Compare the Indian parliamentary system with the UK model. How have constitutional conventions evolved differently in the two settings?
Kartavya Desk Staff
Topic: Comparison of the Indian constitutional scheme with that of other countries
Topic: Comparison of the Indian constitutional scheme with that of other countries
Q4. Compare the Indian parliamentary system with the UK model. How have constitutional conventions evolved differently in the two settings? (15 M)
Difficulty Level: Medium
Reference: InsightsIAS
Why the question: The Indian parliamentary system originated from the UK model, but both systems have diverged in their functioning and evolution of conventions, especially visible in contemporary governance practices. Key demand of the question: Compare the structural and functional aspects of the Indian and UK parliamentary systems, and examine how constitutional conventions have developed differently due to written vs. unwritten constitutional contexts. Structure of the Answer: Introduction: Briefly explain the shared Westminster heritage and the difference in foundational constitutional frameworks (written in India vs. unwritten in UK). Body: Comparison of parliamentary systems: Suggest one point each on constitutional basis, supremacy (parliament vs. constitution), executive responsibility, role of head of state, and representation structure. Evolution of constitutional conventions: Suggest one point each on judicial role, flexibility of conventions, role of Governor/Monarch, Speaker neutrality norms, and coalition governance. Conclusion: Summarise how historical context and constitutional philosophy shaped the distinct paths of convention evolution while retaining a common parliamentary core.
Why the question: The Indian parliamentary system originated from the UK model, but both systems have diverged in their functioning and evolution of conventions, especially visible in contemporary governance practices.
Key demand of the question: Compare the structural and functional aspects of the Indian and UK parliamentary systems, and examine how constitutional conventions have developed differently due to written vs. unwritten constitutional contexts.
Structure of the Answer:
Introduction: Briefly explain the shared Westminster heritage and the difference in foundational constitutional frameworks (written in India vs. unwritten in UK).
• Comparison of parliamentary systems: Suggest one point each on constitutional basis, supremacy (parliament vs. constitution), executive responsibility, role of head of state, and representation structure.
• Evolution of constitutional conventions: Suggest one point each on judicial role, flexibility of conventions, role of Governor/Monarch, Speaker neutrality norms, and coalition governance.
Conclusion: Summarise how historical context and constitutional philosophy shaped the distinct paths of convention evolution while retaining a common parliamentary core.