Open Access Research Article
POWER AND POSITION OF RAJYA SABHA AND THE U.S. SENATE: A COMPARATIVE STUDYBY - DEV DHAR DUBEY
Published Paper
Article Details
POWER AND POSITION OF RAJYA SABHA
AND THE U.S. SENATE: A COMPARATIVE STUDY
AUTHORED BY - DEV DHAR DUBEY
CHAPTER:
1 - INTRODUCTION
For nearly a decade, the Senate and the President of USA have
sparred over recess appointments, and the Supreme Court is prepared to weigh
in. The Court is asked in National Labour
Relations Board v. Noel Canning[1] to choose between two extremes: either the Senate can block all
presidential appointments by refusing to confirm nominees and refusing to go on
recess, or the Senate's advice and consent authority may be rendered null and
void because the President can appoint officers during virtually any Senate
break. This issue has been raised in an Essay published in Harvard Law Review by David
J. Arkush titled ‘The Senate and the Recess Appointments’[2].
This attracts the attention of the researcher to the question of
power and position which US Senate Exercise in contrast to Rajya Sabha. The
Senate of United States is considered to be most powerful upper house of the
world [3] on the other hand question as to need of having Rajya Sabha is
being debated as they don’t enjoy any substantial power. The question as to
unequal representation of states, issue of having non-resident as
representative of state in Rajya Sabha and role played by these members to
protect the state interests are some of the issue that has always been in
question and there has been constant demand of having equally represented and
powerful Rajya Sabha with powers equal to that of Lok Sabha.
Both the jurisdictions have adopted the bicameral system and are
federation. US congress just like India, have two chambers known as Senate and
House of Representative and collectively termed as US Congress. These two
houses in India is known differently and termed as ‘Rajya Sabha’ and ‘Lok
Sabha’. The method of election to these houses are different and unique.
Election to US Senate is direct in contrast to India, where it is indirect thus
making the member more like a party nominee rather the state Representative.
These two upper house also enjoys unequal powers and have different role to
play. This introductory chapter will further elaborate the problem,
significance of study, hypothesis, research methods and Chapterization.
1.1 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM:
Recently many of the appointment of the judges by the President of
USA has been withhold by the US Senate by withholding its assent and followed
by the US President exercising its veto to the names approved by the House.[4] This incident brings out to the notice the power and influence of
US Senate in their policies and legislation. These sort of power is in contrast
to power of Rajya Sabha in India, which hardly had substantial powers to
exercise. The issue of domicile as qualification for being representative from
the particular state and most debatable issue[5] on need for having equal representation of states in Rajya Sabha to
make the house more federal and more democratic. Further, the criticism about
the role of Rajya Sabha members and how they are in no way representative of
state and just become the Party Nominee with no mind of their own and with no
interest in protecting the states interest from which they are indirectly
elected. All these issue instigate the researcher to critically evaluate the
power and position of the Rajya Sabha with that of US Senate and addressing the
questions posed before the researcher in more comprehensive way.
1.2 SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY:
State stakes and say in all important issues affecting Centre-state
relations is the essence of federalism. The use of bicameralism to give states
due representation in the legislature and with an object to protect their
interest is found in almost every federal constitution. The present paper will
evaluate the power and position of the upper house of the United States and
India by making a comparative study of these two jurisdictions. The study will
help us to appreciate the need for having due representation of the state in
parliament and to critically evaluate the role of an elected representative
from a different state in protecting their own state interests and thus making
federalism more meaningful and cooperative. On the contrary, the need to have
national interest over and above states’ interest in a few areas like national
security, integrity, unity, etc., also can’t be ignored. Analysis of these two
jurisdictions will help us to find out the shortcomings of the system and to
find out the other ways to ensure proper representation of the state, thus making
federalism more healthy and cooperative.
1.3 AIM & OBJECTIVES:
To evaluate the power and
position of the upper house of the United States and India by making a
comparative study of these two jurisdictions. The following are the objectives
of the research-
- To identify the similarities and differences between
these two systems by comparing their respective powers and functions to
perform.
- To study the composition pattern of the U.S. Senate and
Rajya Sabha and its impact on federalism.
- To evaluate the independence and role of members
representing the state in the Senate and Rajya Sabha.
1.4 HYPOTHESIS:
“U.S. Senate enjoys more power and freedom in comparison with Indian
Council of State, i.e., Rajya Sabha and interests of the state are relatively
more protected by Senators of U.S. than that of the member of Rajya Sabha in
India.”
1.5 RESEARCH QUESTIONS:
- Whether the India Upper house enjoys the same powers and
has to perform the same function as the U.S. Senate? Whether state
interests are duly protected by these members or not?
- Does the unequal representation of states in Rajya Sabha
make states more vulnerable to the parliament or equal representation, as
that in the U.S, resulting in the unequal and unjust representation of
public opinion?
1.6 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:
This research uses secondary
data collected from peer-reviewed of journals, articles, books, and national
and international reports, including that of NGOs. Also, reference has been
made to some Grey literature, including those published in news and print media.
The acceptability of a thesis depends on using sources for its observations,
assertions, and conclusions. According to Creswell[6],
a qualitative research design is appropriate for a study that draws primarily
upon the research of others through a review of published literature.
This research contributes to the academic literature on the power
and position of the upper house in India and the United States by comparing
these two jurisdictions. Both being a federal state and having a parliament
consisting of two houses make this study more relevant, especially when both
have a unique way of including the state’s say in the parliament. The U.S.
relies on equal representation by allowing two representatives from each state,
while India has the representation of states based on the population. This
paper will focus more on the power, function, and role of these two bodies and
how they have an important role to play in any federal form of governance. The
researcher will analyze the effectiveness of these two houses in securing the
interest of states and how far members therein are true representatives of
states.
1.7
OUTLINE OF PAPER:
- Introduction: It introduces the topic and
mentions hypothesis, research question, aim and objective, methodology and
chapterization etc.
- Evolution of Bicameral
Federalism: It
deals with the meaning, history and evolution of Bicameral Federalism in
India and the United States.
- Rajya Sabha: A silent observer- It deals with all about the
Rajya Sabha including History, powers, special powers, functions and
limitations on power etc.
- U.S. Senate: Power and Position- It deals with the power,
function and role of the US senate.
- Comparing U.S. Senate with Rajya
Sabha: It
compare the power and function of US Senate and the Rajya Sabha.
