Federalism in India compared with Federalism in USA
Origin of the idea of federalism in India was first traced in the Commission Simon, appointed “Indian Statutory Commission” in 1927. The Commission was intended to revise the Indian Constitution. In its 1930 report, the Commission recommended the development of India into a ‘federation of self-government units.’ India emerged as a federation that had been relieved of British Raj’s clutches. Several princely states, divided and governed, came together to form the Indian Union. The pre-independence Center and Provinces became a Union of countries with clear powers divided up into three lists-Union, States, and concurrent lists. The former princely states were replaced by the Indian Union, which later became the federal units. Several such states have joined India and have become full members of the Indian Union. When the Constitution of India entered into force, the component units were grouped into four categories of States. A gradual process was followed by the reorganization of the States, which continued until the end of 1969. Ambedkar said that because the Indian Federation was indissoluble it was a “Union” and no government was allowed to separate from it. The federation is a union because it is an indestructible strong center to secure the nation. In general terms, the ‘Confederation’ is the structure in which the Units dominate the Union; in the Unitary State, the Union dominates the Units. An alliance will be formed among independent states in a Confederation where units can divide. Power is derived from the Central Legislative Assembly in the United State.
The union is effectively dividing legislative authority, with each unit in its position being sovereign. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar used the word Union to make clear that States do not have the right to distinguish themselves from the Union. He said that the Union was a federation and called it a versatile federation to say that it was not as static as the American constitution was. The founding fathers of the Constitution felt a need for a strong core due to the existing social, economic, and political circumstances. At the Constituent Assembly, Ambedkar stated: “The Constitution for India is a federal Constitution insofar as it defines what may be referred to as a dual policy, consisting of a Union at the Core and States at the periphery each with the sovereign powers to be exercised in their respective areas of competence under the Constitution.” There are five essentials necessary to be called as federal and these are:
- The Constitution has to be written.
- It has to be rigid.
- It must be the supreme rule of the land;
- The separation or transfer of powers between the Union or the federal government and the different States or provinces may take place.
- An autonomous and impartial judiciary must be formed to interpret the Constitution and the Rules.
However, the term ‘federation’ has not been used consciously. In the case of Kesavananda Bharati vs. State of Kerala, the Supreme Court held that its basic feature was the federal character of the Constitution. In the case of the State of Rajasthan vs. Union of India, the Supreme Court held that the Constitution was an amphibian in the sense that it could travel either on a federal or a unitary plane. Where the action is taken under Article 356, the movement shall be on a unitary plane. Article 249 is a well-designed provision intended to ensure greater consistency in the operation of the union. States have the exclusive right to legislate on matters specified in the State List. Article 249 allows for a situation in which the national interest requires Parliament to be able to legislate on a matter in the State List only if the Council of States agrees, by a two-thirds majority, that it is appropriate in the national interest. In the case of State of Karnataka v. Union of India & Anr, Justice Untwalia said that the Indian constitution is strictly speaking not in a federal sense because it is possible to suggest that a separate, autonomous, sovereign state has joined to form a country such as in the United States of America or the role it has in some other countries of the world. It is for this reason that it was often defined as quasi-federal.
Both United States and India which are considered as the largest democratic countries in the world are based on federalism in their political structure. The US gained the status of Federal Republic State in the year1789; whereas India occupied the status of Socialist, Sovereign, Secular, and the Democratic Republic by enacting its Constitution in the year 1950. Thereby both countries had attained dominion status in which several smaller states got associated with a strong central government which is known as Federal Government in the US and Central Government in India. Thus, both states became Federal Republics.
During framing of the Constitution, the drafting committee headed by Dr.Ambedkar, borrowed many features from Constitutions of other countries including US which was adopted in the Indian context. Hence, both U.S and India, even though federal in character have certain similarities as well as differences between them.
| Holding together federation |
Coming together federation |
| When a large country chooses to divide its authority between the member states and the central government, federalism is regarded as holding together federalism. |
Independent states join together on their own to form a larger unit is known as Coming together federalism |
| In holding together federation, the central power always will maintain its dominance over constituent units which results in the lack of sovereignty often. |
In the Coming Together Federation, the central government and the state always seem to have equal powers. |
| Example: India, Spain, Belgium |
Examples – USA, Australia, Switzerland |
Similarities between the federalism of US and India
1) Written Constitution
The Constitution of both US and India is a written Constitution, which provides for a federal political structure where both the governments exercise their respective powers. The Constitutions of both the countries provide for amending the Constitution to meet the changing circumstances and the growing political, economic, social needs and demands political and economic needs and demands of their respective countries.
