AIR 11 · CSE 2023 · GS2 · 52 pages

Kush Motwani: GS2 answer copy

19 answers by Kush Motwani, as written in the test. Each question opens a page with how other toppers answered it.

The questions

  1. Q1There is a need to resolve the ambiguity in the disqualification provisions under section 8 of RPA 1951. Discuss. How has anti-defection law impacted relationship between pol parties and individual legislators? In light of recent incidents, also discuss unintended consequences it has on functioning of democracy in India.
  2. Q2Constitution is a mere skeleton whereas constitutionalism is the soul of democracy. Discuss.
  3. Q3"Electoral bonds are a double edged sword, providing anonymity to donors while raising concerns around transparency." To what extent have electoral bonds further legitimized opacity in electoral funding?
  4. Q4Question of gender equality is central to debate on UCC. What are the challenges in reconciling UCC with gender equality as enshrined in the constitution?
  5. Q05Governor's office is neither decorative nor inconsequential - it assumes a constitutional role of profound essence". To what extent does the Governor actively contribute to governance of a state, and reinforce principles of federalism?
  6. Q6Recently, demand has been rising in a state regarding enactment of Social Accountability law. How can such a law lead to good governance and boost citizens participation in decision-making? There is a need for convergence of "nutrition-specific" and "nutrition-sensitive" interventions to effectively tackle child undernutrition in India. Examine.
  7. Q8"MGNREGA, lynchpin of rural poverty alleviation, has become victim of fiscal apathy". Critically analyze in light of recent developments. The budget for MGNREGA was cut in Budget 2023-24 by ~ 15%, in light of revival of economy and employment.
  8. Q8(:)"India must leverage, if not manage, global political divides". How can current geopol churn pave way to India's rise to global high table?
  9. Q10"Berlin can be India's gateway to EU". Elaborate with respect to Germany's significance in India's relationship with EU.
  10. Q12Critics assert that limitless judicial authority rests on structural ambiguity of BSD. Has the elastic nature of Basic structure made judiciary more powerful than executive?
  11. Q13FRs are not gifts bestowed upon by the state, rather an individual possesses them independent of the state. In this context, discuss desirability of reasonable restrictions on various FRs.
  12. Q14"SR Bommai Vs Union ..." signified a paradigm shift in judicial interpretation of union's authority to assume control of state's admin". Discuss significance and impact of the judgement in cementing federal structure.
  13. Q15Key to effective decentralisation is "political decentralisation should follow finance and functional decentralisation". Discuss in context of impediments faced by local governance in India.
  14. Q16Multi-stakeholder partnerships are key to leveraging collective expertise and networks. How can effective partnership and localized implementation be fostered to accelerate achievements of SDGs in India?
  15. Q17How has implementation of POSH Act resulted in limited success in raising awareness about sexual harassment, and what factors have hindered its outreach to unorganized sector? Propose strategies to bridge this gap, and ensure comprehensive protection to women in unorg sector.
  16. Q18Neo-Liberal reforms and globalization have deeply transformed institutions of welfare state and set the ground for a new type of civil services". In this context, examine challenges faced in service delivery and suggest reforms.
  17. Q19China views India as "Asian Rival" with innate ability to counter its hegemonic goals in Asia. Despite these difficulties in India-China relations, there are also convergences. Discuss.
  18. Q20Indo-Pacific in recent times has emerged as zone of diverging interests and priorities. Discuss. Do you think Global Security Initiative will supercede Quad in the region?
  19. QN/A

The answers

Question 1 · 574 words written

There is a need to resolve the ambiguity in the disqualification provisions under section 8 of RPA 1951. Discuss. How has anti-defection law impacted relationship between pol parties and individual legislators? In light of recent incidents, also discuss unintended consequences it has on functioning of democracy in India.

Opening · a constitutional or legal provision

Article 102 and 191 of the constitution deal with disqualification of MPs/MLAs from legislatures. Recently, ex-MP Rahul Gandhi was disqualified as MP on the basis of Section 8(3) of RPA 1951.

In this context:

Disqualification grounds:

ConstitutionalStatutory (RPA 1951)
→ unsound mind→ Section 8(1), 8(2): Disqualification if convicted under specific offences
→ undischarged insolvent
→ occupying office of profit, etc.→ Section 8(3): Automatic disqualification if convicted of with sentence more than 2 years.
→ citizen of India (not)→ Section 123
etc→ Section 135

Apparent ambiguity in Section 8, RPA 1951:

Body · points and prose

  1. Section 8 (1) and 8(2) provide for disqualification - if convicted of specific offences.

  2. Section 8(3) : automatic disqualification if sentence is greater than 2 years. (for 6 years)

  3. Ambiguity: Does Section 8(3) over ride Section 8(1) and 8(2) ?

Need to resolve the ambiguity:

  1. to upheld principle of transparency in electoral laws ↓ so that voters may choose without bias

  2. De-criminalisation of politics.

  3. If section 8(3) does not override 8(1) and 8(2) ↓ it may give a loophole to criminal candidates

  4. (similar such loophole was exploited by criminals - section 8(4), till it was struck down by SC in Lily Thomas case)

Way forward :

  1. Clarify over-riding provision of section 8(3)
  2. Further steps towards de-criminalisation of politics; → robust implementation of Section 123 (Abhiram case) (bribery and soliciting votes on grounds of race, caste, religion, etc). //

The anti-defection law was introduced in India via the 52nd Amendment in 1985, Xth Schedule, and corresponding Anti-Defection law.

It was introduced to curb rising defections and horse-trading, which was impacting stability of govt.

It has had a profound impact on relationship between political parties and individual legislators:

  1. Made individual legislators compelled to follow the party whip.

  2. forced individual legislators to vote against their conscience

  3. Curbed intra-party dissent

  4. Broken link of accountability between voter and his representative ↓ Led to less discussions in Parliament

  5. Increased the dependence of individual legislators on political parties.

  6. Created an alternat extra-constitutional authority inside the House - whips

Unintended consequences on functioning of democracy:

  1. leading to "whole sale defections" (as 2/3rd party defecting is exempt under the act) (eg: recently seen in Goa)

  2. Disturbs the balance of power between executive and legislature ↓ earlier, private members (both of ruling and opposition party) were at greater liberty to hold the executive accountable.

  3. Created a situation in which major decisions of the House may be taken by only a few party leaders. ↓ against principles of democracy //.

  4. Reduced scope for collaboration across party lines in legislature ↓ greater confrontation in Parliament ↓ voter interests not represented ↓ against democracy

  5. Against separation of powers. ↓ giving executive control over legislators (via whip).

Way forward:

  1. Supreme Court in Keisham Meghachandra Singh V/s Speaker of Manipur (2020) → Speaker disqualification petitions must be decided within 3 months, unless there are exceptional circumstances → Petitions should not be decided by Speaker, but by an independent mechanism

  2. Dinesh Goswami committee: → Decision should be by President/Governor, on advice of Election Commission → It should be limited to votes where stability of govt is threatened (eg: No-confidence motions)

  3. Political parties must internally establish greater democracy

  4. Voter awareness and education.

Close · a way forward

None written.