GS PAPER Polity, Governance and IR 2023 Question 4

Q4.  Compare and contrast the British and Indian approaches to Parliamentary sovereignty.10

British and Indian approaches to parliamentary sovereignty exhibit both similarities and differences.

Similarities:

• Legal Supremacy: Both Britain and India recognize the principle of parliamentary sovereignty, wherein the legislature is the supreme authority. Laws passed by the respective parliaments hold precedence over other sources of law.
• Bicameral System: Both countries have a bicameral legislature, with a lower and an upper house. In Britain, it's the House of Commons and the House of Lords; in India, the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha.

Differences:

• Constitution vs. Statute: India has a written constitution that outlines the powers and limitations of various branches of government, including Parliament. In contrast, Britain relies on statutes and conventions to define its constitutional framework, making it more flexible.
• Judicial Review: India's judiciary has the authority to review and strike down parliamentary laws if they violate the Constitution's provisions, creating a system of limited parliamentary sovereignty. In Britain, parliamentary sovereignty remains absolute, and courts cannot invalidate laws.
• Federal Structure: India is a federal nation with a distribution of powers between the central and state governments, whereas Britain is a unitary state, concentrating power at the national level.

In summary, while both countries uphold parliamentary sovereignty, India's approach is constrained by its written constitution and judicial review, whereas Britain's is more flexible and absolute due to its unwritten constitution.