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

Introduction

The Parliament of India, as the supreme legislative body, is entrusted with the responsibility of ensuring the accountability of the executive to uphold the principles of parliamentary democracy. Mechanisms such as question hour, motions, and parliamentary committees are designed to achieve this. However, the effectiveness of these mechanisms has been a subject of debate due to various structural and operational challenges.

Key Mechanisms of Parliamentary Accountability

1. Question Hour and Zero Hour

• Question Hour allows Members of Parliament (MPs) to seek information and explanations from the executive on policy decisions and governance issues.
  • Example: Questions on the handling of the COVID-19 pandemic exposed gaps in health infrastructure.
• Zero Hour provides MPs the opportunity to raise urgent matters without prior notice.
  • ★ However, frequent disruptions during these hours dilute their effectiveness.

2. Debates and Discussions

• Parliamentary debates on bills, budgets, and policies enable scrutiny of executive actions.
  • Example: Discussions on the Union Budget highlight fiscal priorities and shortcomings.
• ★ However, declining time spent on debates (e.g., only 14% of time spent on legislative business in the 17th Lok Sabha) undermines this mechanism.

3. Motions and Resolutions

• No-confidence motions and adjournment motions are tools to hold the government accountable.
  • Example: The 1979 no-confidence motion led to the fall of the Morarji Desai government.
• ★ However, the dominance of the ruling party often renders such motions ineffective.

4. Parliamentary Committees

• Committees like the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) and Estimates Committee ensure detailed scrutiny of executive actions.
  • Example: The PAC’s examination of the 2G spectrum allocation case highlighted irregularities.
• ★ However, lack of binding authority and delays in reports reduce their impact.

5. Budgetary Oversight

• Parliament approves the Annual Financial Statement, ensuring fiscal accountability.
  • Example: The CAG reports on public expenditure are discussed in Parliament.
• ★ However, the guillotine process often limits detailed scrutiny of budgetary allocations.

Challenges in Ensuring Accountability

1. Dominance of the Executive

• The anti-defection law (10th Schedule) curtails MPs’ independence, reducing meaningful debate and dissent.

2. Frequent Disruptions

• Disruptions during sessions lead to loss of productive time, as seen in the 2021 Monsoon Session, where only 22% of scheduled time was utilized.

3. Weakening of Committees

• Parliamentary committees lack enforcement powers, and their recommendations are often not binding on the executive.

4. Decline in Parliamentary Time

• Reduced number of sittings (e.g., 60-70 days annually compared to 120-140 days in the 1950s) limits the scope for effective oversight.

5. Opaque Decision-Making

• Increasing use of ordinances bypasses parliamentary scrutiny. For instance, 76 ordinances were promulgated between 2014 and 2022.

Way Forward

• Strengthening Parliamentary Committees: Granting them more powers and ensuring timely action on their recommendations.
• Increasing Parliamentary Sittings: Mandating a minimum number of sittings annually to ensure adequate time for scrutiny.
• Reforming Anti-Defection Law: Allowing MPs greater freedom to express dissent without fear of disqualification.
• Improving Transparency: Reducing the reliance on ordinances and ensuring all major decisions are debated in Parliament.
• Capacity Building for MPs: Providing research and training support to enhance their ability to scrutinize complex policies.

Conclusion

While the Parliament has robust mechanisms to ensure executive accountability, their effectiveness is often hindered by structural and operational challenges. Strengthening these mechanisms and fostering a culture of constructive debate can enhance the Parliament’s role as the guardian of democratic accountability, aligning with the spirit of Article 75(3), which mandates the collective responsibility of the Council of Ministers to the Lok Sabha.