Q.To what extent, in your view, the Parliament is able to ensure accountability of the executive in India?

Body

Mechanisms for Parliamentary Accountability Over the Executive

• Question Hour and Zero Hour
  • Question Hour: The opening hour of a parliamentary sitting allows MPs to pose oral and written queries, forcing ministers to clarify administrative actions and policy decisions.
  • Zero Hour: This period enables legislators to raise urgent matters of public importance without prior notice.
  • Effectiveness: These tools are vital for exposing administrative failures, inefficiencies, and corruption.
  • Limitation: Frequent disruptions, protests, and sudden adjournments significantly reduce their operational impact.
• Debates and Discussions
  • Deliberations on Bills, the Budget, and general government policies facilitate close scrutiny of executive choices. Short Duration Discussions (under Rule 193 of the Lok Sabha) allow for focused debates on specific critical issues.
  • Effectiveness: They promote policy transparency and compel the executive to justify its legislative and administrative actions.
  • Limitation: The ruling party often dominates these discussions, which limits the scope and impact of opposition scrutiny.
• No-Confidence Motion and Censure Motion
  • Under Article 75, the Lok Sabha has the power to dismiss the government through a No-Confidence Motion, ensuring the executive retains the confidence of the house.
  • Censure Motions are utilized to criticize specific policies or individual decisions of the administration.
  • Effectiveness: These are powerful tools that can hold the executive directly accountable and even force its resignation.
  • Limitation: A government with a strong, stable majority reduces the practical feasibility of passing a no-confidence motion.
• Parliamentary Committees
  • The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) audits government expenditure and highlights financial irregularities, while Departmental Standing Committees examine ministerial policies and functioning.
  • Effectiveness: Committees conduct detailed, non-partisan, and in-depth scrutiny of bills and budgets.
  • Limitation: Their recommendations are advisory and not legally binding, which reduces their overall enforceability.
• Budget Scrutiny and Financial Oversight
  • Parliament exercises financial control by approving the Union Budget, scrutinizing government spending through Demands for Grants and the Appropriation Bill.
  • Effectiveness: Ensures transparency and accountability in public spending.
  • Limitation: The ruling majority often pushes budget approvals through without detailed, clause-by-clause discussions.

Challenges in Parliamentary Accountability

• Party Discipline and the Whip System: MPs are generally obligated to vote strictly along party lines, which severely limits independent scrutiny of executive actions.
  • Example: The Farm Laws (2020) were passed with minimal debate due to majority rule.
• Frequent Disruptions and Adjournments: Parliamentary sessions are regularly disrupted by walkouts and protests, reducing the time available for constructive debate.
  • Example: The Monsoon Session 2021 lost over 74% of its active working time due to disruptions.
• Weakening of Parliamentary Committees: While committees provide detailed scrutiny, their recommendations are often sidelined by the executive.
  • Example: The Standing Committee on Labour’s 2020 report on migrant workers during COVID-19 was not fully implemented.
• Excessive Use of Ordinances: The executive sometimes bypasses parliamentary scrutiny by issuing ordinances under Article 123, weakening legislative oversight.
  • Example: The Farm Laws (2020) and the Repealing of Article 370 (2019) were initially introduced through ordinances before parliamentary debate.