LEGISLATIVE, EXECUTIVE AND JUDICIAL CONTROL OVER ADMINISTRATION
The need for effective control over administration is, thus, obvious. Public opinion, professional standards and ethics, and the nature of the Society-all influence administration in varying ways and capacities and exercise control over it. A study of this problem may, however, be made here under the following major heads:
Legislative Control.
Executive Control.
Judicial Control.
Legislative Control
In India, the tools of legislative control are: Questions, Resolutions, Zero hour Discussion, Adjournment Motions, Votes of Censure, Budgets and Parliamentary Committees, Public Accounts Committee, Estimates Committee, Committees on Public Undertakings, Committee on Subordinate Legislation and the Committee on Assurances. Thus, the opportunity for exercising control over administration assumes several forms, which may briefly be discussed below:
President’s Speech: Every new session of Parliament opens with a speech from the President. The President’s speech broadly spells out the major policies and activities with which the executive would be preoccupied in the period immediately ahead. Normally, four days are set aside for general discussion on it. The members of Parliament have, during this period, an opportunity to criticize the entire realm of administration for its alleged acts of omission as well as commission. It is, however, well to bear in mind that the speeches are made on this occasion as well as on others with a view to swaying the public opinion outside the Parliament, not to influencing the honourable members, who rigidly follow, or are obliged to follow, party lines in utterances and voting.
Budget Discussion: Since the introduction of the ‘Budget on Account’, Parliament now has greater opportunity of discussion on the budget proposals. The members of Parliament (by this we mean members of the Lok Sabha) have the following opportunities of criticizing the administration
After the presentation of the budget, general discussion takes place. At this occasion the discussion relates to the budget as a whole or any question of principle involved therein.
Voting on grants provides the second opportunity. Discussion at this stage is confined to each head of the Demand, and if cut motions are moved, to the specific points raised therein. The discussion is sufficiently pointed and may be focussed on specific points.
Discussion on the Finance Bill provides a boundless opportunity to discuss the entire administration.
Question Hour: The first hour of every parliamentary day is reserved for questions, which provide an effective form of control. On an Average some thirty questions are orally asked, and answered daily. The privilege of asking questions keeps the entire administration on its toes. A question is an effective device of focussing public attention, in a striking manner, on different aspects of administration’s policies and activities. A question is generally followed by supplementary questions, which provided a sort of crossexamination of the Minister, and do often catch off his balance.
‘Zero Hour’ Discussion: ‘Zero Hour’, India’s innovation in the field of parliamentary practices, has emerged, since 1962, as a powerful tool of control over the executive, though it is not a formally prescribed device available to the Members of Parliament. It is in a way extraregular and is so called because it is invoked in the House immediately after the question hour but before the items on the order paper of the House (that is, the agenda for the day) are taken up for discussion and disposal. As the Parliament meets at 11.00 a.m. and the question hour is over at 12.00, the latter is the ‘Zero Hour’. It is at this hour that the Members of Parliament can raise, subject to the permission of the Presiding officer, matters which in their eyes are of public importance -even if not listed in the day’s order paper.
Adjournment Debates: The device of Adjournment Motion is a tool of day-to-day control, and may be utilized for raising a discussion in the House on any specific question of urgent nature and of public importance. If allowed by the presiding officer, an immediate debate takes place on the matter raised, thus suspending the normal business of the House.
Adjournment debate is to be distinguished from the two hours’ debate which may ensue on a matter of urgent public importance. The former is characterized by voting after the debate is over: in the latter there is simply a discussion and no voting.
No-Confidence Motion: Provision for ‘no-confidence’ motion also called Censure Motion, exists in the Constitution itself. A censure motion provides an occasion when the entire policy of the Government, or a part of it, comes under fire. An adverse vote on this occasion leads to the resignation of the Government. This provision, however, remained practically a dead letter until 1962. For the first time in Indian parliamentary history, a ‘no-confidence’ motion was discussed and defeated in the Lok Sabha in its monsoon session, 1963. And its frequency has increased in the post-Nehru era.
Debates on Legislation: The various readings of a bill provide opportunities to the Members of Parliament to criticize the entire policy underlying the bill. The criticism may even make the Government change its mind. The Government, for instance, withdrew the highly controversial Hindu Code Bill in 1951. Again in 1968, the Government rescinded its earlier decision to change the name of the Benaras Hindu University.
Parliamentary Committees: Parliamentary committees, Public Accounts Committee, Estimates Committee, Committee on Public Undertakings, Committee on Subordinate Legislation and Committee on Assurances—are also tools of controls over administration.
Audit: Parliament exercises Control Over Public Expenditure through the Comptroller and Auditor-General, who audits (and in practice, maintained till 1976, when accounts were separated from audit) all Government accounts to ensure that the Money granted by Parliament has not been exceeded without a supplementary vote, and that the money expended conforms to rules. The accountability of Government to Parliament in the field of financial administration is, thus, secured through the reports of the Comptroller and Auditor- General, who has rightly been described as ‘the guide, philosopher and friend’ of the Public Accounts Committee.
,
Legislative accountability is the principle that elected officials are responsible to the people they represent. This means that they must be transparent in their decision-making, responsive to the needs of their constituents, and effective in carrying out their duties.
There are a number of ways in which legislative accountability can be achieved. One way is through legislative oversight. This involves the legislature monitoring the activities of the executive branch to ensure that it is acting in accordance with the law. Another way to achieve legislative accountability is through legislative ethics. This involves setting high standards of conduct for elected officials and ensuring that they are held accountable for any violations of those standards.
