and institutional practices have increasingly shifted this cabinet-led framework toward a prime ministerial form of government, concentrating power within the Prime Minister and the Prime Minister's Office (PMO).
Features of Prime Ministerial Dominance
While the constitutional architecture envisions a collegial cabinet acting as first among equals, several operational trends demonstrate a marked shift toward executive centralisation:
- Presidentialisation of Elections: National electoral mandates are increasingly fought and won on the individual persona, appeal, and leadership brand of the Prime Minister, relegating local constituency issues and individual candidates to the background.
- Centralisation via the PMO: The Prime Minister's Office (PMO) frequently acts as a de facto super-cabinet, overseeing policy formulation, inter-ministerial coordination, and bureaucratic appointments, thereby diminishing the deliberative role of traditional Cabinet Committees.
- Reduced Legislative Scrutiny: Executive dominance has weakened parliamentary oversight over legislation. For instance, according to PRS Legislative Research, the 17th Lok Sabha referred only 16% of introduced bills to Departmentally Related Standing Committees for detailed examination, down from 71% in the 15th Lok Sabha.
- Circumvention of Bicameral Deliberation: The executive has at times bypassed scrutiny in the Rajya Sabha by classifying contested legislative measures as Money Bills under Article 110 (such as the Aadhaar Act) or taking recourse to the Ordinance route under Article 123 for major policy interventions.
- Impact of the Tenth Schedule: The Anti-Defection Law enforces strict adherence to party whips across all parliamentary voting, as highlighted in the minority concerns of Kihoto Hollohan (1992). This stifles internal dissent, curbs independent deliberation by MPs, and consolidates power in the party high command.
Institutional Checks and Counter-Forces
Despite these centralising impulses, the Indian constitutional matrix retains resilient checks against unchecked prime ministerial power:
- Judicial Review: The Supreme Court exercises robust constitutional review over executive actions, ordinance promulgation, and arbitrary legislative classifications to maintain constitutional boundaries.
- Federal Safeguards: Robust regional polities, coalition dynamics, and the non-negotiable basic structure doctrine of federalism affirmed in S.R. Bommai (1994) check excessive centralisation by empowering state governments.
Conclusion
While a decisive executive facilitates rapid policy implementation and stable governance, it must not undermine parliamentary accountability. Implementing recommendations of the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC)—such as mandating committee scrutiny for key bills and limiting the scope of whips strictly to confidence motions—is vital to revitalise India's parliamentary ethos.