- Federalism and Extra
constitutional factors: It deals with issue like domicile requirement, equal
representation of states etc.
- Rajya Sabha Members: Party Nominee or
State representatives: It discusses about the role
played by Rajya Sabha members comparing with US Senators. It evaluates the
question that these members are Party nominee or State Representatives.
- Analysis and Conclusion.
CHAPTER: 2
EVOLUTION OF BICAMERAL FEDERALISM
2.1 BICAMERALISM: ORIGIN, MEANING, AND SIGNIFICANCE
2.1.1 Meaning: The term bicameral comes from the
Latin words "bi" (meaning two) and "camera" (meaning
chamber)[7].
A bicameral legislature is one in which two legislatures share legislative
power. Around 80 countries have bicameral legislatures. Bicameralism is very
common in federal, large, and presidential governments, whereas unicameralism
is more common in unitary, small, and parliamentary states. The British
Parliament, which is divided into two chambers, has served as a model for other
parliamentary systems around the world. A bicameral system differs from a
unicameral system in which all members of the legislature discuss and vote
together.
2.1.2 Origin: The bicameral system evolved in
mediaeval Europe. Because of the strong class differences between the
aristocracy, clergy, and commoners, these groups of representatives were tasked
with advising the monarch on topics pertaining to and representing the
interests of their different social spheres.[8]
In England, these groups eventually evolved into the Houses of Lords and Commons.
In the current United Kingdom, the House of Lords is still considered a more
elite organisation, whilst the House of Commons represents a larger, more
common class.
2.1.3 Significance: There are practical as well as
historical reasons for having two houses of the legislature. A practical
rationale for a bicameral system is to serve as part of a larger system of
checks and balances that balance the authority of various sectors of a
government or society. Bicameralism helps prevent the legislature from having
too much power by dividing power within the legislative branch—a form of
intra-branch check. Bicameralism has historically served to balance the power
of different socioeconomic classes or groups within a society inside the
legislative body.
2.2 HISTORY OF BICAMERALISM IN THE UNITED STATES
2.2.1 Brief History: In the United States, the
bicameral system consists of the House of Representatives & the Senate,
which are known collectively as the United States Congress. Both houses are
established in Article 1, Section 1 of the United States Constitution. The
founders of America could not agree during the Constitutional Convention on
whether every state should have the same number of members or whether the
number of representatives should be decided by population size. The founders
elected to include both aspects in the Great
Compromise[9]:
the bicameral government was established.
2.2.2 Objective/Reasons:
The two chambers of the US parliament, like the two houses of the English
Parliament, were created to represent diverse interests within the nation. The
Senate was created to serve the interests of the states, but the House of
Representatives was created to be elected by and represent the general public.
The powers assigned to each house by the Constitution reflect this, with the
Senate being given a more deliberative, advisory, and supervisory role, while
the House of Representatives was granted main responsibility over their
constituents' revenue.
2.3 INDIA'S BICAMERALISM HISTORY
2.3.1 Pre Independence:
Bicameralism was first used in India in 1919. The Government of India Act of
1919 envisions two houses of the Indian legislature, the House of Assembly and
the Council of State, as well as the governor-general. The council was given a
five-year term. The Government Act of 1935 established the Council of State as
a permanent organisation, making its dissolution inconceivable. Each member of
the Council of State must serve for nine years, with one-third of the members
retiring every three years. The Second Chamber was established by the Indian
Government Act of 1919 and continued in operation until 1947.[10]
2.3.2 Constitutional Debates:
Due to the widespread communal violence that had followed the subcontinent's
partition when the Constitution was being written, as well as the difficulties
the transitional government was having in convincing the numerous princely
states to join the Union, the goal of constructing a strong Union became even
more pressing. Given these circumstances, it was determined that the Union
Parliament needed to be expanded to include a second chamber to adequately
satisfy the diverse interests of the component organisations under the new
federal framework. Bicameralism was thus implemented in Independent India as
well. The Indian constitution establishes bicameralism with Rajya Sabha (an
upper house) and Lok Sabha (a lower chamber).
CHAPTER: 3
RAJYA SABHA: A SILENT OBSERVER
3.1 HISTORICAL BACKDROP OF
RAJYA SABHA
3.1.1 Origin of the term- Rajya Sabha:
The Indian Parliament is comprised of the President and the two Houses referred
to in the Constitution as the 'Council of States & 'The House of the
People. They are more commonly known as the Rajya Sabha and the Lok Sabha. On
August 23, 1954, Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, Chairman of the Council of
States, made an announcement in the Council about the acceptance of the name of
the Council of States as the 'Rajya Sabha. Previously, on May 14, 1954, the
Speaker of the Lok Sabha, Shri G.V.Mavalankar that the House of the People will
be renamed 'Lok Sabha.[11]
3.1.2 Constitutional Debates
and Journey towards Rajya Sabha: The second Chamber can be traced back to
the Montague-Chelmsford Report. The GOI Act of 1919 provided for the 'Council
of State' as a second house with a very limited franchise, which was
established in 1921. The Governor-General presided over the Council of State as
an ex-officio member. The composition of the Government of India Act of 1935
rarely changed. [12]The
constituent Assembly held extensive deliberations on the necessity or otherwise
of the Second house. Finally, it was agreed that independent India would have a
bicameral legislature, mostly because it was thought that a federal system was
the most viable form of governance for such a large country with enormous
diversity. It was intended as the federal and second chamber, with a limited
membership than the House of People.
3.2 CONSTITUTIONAL POSITION OF RAJYA SABHA:
The Constitutional position of the Rajya Sabha can determined by
evaluating its position in Indian Scenario from three different ways which are
as follows:
I.
Where Rajya Sabha power is equivalent to that of Lok Sabha.
II.
Where Rajya Sabha power is not equivalent to that of Lok Sabha.
III.
Where Rajya Sabha enjoys special powers.
In the
following areas, the Rajya Sabha has the same powers and status as the Lok
Sabha:
i.
Introduction and passage of
ordinary hills
ii.
Introduction and passage of
Constitutional amendment bills.
iii.
Financial bills concerning
Consolidated Fund of India expenditure be introduced and passed.
iv.
Election and impeachment of the
President.
v.
Election and removal of the
Vice President. Only the Rajya Sabha, however, has the power to
initiate the removal of the vice-president. He is removed as a result of a
resolution that was approved by the Lok Sabha with a simple majority after
being approved by the Rajya Sabha with an effective majority.
vi.
