Home
Publications
Search
Register
Log inIs Prime Minister's role severely limited by the Constitution?
Page 1 of 1
Is Prime Minister's role severely limited by the Constitution?
by confuzzled dude Wed Jul 02, 2014 6:16 pm
Crucially, moreover, the Prime Minister's role is severely limited by the Constitution, as, indeed, is the centre's, and there are sharp boundaries to what a purported 'strong man' can achieve, irrespective of integrity or intent. Indeed, if we look back through history, India's Prime Ministers, despite tremendous variations in style and personality, have left little positive and permanent imprint on the nation. The strongest of these by all assessments was Indira Gandhi, and she left enveloping institutional disintegration in her wake, even as she failed to address the fundamental dystrophies of the state and nation.
A dynamic and consensual leader (most would concede that the latter attribute is one that Modi does not appear to possess) can exercise greater influence, but this is not the same as securing obedience. A Prime Minister today, has extremely limited room for manoeuvre. Some state satraps may not cooperate. Unlike a state government, where a Chief Minister has tremendous powers of direct intervention, the union government must rely for the success of an overwhelming proportion of its plans and programmes— especially in the internal security sphere— on their willing and efficient implementation by the states. Unfortunately, even where willingness may be attainable, efficiency, most often, is not. Worse, in a polarized polity, states have often, in the past, done everything in their power to disrupt and subvert central schemes and programmes, and this remains a possibility under the current dispensation. Modi, however, has a distinct advantage over past regimes in his Parliamentary majority, as well as in the number of 'friendly' state governments in the present setup— a number that is likely to augment significantly during his tenure, if his performance meets even minimal expectations of the public.
http://www.outlookindia.com/article/The-Burden-Of-Expectations/291265
A dynamic and consensual leader (most would concede that the latter attribute is one that Modi does not appear to possess) can exercise greater influence, but this is not the same as securing obedience. A Prime Minister today, has extremely limited room for manoeuvre. Some state satraps may not cooperate. Unlike a state government, where a Chief Minister has tremendous powers of direct intervention, the union government must rely for the success of an overwhelming proportion of its plans and programmes— especially in the internal security sphere— on their willing and efficient implementation by the states. Unfortunately, even where willingness may be attainable, efficiency, most often, is not. Worse, in a polarized polity, states have often, in the past, done everything in their power to disrupt and subvert central schemes and programmes, and this remains a possibility under the current dispensation. Modi, however, has a distinct advantage over past regimes in his Parliamentary majority, as well as in the number of 'friendly' state governments in the present setup— a number that is likely to augment significantly during his tenure, if his performance meets even minimal expectations of the public.
http://www.outlookindia.com/article/The-Burden-Of-Expectations/291265
confuzzled dude- Posts : 10205
Join date : 2011-05-08
Similar topics» Hmm! No obit for the limited taxation champion?
» Is the US severely lacking in skilled blue-collar labor?
» Dalit woman severely beaten by Hindoos after her shadow falls on Yadava muscleman
» Living your life with limited budget after 50...
» Sehwag likely to miss limited-overs leg
» Is the US severely lacking in skilled blue-collar labor?
» Dalit woman severely beaten by Hindoos after her shadow falls on Yadava muscleman
» Living your life with limited budget after 50...
» Sehwag likely to miss limited-overs leg
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum