Comparison of Indian Constitution PDF

Comparison of Indian Constitution with Other Constitutions MATHEW T THOMAS  India and Britain Parliamentarian system – Parliamentary supremacy vs constitutional supremacy Parliamentary sovereignty vs popular sovereignty – Court cann...

Comparison of Indian Constitution with Other Constitutions MATHEW T THOMAS  India and Britain Parliamentarian system – Parliamentary supremacy vs constitutional supremacy Parliamentary sovereignty vs popular sovereignty – Court cannot invalidate a law Monarch vs President – both ceremonial heads Written vs Unwritten constitution – rigid vs flexible Unitary vs Federal system with a unitary bias Procedure established by law vs due process – India has both – Britain does not have basic structure doctrine as well MATHEW T THOMAS  India and Britain India – an integrated judiciary - separate systems for England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland Judiciary as the final interpretor of Constitution – same Appointment of Judges – Judicial Appointment commission from 2005 onwards in Britain Independence of Judiciary – removal need the approval of Parliament writ petitions – same Rule of law Britain allows dual citizenship MATHEW T THOMAS  India and Britain Fundamental rights vs Human Rights act of 1998 - Constitution a product of human rights in Britain No DPSP or Fundamental duties Bicameral legislature Speaker in Britain resigns from political party – two terms for speaker P.M a member of Lower House The role of Cabinet and legal responsibility of ministers MATHEW T THOMAS  Indian and US Smallest vs largest Bill of rights vs F.Rs - political rights to citizens Federal vs Federal with unitary bias Rigid constitution – same but American constitution is more rigid – need 2/3rd majority in federal legislatures and 3/4th in state legislatures Republic and Presidential form of government MATHEW T THOMAS  Indian vs US Separate vs integrated judiciary Indian judiciary is more powerful Judicial review and due process – more extensive in US – but the scope of judicial activism is limited in US Emergency provisions as legislations – a constitutional provision in India Separation of state from religion vs Gandhian secularism No DPSP or F.Ds MATHEW T THOMAS  Discuss India as a secular state and compare with the secular principles of the US constitution. India – explicitly mentioned in Preamble US – implied through first amendment and as articles Strict separation from religion equal respect of all religions More focus on the freedom to practice State involve in religious matter for social religion justice Uniformity in civil laws Have different personal laws MATHEW T THOMAS  French constitution New constitution younger than India – adopted only in 1958 Incorporates the historic 'Declaration of Rights of Man and of the citizen' - India adopted the ideals in Preamble Concise constitution – preamble and 92 articles Main aim of constitution – ensure stability by creating a strong executive Semi – presidential system – elected by direct popular vote, and has significant powers, especially in foreign policy and national defense. MATHEW T THOMAS  French constitution Strict version of secularism - laïcité - public life remains free from religious influence – even religious symbols are generally banned in public institutions Judiciary – can review legislation before it is promulgated - adjudicate electoral disputes - separate judicial and administrative court systems. More rigid constitution than India - approval by both houses of Parliament followed by a national referendum, or alternatively, by a three-fifths majority in a joint session of Parliament Follows a unitary structure MATHEW T THOMAS  German constitution German Basic Law – adopted in 1949 Smaller than Indian – only 146 articles bicameral legislature at the Centre – Bundestag and Bundesrat Strong focus on fundamental rights – ensured by Federal court system Social rights are integrated into the constitution - state has a duty to ensure social justice, economic security, and equal opportunities for all citizens. MATHEW T THOMAS  German constitution Parliamentarian system – head of the government is Chancellor – President is a ceremonial head Independent and powerful judiciary Federal system and separate judicial system Secular state – but cooperative relationship with religious institutions Rigid constitution - Amendments require a two-thirds majority in both the Bundestag and the Bundesrat - Certain core principles cannot be amended under any circumstances MATHEW T THOMAS  Canadian constitution Has a colonial legacy like India – British North American Act of 1867 – Constitution Act, 1972 Federation but leaning towards Centre – less centralized than Indian Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982) - guarantees F.Rs Parliamentarian system - Governor General represents the British monarch as the ceremonial head of state MATHEW T THOMAS  Canadian constitution bicameral legislature Integrated judiciary Office of Governor – appointment from Centre Most amendments require the approval of both houses of Parliament and two- thirds of the provinces representing at least 50% of the population recognizes the rights of Indigenous peoples – recognizes the rights of SC/ST community MATHEW T THOMAS MATHEW T THOMAS