Advising the President to have
the Chief Justice, Supreme Court and high court judges, the chief election
commissioner, the comptroller, and the auditor general removed.
vii.
Approval of the President's
ordinances
viii.
The President must approve the
proclamation of all three types of emergencies.
ix.
Selection of ministers
including the Prime Minister. Under the Constitution, the ministers including
the Prime Minister can be members of either House. However, irrespective of
their membership, they are responsible only to the Lok Sabha.
x.
Widening of the jurisdiction of
the Indian Supreme Court and the UPSC.
3.2.2
WHERE RAJYA SABHA POWER IS NOT
EQUAL TO LOK SABHA
The Rajya
Sabha's powers and position are unequal to those of the Lok Sabha in the
following areas:[14]
i.
Only the Lok Sabha is the proper venue for presenting
a money bill.
ii.
The Rajya Sabha has no authority to amend or reject a
Money Bill. It should send the bill back to the Lok Sabha within fourteen days,
either with or without recommendations.
iii.
The Lok Sabha has the option of accepting or rejecting
all or any of the Rajya Sabha's recommendations. In all circumstances, the
money bill is considered to have been passed by both Houses.
iv.
A financial bill that does not contain only the
provisions of Article 110 may be introduced solely in the Lok Sabha and not in
the Rajya Sabha. However, in terms of passing, both Houses have equal
authority.
v.
The Speaker of the Lok Sabha has the final power to
decide that any bill is a Money Bill or not.
vi.
The Speaker of Lok Sabha chairs over the joint sitting
of both the Houses.
vii.
In a joint sitting, the Lok Sabha with the most
members wins, unless the combined strength of the ruling party in both Houses
is less than that of the opposition parties.
viii.
The Rajya Sabha can only debate the budget but not
vote on grant requests.
ix.
A resolution to end the national emergency can only be
passed by the Lok Sabha, not the Rajya Sabha.
x.
Rajya Sabha is not empowered to remove the ministers
by passing a no-confidence.
3.2.3
RAJYA SABHA SPECIAL
POWERS
3.2.3.1
Legislation on State List:
Rajya Sabha has its own distinctive features. As a federal chamber,
the Rajya Sabha has several distinct powers granted by the Constitution. All
legislative subjects/areas have been separated into three Lists: Union List,
State List, and Concurrent List. The Union List and the State List are mutually
exclusive. Under normal circumstances, the Parliament cannot legislate on an
issue put on the State List. However, if with a two-thirds majority of
members present and voting, Rajya Sabha approves a resolution stating that it
is "necessary or expedient in the national interest" for parliament
to enact a law on a matter specified in the State List on an issue[15]
stated in the resolution for the whole or any part of India's territory. Such a
resolution is valid for a maximum of one year, but it can be extended by one
more year at a time by passing another similar resolution.
3.2.3.2
Creation of All India Services:
Similarly, with a two-thirds majority of members present and voting,
Rajya Sabha can establish one or more All India Services to be shared by the
Centre and the States. [16]
3.2.3.3 Special Power during
Emergency[17]: The President is empowered to issue Proclamations in times of
national emergency, failure of the state's constitutional machinery, or
financial hardship. Each such proclamation must be approved by Parliament
within a specific time limit. However, in some cases, Rajya Sabha possesses
extraordinary capabilities in this regard. If a Proclamation is issued when Lok
Sabha is dissolved, or if Lok Sabha is dissolved within the time permitted for
its approval, the proclamation remains effective if it is passed by Rajya Sabha
within the time stipulated in the Constitution under Articles 352, 356, and 360
by a resolution.
3.3 RAJYA SABHA IN FINANCIAL MATTERS
3.3.1 Money Bills[18]:
A Money Bill can only be introduced in the Lok Sabha. After the
House has passed it, it is sent to Rajya Sabha for concurrence or
recommendation. The Rajya Sabha's authority over such a Bill is restricted.
Rajya Sabha is required to return such a Bill to Lok Sabha within fourteen days
of its receipt. If the Bill is not returned to the Lok Sabha within the
fourteen-day timeframe, it is presumed to be passed by both Lok Sabha and Rajya
Sabha at the conclusion of the period in the form in which Lok Sabha passed it.
The Rajya can only recommend but cannot amend a Money Bill, which the Lok Sabha
may either approve or reject it.
3.3.2 Financial Bills[19]:
Other than Money Bills, certain Financial Bills cannot be introduced
in Rajya Sabha. However, there are particular sorts of Financial Bills on which
the Rajya Sabha's powers are unrestricted. These Bills may be introduced in
either House, and the Rajya Sabha has the authority to reject or amend such
Financial Bills as it does any other ordinary Bill.
3.3.3 Demands for Grants[20]:
Though Rajya Sabha does not vote on Demands for Grants of Ministries/Departments,
which are strictly reserved for Lok Sabha, no funds can be withdrawn from the
Consolidated Fund unless the Appropriation Bill is ratified by both Houses.
Similarly, the Finance Bill is presented to Rajya Sabha. Furthermore, the Department-related
Parliamentary Standing Committees that evaluate the yearly Demands for Grants
of Ministries/Departments are joint committees comprised of members from the
Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha, each of which has ten members in these Committees.
CHAPTER: 4
U.S. SENATE: POWER AND POSITION
4.1 U.S. SENATE:
HISTORICAL BACKDROP
The Senate serves as the upper house of the US Congress, while the
House of Representatives serves as the lower chamber. They comprise the
national bicameral legislature of the United States. The framers of the United
States Constitution specified the organisation and powers of Congress in
Article I in 1787. They debated the concept of a two-house Congress. Virginia's
George Mason argued that, One house would be the "grand depository of the
democratic concept of governance.” To counteract popular influence in national
governance, Virginia's James Madison advocated a second house that would be
small, deliberative, and independent of the larger, more democratic house. This
evolved into the Senate. Since the Senate was established by the founders of
the United States Constitution, senators, scholars, journalists, and other
observers have attempted to explain its position in the federal system of
checks and balances.