2) Bill of Rights and Fundamental Rights
The US Constitution has given its citizens fundamental rights such as the right to equality, freedom, right against exploitation, freedom of religion, cultural and educational rights, right to property, and the right to Constitutional remedies etc. by means of ‘The Bill of Rights’, Part III of the Indian Constitution guarantees the fundamental rights of the people as given in Articles 14 to 34.
3) Supremacy of the Federal or Union Government
In both the countries, the federal government works at the centre in which various states have acceded to. In the US, there are 50 states who have associated them to the federal government and in the Indian Union, as many as 29 states and 8 Union territories have accepted this form of government. Both in US and India, states which have accepted the Federal set up have no individual power to separate from the Central Government or the Union Government. While both the Central as well as State Government is empowered to makes laws on subjects given in the concurrent list, the law enacted by the Federal or Union Government will prevail over the law enacted by the states on the same subject in case of dispute. Thus, Federal or Union Government is supreme in the present federal structure.
4) Separation of powers
Both US and Indian Constitutions provides for separation of powers among three institutions namely executive, legislature and judiciary. Each division is empowered with a separate power. The executive governs the country, the legislature makes laws, and the judiciary ensures justice. President of US is the chief executive head of US, whereas the Union cabinet headed by the Prime Minister is the real chief executive body in India. Both US and India have a bicameral legislature. The upper and the lower houses of US legislature are called as the House of Senate and the House of Representatives respectively, and the Indian Parliament has Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha as its Lower and Upper house respectively.
5) Powers of Checks and Balances
Though there is a clear-cut separation of powers between executive, legislature and judiciary in both countries, still there can be overlapping of these powers. There are chances of abuse of power or arbitrariness. Thus, there is a need for a system of ‘checks and balances’ prevalent in both countries.
The President having chief executive power appoints the members of his ‘Kitchen Cabinet’ and he is the Supreme Commander-in-Chief of Army, Navy and the Air Force. He is empowered to appoint the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the US. He enters into treaties with other countries. However, his treaties must be approved by the House of Senate. Otherwise, the treaty will not come into force.
Similarly in India, it is the Prime Minister and his cabinet who exercise real power. They can be removed from power by a successful no-confidence motion passed by both houses of parliament. The policy decisions become laws only after obtaining the requisite majority of the parliament. However, the laws enacted by the parliament are subject to the judicial review of the Supreme Court of India.
Thus, the powers of checks and balances have been the efficient method both in the US and in India in protecting the democracy in both countries.
Differences between the federalism of US and India
While USA is a Dual Federation, India is a Cooperative Federation.
| Dual Federation (USA) – both the Centre and state are completely independent. They are complete governments |
Cooperative Federation (India) – Interdependence of Centre and state govt. Neither of them is independent of the other. Centre usually has the role of big brother. |
| Centrifugal federalism |
Centripetal federalism |
| Symmetrical federalism: All states are given equal representation in Senate |
Asymmetrical federalism:
1. States have been given representation in Rajya Sabha on the basis of their population.
2. Articles 370, 371 provide special provisions to few states. |
| USA is a Legislative federation. This means that States have dominance in law making. |
India is an Executive federation. This means that states are important at the executive level only. |
| USA is an indestructible union of indestructible states |
India is an indestructible union of destructible states. |
| USA constitution provides a role to states in ratifying the international treaties through the Senate. |
There is no such provision for states in the Indian Constitution. |
There are certain differences that exist between the federalism of US and India. These differences have been created by the architects of the Indian Constitution. The US federalism is very strong and more rigid as envisaged in their Constitution by its leaders. It is more federal than unitary in character. Whereas, India is more unitary than federal and we can even say that it is a quasi-federal state.
