Indian Parliament and Theories of Justice: A Comprehensive Analysis
1. Composition of the Indian Parliament
The Parliament of India is the supreme legislative body of the Union. It consists of three parts: the President, the Lok Sabha (House of the People), and the Rajya Sabha (Council of States). This structure is provided under Article 79 of the Constitution. Though the President is not a member of either House, no bill can become law without his or her assent.
- Lok Sabha: Represents the people directly. Members are elected through universal adult franchise. It is the more powerful House, controlling the Council of Ministers and money bills.
- Rajya Sabha: Represents the states and union territories. It is a permanent House, not subject to dissolution, ensuring continuity.
Parliament performs functions such as law-making, controlling the executive, passing the budget, and amending the Constitution, reflecting democratic and federal principles.
2. Number of Members in Parliament
The strength of the Indian Parliament is fixed by the Constitution:
- Lok Sabha: Maximum of 552 members (530 from states, 20 from union territories). Currently, it has 543 elected members.
- Rajya Sabha: Maximum strength of 250 members (238 representing states/UTs, 12 nominated by the President from fields like literature, science, and art).
This structure balances democracy with federalism by providing both population-based and state-based representation.
3. Mode of Election of Members
Members of the Lok Sabha are elected directly by the people using the First Past the Post system. Elections are conducted by the Election Commission of India.
Members of the Rajya Sabha are elected indirectly by the elected members of State Legislative Assemblies through proportional representation by means of the single transferable vote. Additionally, 12 members are nominated by the President.
4. Role of the President in Parliament
The President is an integral part of Parliament. Key roles include:
- Granting or withholding assent to bills.
- Summoning and proroguing sessions and dissolving the Lok Sabha.
- Promulgating ordinances when Parliament is not in session.
- Addressing joint sittings and nominating members to the Rajya Sabha.
5. Marxist View of the Indian State
The Marxist perspective views the state as an instrument of class domination. It argues that despite democratic institutions, real power lies with the economically dominant classes (bourgeoisie). From this viewpoint, parliamentary democracy creates an illusion of equality while maintaining class exploitation, necessitating structural changes to address poverty and inequality.
6. Rawls’ Theory of Justice
John Rawls, in A Theory of Justice (1971), proposed “Justice as Fairness.” Key concepts include:
- Veil of Ignorance: Deciding rules without knowing one’s social status.
- Principle of Equal Liberty: Equal rights to basic liberties.
- Difference Principle: Inequalities are permitted only if they benefit the least advantaged.
7. Subaltern Perspective of Justice
This perspective focuses on marginalized groups like Dalits, tribal communities, and the poor. It argues that mainstream theories ignore the lived experiences of the oppressed. Subaltern justice emphasizes addressing structural inequalities, land rights, and caste oppression, advocating for the empowerment of marginalized voices in decision-making.
8. Feminist Theory of Justice
Feminist theory examines justice through the lens of gender equality. It challenges patriarchal structures and advocates for:
- Equal rights and pay.
- Protection from domestic violence and harassment.
- Recognition of unpaid care work.
It seeks a society free from gender-based discrimination and oppression.
9. Case Laws Related to Justice Theories
Landmark Indian judicial decisions reflect these theories:
- Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978): Reflects Rawlsian fairness in legal procedure.
- Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992): Supports the Difference Principle and subaltern empowerment.
- Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997): Reflects feminist justice in the workplace.
- Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018): Promotes individual liberty and dignity.