4.2 CONSTITUTIONAL AND THE
U.S. SENATE:
Following
are the Constitutional Provisions under U.S. Constitution that deals with the
Senate and matters related therewith:
4.2.1 Establishment of Senate: Article 1, Section
1 of the U.S. Constitution declare that there shall be a Senate with all
legislative powers. It states that: “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested
in a Congress of the
United States, which shall
consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”[21]
4.2.2 Equal
Representation: Article 1, Section 3 declares
that “The Senate of the United States shall be
composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof,
for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote…….”[22]
Thus, the Senate is made up of senators who
each represent an entire state. Every state is represented by two senators who
serve staggered six-year terms. There are now 100 senators representing the 50
states.
4.2.3 Remuneration: Further Article
1, Section 6 states that, “The Senators and Representatives shall receive a
Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the
Treasury of the United States.”[23]
4.2.4 Qualifications of Senators: U.S. Constitution itself provides for
the qualifications of Senators by stating that, “No Person shall be a
Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine
Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an
Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.”[24]
4.2.5 Vice-President as President of Senate: The Senate is headed by the Vice-President as Constitution states “The
Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall
have no Vote unless they be equally divided.”[25]
4.2.6 Power of Impeachment: Article I,
section 3, clause 6 provides for impeachment of Senators by 2/3rd
majority. It states that, “The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all
Impeachments . . . And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of
two thirds of the Members present.” [26]
4.2.7 Nomination and Consent of Senate in certain cases: Constitution list out certain situations where consent of Senate is
mandatorily required. Article II, section 2, clause 2 states that, “The
President shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate,
shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the
supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States….”[27]
And Article II, section 2, clause 2 states further that, “He shall have
Powers, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties,
provided two thirds of the Senators present concur….”[28]
4.3 POWER OF U.S. SENATE:
U.S. Senate because of its longer terms, smaller size, and
state-wide constituency it is often regarded as a more deliberative and
respectable chamber than the House of Representatives. The Senate's influence
stems from more than simply its relatively restricted membership; the
Constitution also grants it certain powers. In addition to the extensive powers
provided jointly to both houses of Congress, the Constitution specifically
mentions the role of the upper chamber in Article I, Section 3[29].
4.3.1 Advisory and Consent
Powers: The Senate has several advisory and consent
powers that are unique to it. Treaties must be approved, and cabinet
secretaries, federal judges, flag officers, regulatory authorities,
ambassadors, other federal executive officials, and federal uniformed officers
must be confirmed. The President of the USA has the authority to negotiate
treaties and agreements with other countries, but they must be ratified by the
U.S. Senate by a two-thirds vote in order to become effective. This isn't the
only method the Senate checks the president's power.
4.3.2 Nomination: If no candidate receives a majority votes cast for vice president,
the Senate must select one of the top two electors. All presidential
appointments, including Cabinet members, judicial officers, and ambassadors,
must be approved by the Senate, which has the authority to summon any nominee
to testify.
4.3.3 Power related to War
and Investigation: The Senate also conducts
investigations on subjects of national importance. Special investigations have
been conducted into issues ranging from the Vietnam War to organized crime and
related cover-up. The Senate and House have equal authority in declaring war,
keeping military troops, levying taxes, borrowing money, minting currency,
regulating trade, and passing all laws "necessary and appropriate"
for the government's administration. The Senate, however, has sole jurisdiction
to advise and agree on treaties and presidential nominations.
4.3.4
Censure: Article I,
section 5, of the U.S. Constitution provides that "Each House of Congress
may determine the Rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly
behaviour, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds, expel a member."[30] Censure is a form of
discipline used by the Senate against its members (sometimes referred to as
condemnation or denouncement). A formal statement of disapproval, a censure
does not remove a senator from office. Since 1789 the Senate has censured nine
of its members.
4.3.5
Contested Senate Elections:
The United States Constitution gives each house of Congress the power to be the
judge of the “elections, returns, and qualifications of its own members”[31]. Since 1789 the Senate
has carefully guarded this prerogative and has developed its own procedures for
judging the qualifications of its members and settling contested elections.
4.3.6 Expulsion: Article I, section 5, of the U.S. Constitution provides that each house of Congress may "punish its members for disorderly behaviour, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds, expel a member."[32] Since 1789 the Senate has expelled only 15 members.
4.3.7
Filibuster and Cloture: The Senate has a long history of using the filibuster—a term dating back
to the 1850s in the United States—to delay debate or block legislation.
Unlimited debate remained in place in the Senate until 1917, when the Senate
adopted Rule 22 that allowed the Senate to end a debate with a two-thirds
majority vote—a procedure known as "cloture." In 1975 the Senate
reduced the number of votes required for cloture from two-thirds (67) to
three-fifths (60) of the 100-member Senate.[33]
4.3.8
Voting: The Senate takes
action on bills, resolutions, amendments, motions, nominations, and treaties by
voting. Senators vote in a variety of ways, including roll call votes, voice
votes, and unanimous consent.
4.3.9 Impeachment Powers: The Senate hears the cases of those impeached by the House. While
the House of Representatives has the authority to recommend impeachment of a
serving president, vice president, or other officials such as a judge for
"high crimes & misdemeanors," the Senate is the lone jury if
impeachment is brought to trial. The Senate can thereby remove an official from
office with a two-thirds majority. The House of Representatives has impeached
three presidents to date: Andrew Johnson, Bill Clinton, and Donald Trump. All
three have been acquitted by the U.S. Senate.
CHAPTER: 5
COMPARING U.S. SENATE WITH RAJYA SABHA
5.1 Overview of both the
Jurisdiction:
The Rajya Sabha in India and the Senate in the United States are
both Upper Houses of their respective legislatures. This implies that the
member nations are represented by both houses. In contrast, the lower chambers,
such as the Lok Sabha in India and the House of Representatives in the United
States, do not represent member states but rather constituencies. In USA, each
state is represented by two senators, each of whom represents the whole state
rather than a specific constituency but this is not the case with Rajya Sabha
in India, where the representative is indirectly elected and represents not the
entire state rather only a specific constituency within the State.
The United States of America is a classic example of a federation. A
federation is a group of "member states" that are largely
self-governing but fall under the jurisdiction of the central authority. Every
U.S. state has its own constitution and citizenship. In India, however,
federalism has a unitary leaning; therefore, distinct citizenship is not there,
separate constitutions do not exist, and state governments have little real
freedom. State governments, on the other hand, rely heavily on the central
government for resources, and party affiliations shape this Centre-state
relationship to a substantial extent.