1) The Constitution of US is very rigid than the Indian Constitution
The Constitution of US is very precise and rigid running into only a few pages, whereas the Constitution of India is very bulky containing as many as XXII parts, 395 articles, and ten schedules. Since the US Constitution is very rigid, the provisions meant for amending the Constitution are also very rigid and more formal. The US Constitution has been amended only 27 times. Whereas, the Indian Constitution, which came into force in the year 1950, has so far been amended 94 times. Therefore, it is easy to amend the Indian
2) While the US has the Presidential form of Government, India has the Parliamentary form of Government
In the US, the President is the head of the state and so his government is popularly referred as the Presidential form of government. India, on the other hand, has a Parliamentary form of Government as the Prime Minister with his cabinet exercises real power with the President being only a nominal head. The President of US holds office for a period of four years while the Indian Prime Minister holds power for five years as long as his political party enjoys a majority in the Lok Sabha. While the US follows the bi-party system, India has a multi-party system and a complicated process of election.
4) Differences in the judicial system between US and India
US being a developed country have an advanced judicial system. The judicial system of India is however rapidly developing. A Judge in the US holds office as long as he is capable of performing his duties. Indian Constitution on the other hand states that a District judge holds his post till the age of 58, a High Court judge holds till the age of 62 and a Supreme court Judge retires at the age of 65.
5) Difference in citizenship
The Constitution of India recognises single citizenship. On the other hand, USA Constitution provides for a double citizenship that is a US citizen can have citizenship of two countries, USA and some other country.
6) Union and secession
As per Article 4 of Section 3 of the U.S Constitution, it is clear that, without agreement between the legislatures of the States concerned and the Congress, no new State shall be created or established beyond the competence of any other State. Thus, it can be inferred that no State will withdraw from the U.S. Constitution from the union.
Article 1 of The Constitution of India states that India is a Union of States. Article 2empowers Parliament to admit or form new States within the Union on such terms and conditions as it considers necessary. Further under Article 3, the Parliament may, by statute, create a new State by separating the territory from any State or by uniting two or more States or parts of States or by uniting any territory to any part of any State; by raising the area of any State; by reducing the area of any State; by altering the borders of any State; or by changing the name of any State.
The Parliament is therefore entitled to create new states, to modify current Member States’ regions, and to change the names of every current State. Therefore the Constitution provides for modifications to the geographical limits and does not protect the territorial integrity of the States. It is also possible to change names. According to Article 2, the terms and conditions for the admission of any region into the Union or for the creation of a new state must be defined by the Parliament. In so doing, it is not to seek rivalry between the State of which the proposal is likely to affect its territory, boundary, or name. All that Article 3 requires is for the President to send the Bill “to express his opinions” in such cases to the legislatures of the concerned States. If the opinions of the Member States are known, it is left to Parliament to vote on the proposed amendments.’ The Parliament can, therefore, without the competition of the State or States concerned, alter the boundaries of the State or increase or decrease its area or change its name. These clauses indicate that Parliament is of utmost importance in the matter of the Constitution of States.
7) Centre and state working
Article 1 Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution provides for 18 subjects to be legislated and limited by the middle. The majority of the authority is with the Nations. And the residual power is with the states. In India, exhaustive lists are drawn up which cover the different areas of the Center and the states. No question of residual power ever arose. But then, if there is no entry in any of the three lists, the Center shall have the authority to do so. Thus, the residual power is with the Center.
Summing up
The federalism structure of the United States and India is somewhat different, but both structures have performed effectively and preserved national independence with a different history and challenges. Federalism is like a rainbow, each colour is distinct, but they make a cohesive pattern together. A fluid balance between the center and the States must be preserved continuously by federalism. Ultimately, a community and a collection of principles and virtues such as honesty, compassion, and the spirit of cooperation must be established by the citizens and political process. It can also be inferred that certain federalist characteristics are common to both India and the United States. On the other hand, the federal character of India and the USA differ in many regions. But both the United States and the Indian federalism are very popular despite their limitations.
Next
previous
Latest News
EDITORIALS & ARTICLES
General Studies