Which among the following is not the strength or chief benefit of

Which among the following is not the strength or chief benefit of Bicameralism?

[amp_mcq option1=”Second chambers check the first chambers and prevent majoritarian rule.” option2=”It checks the powers of the executive.” option3=”The second chambers can act as a constitutional safeguard.” option4=”It often acts as a check on democratic rule, particularly when their members are non-elected or indirectly elected.” correct=”option4″]

This question was previously asked in

UPSC CDS-2 – 2022

Download PDF Attempt Online

Bicameralism refers to a legislature with two chambers or houses. Strengths include providing a check on the lower house (preventing hasty or majoritarian legislation), allowing for representation of different interests (like states in a federal system), and potentially serving as a constitutional safeguard. Statement D, which suggests that non-elected or indirectly elected second chambers act as a check on *democratic rule*, is often seen as a *weakness* or *criticism* of bicameralism from a purely democratic perspective, as it can dilute accountability and the direct will of the electorate. The question asks what is *not* a strength or chief benefit.

Bicameralism aims to provide checks and balances within the legislature, offer diverse representation, and ensure careful consideration of laws. A second chamber whose members are not directly elected can be perceived as undemocratic, which is a potential drawback, not a benefit, in the context of democratic governance.

In federal systems, the second chamber often represents the constituent states (e.g., Rajya Sabha in India, Senate in the USA). The mode of election or selection to the second chamber varies significantly across countries.

More similar MCQ questions for Exam preparation:-