5.2 Election Method: The Constitution originally mandates that the senators should be
chosen by the legislatures of the respective states but soon after realizing
the misuse of this law and a sort of “invisible government”, indirect election
was introduced by the 17th Amendment. Now, the Senators are chosen
directly by the residents of the states. As a result, they enjoy the people's
direct support and acceptance. In contrast, Members of the Rajya Sabha are
chosen indirectly. They are chosen by the legislatures of the several state
governments. They do not have direct people representation and they are
proportionally represented by the way of indirect election and nominations.
5.3 Composition: The Senate grants equal representation to all states, regardless
of size or population. This implies that both small and big states will have
two representatives. All states have an equal say in the legislative process.
The most populous state of New York has same representation as that of small
state of Nevada. This is in contrast to members of Rajya Sabha, whose
representation is determined by population. More populous states like Uttar
Pradesh have a stronger voice, and so majority rule is fairly prevalent. This
makes it simple for the dominant party to disregard opposition and minority'
interests. Every state does not stands on the same footings as many small
states have mere one seat in Rajya Sabha and state like Uttar Pradesh have
around 31 seats.
5.4 Powers: In many ways, the Senate is much more powerful than the House of
Representatives. For starters, the Senate has nearly total power over the
budget. Second, for treaties, the President requires Senate ratification. In
comparison, the Rajya Sabha has no jurisdiction over the Budget other than a
"delaying" ability. Failure to approve a measure has no beneficial
effect since the joint session method of settling a dispute between the
chambers benefits the Lok Sabha because it is led by the Lok Sabha's Speaker.
5.5 Representation: Each senator represents about half of the state with the other
half represented by another member. As a result, they enjoy higher voter
support. On the other hand, the Rajya Sabha represents a lower number (a set
number) and hence receives less voter support.
5.6 Compactness and Seats
Distribution: U.S. Senate is a small body of only
100 members. Each and every state sends two representatives each, irrespective
of population and size. In contrast, Rajya Sabha has 235 members and states are
not equally represented. The number of state representative vary according to
population of the state, thus number vary from one to thirty one. As the Senate
has just 100 members, talks and deliberations are simplified. Members are also
given extra time to talk. Due to large number of members in the Rajya Sabha
members may not have sufficient time to speak. Furthermore, more people
inevitably leads to more disorder.
5.7 Senate Versus Rajya
Sabha: Both houses are comparable in the sense that
they are "upper houses" that reflect governmental interests. However,
they are vastly different in terms of powers, functions, and the complex
consequences of the same. In general, the upper house has less power than the
lower house. This is because that a lower house is directly chosen by the
people. However, the United States is an "exception" to this rule.
The Senate is regarded as the "world's most powerful upper house." In
Contrast, the Rajya Sabha is a weak, redundant, and unnecessary body.
CHAPTER: 6
FEDERALISM AND EXTRA-CONSTITUTIONAL FACTORS
6.1 Representative ‘from State’ versus ‘of State’: Indian Context
6.1.1 Domicile as a Criteria:
The Rajya
Sabha was created with the intention of holding dignified debates on
significant subjects and sharing the knowledge of seasoned individuals who were
supposed to engage in the debate with a certain degree of learning. Federalism
is not territorial, hence residence should not be used to determine federal
structure. The Government of India Act of 1935[34]
included no mention of domicile. The Rajya Sabha, as a Second Chamber, differs
from the US Senate in that all states have equal representation. The
representation of states in Rajya Sabha is based on population, as specified in
the Fourth Schedule.
State
participation in the Rajya Sabha was never a criterion for the practise of
federalism in India. The fundamental aspect of federalism is the separation of
issues over which the states and the federal government can legislate. The
Seventh Schedule is used to accomplish this. The claim that a representative
who does not belong to a state cannot properly represent it is false.
Federalism was not jeopardised as long as states enjoyed the right to be
represented in the Rajya Sabha by their elected MPs.
6.1.2 Constitutional Debate:
In the debate over the purpose of Rajya Sabha, leaders such as Gopalaswamy Ayyangar and S. Radhakrishnan
saw it as a dignified, cooling, and revising chamber, whereas others such as K. T. Shah, Lakshminarayan Sahu, and Loknath
Mishra wanted to give each State equal representation in the House and have
the role of the Council of States. However, the Rajya Sabha was agreed to be
the conventional second house, with the emergence of the Council of States. The
major duty, according to the Sarkaria Commission, was "... that of a second house of Parliament
performing legislative powers, more or less in coordination with the Lok
Sabha."[35]
Even Rajya Sabha debates are
under the ambit of Union List. Except for legislating under Articles 249, 312 and
356(3), the Rajya Sabha's role is comparable to that of the Lok Sabha. Even
Articles 249 and 312 deal with matters of national interest and the
establishment of All India services, respectively. Article 356 also grants the
Rajya Sabha the authority to declare a state of emergency if the Lok Sabha is
dissolved within that time. Both of the earlier issues
do not affect any one state, but rather the country as a whole. Article 356
powers are only temporary since the proclamation must be recognised by the Lok
Sabha within 30 days of its formation. A non-resident representing a State,
like a Lok Sabha MP from the State, can discuss these issues and participate to
the legislative process. If, on the other hand, the domicile criterion was
preserved. Furthermore, due to political compulsions, members vote based on
their party affiliation rather than their state.
6.1.3 Nominated Members:
There is
a provision in the Rajya Sabha for twelve nominated members who have achieved
eminence in the areas of art, literature, science, and social services. This
provision was made to include diverse viewpoints and improve the quality of
legislation. As a result, the amendment demonstrates that the goal of the Rajya
Sabha was not to represent states, but to represent a broad range of
individuals.
6.1.4 Landmark Ruling:
Supreme Court in the landmark judgment of Kuldip Nayar v Union of India[36],
upheld the constitutional validity of Section 3[1] of the Representation of
People’s Act which was amended by the Parliament in 2003 and concluded that
simply calling second house as the "Council of States" is
insufficient to make residency a condition. A 'representative' is somebody who
the State's lawmakers believe is qualified to represent the State. The election
is what qualifies a person to be a "representative." If lawmakers
believe that a person with a connection to the state is a superior candidate,
they have the option of electing him instead of the non-resident candidate. By
admitting non-residents, no barrier is established for State citizens to run
for Rajya Sabha seats.
6.2 Unequal Representation
of States:
6.2.1 Position in India:
Unlike USA, Indian constitution provides for the unequal
representation of States in Rajya Sabha. The number of seats allotted to each
state is calculated as per their population and not represented equally.
