Compare and contrast the British and Indian approaches to parliamentary sovereignty.

GS 2

Indian Polity

2023

10 Marks

Parliamentary sovereignty is a fundamental concept shaping governance structures in both British and Indian constitutional systems. While both nations share common parliamentary heritage, their approaches to legislative supremacy differ significantly due to their unique historical contexts and constitutional frameworks.

Key Differences in Parliamentary Sovereignty

Aspect	British Parliament	Indian Parliament
Constitutional Basis	Britain has an unwritten constitution based on conventions, statutes, and judicial decisions	India has a written and rigid Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land
Extent of Sovereignty	Parliament is sovereign and can make or unmake any law, including constitutional changes. No authority can override or declare an Act invalid	Parliament is not sovereign, its powers are limited by the Constitution. It cannot amend the basic (Kesavananda Bharati case, 1973)
Role of Judiciary	Judiciary has no power of judicial review over Acts of Parliament. Parliament is supreme	Judiciary can strike down laws violating the Constitution under Article 13. Judicial review is part of basic feature
Division of Powers	Britain is a unitary state, Parliament has complete legislative control over the entire territory	India is a federal polity, Parliament shares legislative powers with State Legislatures. Subjects are divided into Union, State, and Concurrent Lists
Amendment Process	No distinction between ordinary and constitutional laws, same procedure applies	Article 368 provides a special procedure for constitutional amendments. Some require ratification by half of the states
Rights Regime	Parliament can curtail or expand individual rights without judicial restraint	Fundamental Rights (Part III) are enforceable and cannot be abrogated arbitrarily by Parliament
Concept of Basic Structure	Not applicable, Parliament can fundamentally alter constitutional principles	Subject to the basic structure doctrine; e.g., secularism, federalism, judicial independence cannot be amended

Similarities Between British and Indian Parliaments Regarding Parliamentary Sovereignty

Legislative Supremacy: Both parliaments hold supreme legislative authority within their jurisdictions (subject to constitutional limits in India). They can make laws on any subject in their domain.
Control Over the Executive: In both systems, the executive (Council of Ministers) is collectively responsible to the Lower House (House of Commons in UK, Lok Sabha in India), reflecting the sovereignty of the legislature.
Power to Grant or Deny Funds: Both parliaments control the power of the purse. The Annual Financial Statement (Budget) must be passed by Parliament for the government to function.
Parliamentary Privileges: Members enjoy freedom of speech and other legislative privileges, insulating them from external interference — signifying independent sovereign functioning.
Questioning the Executive: Question Hour, motions, debates, and confidence/no-confidence votes allow both parliaments to assert authority over the government.

The Indian approach to parliamentary sovereignty represents a unique adaptation of the British model, modified to suit a federal democratic republic with constitutional supremacy. While the British Parliament enjoys absolute sovereignty, the Indian Parliament's powers are circumscribed by constitutional provisions, judicial review, and the basic structure doctrine, ensuring a balanced governance framework.

Answer Length

Model answers may exceed the word limit for better clarity and depth. Use them as a guide, but always frame your final answer within the exam’s prescribed limit.

In just 60 sec