Day 9 – Q 1.Many countries have bicameral legislatures like India. Can you make a comparison of the powers and functions of the upper house in India vis a vis the other countries having bicameral legislatures. You can take two such countries for comparison.
1. Many countries have bicameral legislatures like India. Can you make a comparison of the powers and functions of the upper house in India vis a vis the other countries having bicameral legislatures. You can take two such countries for comparison.
कई देशों में भारत जैसे द्विसदनीय विधायिका हैं। क्या आप भारत में ऊपरी सदन की शक्तियों और कार्यों की तुलना उन देशों से कर सकते हैं जहाँ द्विसदनीय विधायिका है? तुलना के लिए आप ऐसे दो देशों को ले सकते हैं।
Introduction:
In modern democracies, bicameralism is a feature adopted in pursuance of many of the objectives that were enumerated by James Madison among others in the course of the framing of the United States Constitution at the Philadelphia Convention of 1787.
Body:
The core rationale for having two chambers in a national legislature broadly flows from the need for checks and balances in a democratic government.
Nations with large territories and heterogeneous constituents prefer bicameralism for ensuring the adequate representation of diverse interests at the federal level.
India is not alone in having bicameral system, as of 2019, around half of the world’s national legislatures are bicameral.
- USA- US Congress is divided into Senate and House of Representatives.
- UK- House of Lords and House of Common. Indian bicameral set up was inspired from system though both have differences.
- Pakistan- It has Senate and National Assembly.
- Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Japan are other major countries with bicameral set up.
Comparison of structure and powers of Rajya Sabha with that of Upper Houses of Australia and Germany:
| CHARACTER | INDIA(RAJYA SABHA) | AUSTRALIA (SENATE) | GERMANY (BUNDESRAT) |
| Numerical strength | 250 | 76 | 60 |
| Type of election and distribution | Indirectly elected unequal representation | Directly elected and equal representation | Indirect elections based on multi-party system and unequal representation |
| Term | 6 years 1/3rd of the members retire every two years. No dissolution | 6 year terms with half the members retire every three years. Dissolution present | Staggered representation based on the term of the states. No dissolution. |
| Joint sitting | Yes only for bills other than money bills | Yes but not for money bills | No provision, each bill has to be passed |
| Veto power | No veto but can make exclusive laws on some subjects (Art.312) | No veto | Veto power for bills in concurrent list |
| Relative strength | Due to indirect nature of election, constitutional restrictions considered a weaker house | Due to the process of Double dissolution it is considered a relatively stronger house than the lower one | Due to unequal federal representation and veto power it is the stronger house amongst both. |
| Law making power | Present under article 312 (creation of all India service) | No such exclusive power | No such law making power but has power of veto on all legislative matters. |
Conclusion:
The basic rationale for having two parliamentary chambers is the need to avoid a concentration of power in a single body and the risk of abuse which this entails. Dividing power between two legislative chambers of broadly equal status is a safeguard against a single chamber taking extreme or excessive measures which may lack broad community support.