Political Parties indirectly elect the members through proportional
representation system and thus it is mere reflection of stronghold of political
parties in various state legislative assemblies.
States like Uttar Pradesh has more than 31 seats of Rajya Sabha, on
the other hand, small states like north-eastern states have mere 1 seats.
Moreover, many Union Territories except Delhi, Jammu & Kashmir, and Puducherry are not represented in Rajya
Sabha. They lack any sort of representation directly or indirectly in Rajya
Sabha.
The explosion of populations in the Hindi
states have created a situation that could prove destabilizing for the Indian
Union. India has simply delayed the problem by freezing the
number of state seats in Parliament at the 1971 population.
6.2.2 Position in USA:
In Contrast, every state has equal representative in United States
Senate and two members are there irrespective of their size or population.
Every state is represented by two senators who serve staggered six-year terms.
There are now 100 senators representing the 50 states. This ensure due
representation of each and every state and respect each territorial units
integrity and limited sovereignty no matter how small or how large it is.[37]
6.3 GIVE IT EQUALITY WITH THE LOK SABH
6.3.1 Need for Equality:
The Rajya Sabha has fewer legislative powers than the Lok Sabha. It
cannot, for example, stymie a money bill and can be overruled by the device of
a joint sitting. This difference in powers is ostensibly similar to the United
Kingdom – except that the UK’s Upper House is an appointed body. The Rajya
Sabha, however, is elected by the state legislatures. This, it might be noted,
is the same manner in which the Indian Constituent Assembly – the body that
drafted the Indian Constitution – was elected. Giving the Rajya Sabha parity
with the Lok Sabha will ensure that the states have their say in the running of
the Parliament, allowing a crucial check and balance on the vast powers of the
Union government.
6.3.2 Comparison with the
USA:
A better analogy is the United States, where the equivalent of the
Indian Council of States, the Senate, is also elected. Earlier, before 17th
Amendment till 1913[38],
like Rajya Sabha MPs, senators in the US were elected by state legislatures but considering the pity
politics, corruption and ‘invisible government’ they are now directly elected.
The United States Senate has equal powers as the lower house (the House of
Representatives). Moreover, politically, being a senator carries far more prestige
than being a representative, given that the former represent an entire state.
6.4 JOINT SESSION:
6.4.1 Constitutional Provisions:
To break
the deadlock, the Indian Constitution calls for combined sittings of both
Houses. The President of India convenes a joint session of Parliament[39], which is
presided over by the Lok Sabha Speaker and, if he or she is unable to attend,
by the Deputy Speaker. If none of them are accessible, the Rajya Sabha Deputy
Chairman will preside. In the absence of any of the aforementioned posts, any
other members of Parliament may preside by majority approval of both Houses.
6.4.2 Joint Session and Federalism:
Joint
session under Article 108[40]
is something really tricky. Though it is enacted to end the deadlock, but the
way it ends the deadlock is itself problematic and against federalism. Till
date, it is used only thrice but the issue may arise in future when there is
great possibility of misuse of this provision, particularly when there is
majority government. Article 108 provides for joint sitting of both Lok Sabha
and Rajya Sabha and resolving of dispute by majority votes, where the Lok Sabha
has clear edge as it has almost double numbers of members than Rajya Sabha.
This will make it as a tool in the hand of government to escape the criticism
and dissent of Rajya Sabha. They can easily pass any legislation by using that
brutal majority and thus, putting the stake of states at risk. This provision
appears to be inconsistent with the Federalist principles and also affecting the
say of states in the legislative matters to some extent.
CHAPTER: 7
RAJYA SABHA MEMBERS:
TRUE VOICE OF STATE? OR JUST A PARTY NOMINEE?
7.1 Role of Rajya Sabha Members:
As the
Second Chamber, the Rajya Sabha serves as a revisionary house, evaluating bills
approved by the Lok Sabha and providing some continuity in the underlying
policies of laws passed by the parliament. In addition, Rajya Sabha formalizes
the federal principles of power-sharing between the Centre and the states. The
success of this plan, however, is dependent on the members of the house. If
every member of the house fulfils their commitments and duties to the state
they represent and to the people at large, the house can function effectively
and federalism can be strengthened. The following are some of the duties of
Rajya Sabha members:
7.1.1 Safety Valve of India’s Federal Policy: As
bicameralism is required for a federal constitution to provide representation
to the units of the federation, Rajya Sabha serves as a safety valve for
India's federal policy by serving as a critical component of the constitutional
checks and balances structure. The Council of States serves as a safety valve
inside the legislature, lowering federal tensions.
7.1.2 Review and Evaluation Role: The
fundamental goal of creating Rajya Sabha was to create a revisionary chamber to
keep a check on the fast legislation that the lower house could approve under
populist pressures, as Rajya Sabha can postpone the passage of bills.
7.1.3 As a Deliberative Body:
Parliament, in addition to being a legislative body, is a deliberative body
that permits members to debate issues of public importance. Thus, the Upper
House's purpose is to be a deliberative body in addition to balancing the
unpredictable nature of the Lok Sabha.
7.1.4 Representing the Vulnerable Sections: The Lok
Sabha does not effectively represent underrepresented groups of society based
on religion, gender, race, and linguistic minority. As a result, indirect
election to the Rajya Sabha would allow them to participate in the legislative
process of the country.
7.2 PARTY NOMINEE OR STATE REPRESENTATIVE?
7.2.1 Rajya Sabha Seat Distribution:
Rajya Sabha, the
Upper House of Parliament, has 250 seats in total. Twelve members are directly
nominated by the President of India, 229 are elected by states, and four are
elected by union territories. It means that 233 persons are elected while the
remaining candidates are nominated in the Rajya Sabha. The allocation of seats
determines which states send how many members to the Rajya Sabha based on
population.[41]
Members of the Rajya
Sabha, like any democratic post, are the people's representatives. They are,
however, not directly elected by the people, as are Lok Sabha elections, but by
their representatives.