Legislative transparency is also important for ensuring accountability. This means that the legislature should make its deliberations and decisions public, so that the people can see what is happening and hold their elected officials to account. Legislative responsiveness is another important aspect of accountability. This means that the legislature should be responsive to the needs of its constituents and should take steps to address those needs.
Finally, legislative effectiveness is also important for ensuring accountability. This means that the legislature should be able to pass laws that are effective in addressing the problems that its constituents face.
There are a number of challenges to achieving legislative accountability. One challenge is that elected officials often have a conflict of interest. They may be more concerned with serving their own interests or the interests of special interest groups than with serving the interests of their constituents. Another challenge is that the legislature is often complex and difficult to understand. This can make it difficult for the public to hold their elected officials accountable.
Despite these challenges, it is important to strive for legislative accountability. This is essential for ensuring that the government is responsive to the needs of the people and that it is acting in the best interests of the country.
Here are some specific examples of how legislative accountability can be achieved:
Legislative oversight: The legislature can establish committees to oversee the activities of the executive branch. These committees can hold hearings, subpoena witnesses, and issue reports.
Legislative ethics: The legislature can adopt codes of ethics for its members and establish ethics committees to investigate allegations of misconduct.
Legislative transparency: The legislature can make its deliberations and decisions public. This can be done by televising committee hearings and floor debates, and by publishing transcripts of those proceedings.
Legislative responsiveness: The legislature can establish mechanisms for constituents to communicate with their elected officials. This can be done through phone calls, emails, letters, and town hall meetings.
Legislative effectiveness: The legislature can conduct performance reviews of its own operations and make changes to improve its effectiveness.
These are just a few examples of how legislative accountability can be achieved. There are many other ways to achieve this important goal. It is important for the legislature to be constantly working to improve its accountability to the people.
What is legislative accountability?
Legislative accountability is the process by which elected officials are held responsible for their actions. This can be done through a variety of means, including Elections, public opinion polls, and oversight by the media and other watchdog groups.
Why is legislative accountability important?
Legislative accountability is important because it helps to ensure that elected officials are responsive to the needs of their constituents. It also helps to prevent Corruption and abuse of power.
How can legislative accountability be improved?
There are a number of ways to improve legislative accountability. One way is to make it easier for citizens to participate in the political process. This can be done by making it easier to register to vote, by making it easier to vote, and by making it easier to contact elected officials. Another way to improve legislative accountability is to increase transparency in government. This can be done by requiring elected officials to disclose their financial information, by requiring them to meet in public, and by requiring them to keep records of their activities.
What are some examples of legislative accountability in action?
One example of legislative accountability in action is the Impeachment of President Bill Clinton. Clinton was impeached by the House of Representatives in 1998 for perjury and obstruction of Justice. He was acquitted by the Senate, but the impeachment process served as a check on his power and helped to ensure that he was held accountable for his actions.
Another example of legislative accountability in action is the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act was passed in response to the Enron scandal. The law increased oversight of public companies and their executives, and it made it easier for shareholders to hold them accountable.
What are some challenges to legislative accountability?
One challenge to legislative accountability is the power of special interests. Special interests are groups that have a vested interest in the outcome of legislation. They often have a lot of money and influence, and they can use this influence to sway elected officials to vote in their favor.
Another challenge to legislative accountability is the complexity of government. The government is a large and complex Bureaucracy, and it can be difficult for citizens to understand how it works. This can make it difficult for citizens to hold elected officials accountable for their actions.
What are some solutions to the challenges of legislative accountability?
One solution to the challenges of legislative accountability is to increase transparency in government. This can be done by requiring elected officials to disclose their financial information, by requiring them to meet in public, and by requiring them to keep records of their activities.
Another solution to the challenges of legislative accountability is to increase citizen participation in the political process. This can be done by making it easier for citizens to register to vote, by making it easier to vote, and by making it easier to contact elected officials.
Finally, it is important to remember that legislative accountability is a process, not an event. It takes time and effort to build a System of Government that is truly accountable to the people.
Sure, here are some multiple choice questions about the topics of legislative accountability, transparency, and oversight:
Which of the following is NOT a way that the legislative branch can hold the executive branch accountable? (A) Approving the executive branch’s budget (B) Confirming the executive branch’s appointments (C) Initiating impeachment proceedings (D) Overseeing the executive branch’s activities
Which of the following is NOT a way that the legislative branch can increase transparency? (A) Holding public hearings (B) Publishing reports (C) Releasing documents (D) Conducting investigations
Which of the following is NOT a way that the legislative branch can increase oversight? (A) Creating committees (B) Holding hearings (C) Issuing subpoenas (D) Approving legislation
Which of the following is the best example of legislative accountability? (A) The House of Representatives impeaching President Trump (B) The Senate confirming Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh (C) The House of Representatives passing the Affordable Care Act (D) The Senate investigating the Trump administration’s ties to Russia
Which of the following is the best example of legislative transparency? (A) The House of Representatives releasing the Mueller Report (B) The Senate holding a hearing on the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to The Supreme Court (C) The House of Representatives passing the Freedom of Information Act (D) The Senate investigating the Trump administration’s ties to Russia
Which of the following is the best example of legislative oversight? (A) The House of Representatives creating the Select Committee on Benghazi (B) The Senate holding a hearing on the nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court (C) The House of Representatives passing the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer protection Act (D) The Senate investigating the Trump administration’s ties to Russia