7.2.2 Rajya Sabha Elections:
Any candidate filed by a political party must
be proposed by at least 10 members of the state assembly, or 10% of the party's
assembly strength. To win, a contender must receive more votes than a certain
number of incumbent MLAs. This is determined via an intricate formula involving
a single transferable vote, which allows the voter to select options depending
on desire. The voter can rank candidates 'X' and 'Y' in order of preference,
and so on. If the 'X' candidate is eliminated due to lesser number of votes
cast during the counting procedure, the voter's vote for 'X' can be transferred
to 'Y,' and so on. The vote is done using an open ballot mechanism. The
candidates are chosen as winners based on the preferences of voters, who do not
vote for the seats directly but rather rank the candidates in order of
preference.[42]
7.2.3 Party Nominee rather than State Representative:
After analyzing the
seat distribution and method of election by proportional representation, it is
quite clear that Rajya Sabha members are more like a party nominee because
their chance of being elected depends upon the number of seats the party had,
to which he/she is affiliated. If they belong to ruling party their probability
is high as they can easily manage to get more number of seats than any other
party. Use of whip ensures that there is no cross voting and party gets maximum
number of candidates elected. Thus, these candidates are more like a party
nominee and are truly loyal towards their political ideology.
The non-mandatory requirement of being domicile of the state is another
controversial issue. Political parties’ places its important candidates who
have lost in Lok Sabha elections for Rajya Sabha so that they can bring him/her
in Cabinet. In fact, some of the Prime Minister prefer to be from Rajya Sabha
instead of Lok Sabha as they fear losing the elections. All this tussle set
aside consideration of having a representative from that state who can raise
the local issues and secure the state interest. Most of the members are like
party representative and have less interest in securing the interest of the
state from where they are being elected.
Further, Rajya Sabha in today’s scenario became the parking area for the
aged politicians, disregarded and ones who have lost the Lok Sabha Elections
but important part of party by which he/she is being backed or politicians who
have changed the party by resigning from their seats. Moreover, some important
businessman, industrialist, reporters, media owners, actors, social workers,
jurist or lawyers having stronghold and large public support are being offered
Rajya Sabha seats for gaining votes and public support through them. Thus, we can
say that in true sense, Rajya Sabha is not state voice but an echo of the
political parties to which they are affiliated.
7.3
COMPARISION WITH US SENATE:
7.3.1 Based on Election and Domicile: U.S Senate is a small body of 100
members, two from each state irrespective of size and population of the state.
In this way all 50 states[43]
are equally represented by equal number of members in senate. These
representative unlike India is directly elected and is bound to be resident of
the state to which they represents. No
person from other states can contest for the post of Senators from state other
than to which he belongs, thus maintaining the necessity of required interest
in that that which he required to protect. He / She in true sense represents
the voice of state as he is attached to the place and moreover, direct election
made them more accountable towards the public.
7.3.1 Based on Party Affiliation and Nomination: Though they are also inclined towards
the political parties but such inclination does not mean that they are
political nominee as their election depends upon voters not on the whims and
fancies of the political parties. Also, there is no provision as to Nominated
members in the Senate as found in India. This ensure that federal principles are
being followed and no person other than state representative has the access to
the States Chamber.
CHAPTER: 8
ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION
8.1 CRITICAL ANALYSIS: AN OVERVIEW
8.1.1 Equal Representation: After
analyzing the power and position of both the houses i.e. Rajya Sabha and the
U.S. Senate, we can answer the research questions and conclude the discussion
by recommending some changes in the legal provision to make these two houses
more effective and federal. The need for having due representation of states in
the upper house of India is clearly made out by this paper. The unequal
representation of states in Rajya Sabha is one of the problem pointed out by
this paper which need to be addressed.
8.1.2 Role of Members and Domicile: Similarly,
the crucial role played by the members of the upper house is also important to
ensure efficacy and federal character of the house. The moment where these
members start acting like party nominee, the protection of state’s interest for
which they are being elected is being compromised. They can’t prioritize their
political interest over the state interest for which they are being elected.
They are bound to protect their respective state from each and every possible
harm that may be caused. They are there to protect the federal character of the
Nation and any action of the Union which is inconsistent or in violation of
federal principles must be opposed and disregarded by that state. Also, the paper points out how the provision mandating
for joint session can be misused by one house to render the other house
irrelevant and powerless and establish the dominance of one house over the
other.
8.1.3 Suggestions: Thus, paper try to
find out the solutions by recommending equal representation of states to ensure
that it does not become vulnerable to the uncontrolled powers of Parliament or
the Government and need for domicile as qualification for being Senator or
member of the upper chamber to ensure that state interest is secured by the
resident of that state who had some vested interested in the protection of
their own state. This is similar to having a provision for nationality /
citizenship for post of Executive or Head of Government.
8.2 ANSWERING THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS:
At the very
beginning of the paper the researcher drafted two research questions which need
to be answered. Now, after discussing in detail about the two houses we can
answer those two questions, which are as follows:
8.2.1
Research Question: 1-
Whether the India Upper house enjoys
the same powers and has to perform the same function as the U.S. Senate?
Whether state interests are duly protected by these members or not?
Answering to the first part of the
first question, it is clearly visible after comparing the power and position of
both the houses that Rajya Sabha in India does not enjoys the same power and
their function is similar to some extent but not one and the same. US Senate,
without any doubt is much more powerful than that of Rajya Sabha. Rajya Sabha
unlike US Senate has no control over finances which is something very critical
for running any government. Moreover, the provision for joint session subdue
one house to be subordinate of other and establishing the dominance of the
other house, where it can decide on its own whim and fancies and getting it
approved in one or the other way.
Furthermore, answering the second
part of the first question, that after considering the election methods,
politics involved, domicile requirement, and members acting like parties
nominee in India to secure a seat in Rajya Sabha and comparing all these with
the USA, researcher can conclude that state interest are not duly protected by
these members. These members are more like a political nominee not the elected
representative of state. They prioritize their political interest over the
state interest. Moreover, having no connection to the place, they find it
unnecessary to indulge in the problems of that state. They are not accountable
to public and depends solely on party’s fancies. Thus, making them more loyal
towards political parties than the state they are representing. Also, use of
this upper house as parking area for politicians make this idea of having
indirectly elected representative more questionable.
8.2.2
Research Question: 2-
Does the unequal representation of states
in Rajya Sabha make states more vulnerable to the parliament or equal
representation, as that in the U.S, resulting in the unequal and unjust
representation of public opinion?
Answering to the
second question, researcher after comparing the provisions can conclude that
the unequal representation of states in Rajya Sabha make states more vulnerable
to the parliament. Different state being represented differently is very
unjustified in federal country like ours, where every state no matter what is equally
important in one way or the other. It does not place all states on equal
footings and does not provide equal respect to every state. This sometimes
makes the states more vulnerable and subject of discrimination. Vote and Seat
politics force political parties to woo larger states by offering extra
benefits, funds and projects as against the smaller states with less number of
seats and voters. For example, In India, state like Uttar Pradesh which has
more than 31 seats is loaded with schemes and projects in comparison to any
northeastern states having one seat. Due to less in number, many states cannot
raise their voices and local issues as effectively as that of larger states.
Also, use of
joint session is one of the way by which the upper house is subordinated by the
lower house and thus enforcing the views of one house over the other, without
its proper consent. Thus, reducing the federal character to zero. Joint session
of two houses which are unequal in numbers and decision by majority is just
like mockery with the house having less in number. The same applies n Rajya
Sabha, which is dominated by Lok Sabha and Government in power. In contrast,
USA public opinion is not disregarded by having elected and equal members from
every states.
Thus, we can conclude
by saying that Unequal representation in Rajya Sabha makes state more
vulnerable to large powers of the parliament and Equal representation of state
in USA is in tune with federal and democratic principles, where every state has
equal voice. For representing public opinion there exist the other house. The
upper house is meant for state and it should be used accordingly. This will
uphold the federalist principles and make the federalism more cooperative and
friendly.
8.3
EVALUATING
THE HYPOTHESIS:
8.3.1 First Hypothesis: Researcher hypothesizes that “U.S. Senate enjoys more power and
freedom in comparison with Indian Council of State, i.e., Rajya Sabha and
interests of the state are relatively more protected by Senators of U.S. than
that of the member of Rajya Sabha in India.” Considering the whole discussion
and various constitutional and legal provisions related therewith and after
answering the research questions, researcher came to the conclusion that this
hypothesis stands valid. US Senate un-doubtfully enjoys more power and freedom
than the Rajya Sabha. US Senate has substantial power and control over
legislation and finances. They are having many additional power than that of
Rajya Sabha and there exist no provision for joint sitting which can affect its
power or downgrade its position. Exceptionally, it is the world most powerful
upper house. In contrast, Rajya Sabha exercises power equivalent to Lok Sabha
but in cases of Finances and Money Bills it has no control or substantial power
as such. Moreover, during joint sitting due to less members as such, it is
subordinated to Lok Sabha.
8.3.2 Second Hypothesis: Also, the second part of the hypothesis stands valid. The interests
of the state are relatively more protected by Senators of U.S. than that of the
member of Rajya Sabha in India because US Senator are directly elected and is
responsible to the citizens while Indian Rajya Sabha membership solely depends
upon the political parties fancies and support. Members are indirectly elected
by way of proportional representation. This means as much seats one political
party had, they can make way for that number of candidates to Rajya Sabha.
Thus, members are more loyal towards parties rather than the state.
Additionally, the non-requirement of domicile for being members of Rajya Sabha
from that state is also contributing to the problem as the outsider cannot
truly understand the need of the state and their interest to be protected. They
don’t find attached to the place and have no interest therein as they are not
even accountable for their inactiveness.
8.4
CONCLUSION
AND SUGGESTIONS:
Finally, the researcher can conclude the paper by reaffirming the
problem and possible solution. US Senate is much more powerful than Rajya Sabha
and is probably the world’s most powerful institution after UK Parliament.
Senators truly represents the state interest and are accountable to public thus
find themselves bound by the public opinion. Equal representation of the states
give state equal say in the legislation and decision and protect them against
the rule of majority and discrimination possible against small states. In
contrast, Rajya Sabha though have certain special powers but is not that
powerful as that of Senate and members thereof is not true representative of the
state and are more like the party nominee. They are indirectly elected and does
not reflect public opinion but only the party interest. Moreover, absence of
domicile and Rajya Sabha as parking area is the current issue that need to be
addressed. This can be done by providing for Equal representation to states,
making domicile as qualification for being member of the house, giving equal
power to Rajya Sabha as that of Lok Sabha and by doing away with the Joint
session where majority of Lok Sabha subdue the Rajya Sabha as mere approver.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
A. BOOKS REFERRED:
1.
V.N. Shukla, Constitution of
India
2.
D.D. Basu, Shorter Constitution
3.
M.P. Jain, Constitutional Law
of India.
4.
V. Bhagwan, World Constitution.
5.
H.M Seervai, Constitutional Law
of India
6.
M.P. Jain, Introduction to
Constitutional History of India
B. STATUTES REFERRED:
1.
Constitution of India-1950
2.
Constitution of the United
States of America-1789
3.
Representation of Peoples
Act-1950
C. EXTERNAL SOURCES REFERRED:
1.
Rajya Sabha.nic.in
2.
Senate.gov
3.
JSTOR
4.
EBC- E Reader
5.
Legal Service India
6.
The Hindu
7.
Lawctopus
8.
Investopedia
D. CASES REFERRED:
1.
Kuldip Nayar v Union of India
2. National Labour Relations Board v. Noel Canning
E. ARTICLES REFERRED:
1.
The Senate and the Recess
Appointments by David J. Arkush - Harvard Law Review
2.
Domicile Requirement in Rajya
Sabha vis-à-vis Federalism by Abhishek Mohanty
[1] National Labour Relations Board v. Noel Canning (D.C. Cir. 2013) 705 F.3d 490, cert.
granted, 133 S. Ct. 2861 (2013).
[2] David J. Arkush, ‘The Senate and
the Recess Appointments’ 127 Harv. L. Rev. F. 1 <The Senate and the Recess
Appointments - Harvard Law Review>
accessed 18 October 2022
[3] Nirmala,
‘Why and how is the US senate more powerful than the Rajya Sabha and the
British House of Lords?’ <Why and how is the US senate more
powerful than the Rajya Sabha and the British House of Lords?
(preservearticles.com)>
accessed 18 October 2022
[4] David J. Arkush, ‘The Senate and
the Recess Appointments’ 127 Harv. L. Rev. F. 1 <The Senate and the Recess
Appointments - Harvard Law Review>
accessed 18 October 2022
[5] Abhishek Mohanty, ‘Domicile
Requirement in Rajya Sabha vis-à-vis Federalism’ (February 5, 2015) < Domicile Requirement in Rajya Sabha
vis-à-vis Federalism - Academike (lawctopus.com)> accessed 18 October 2022
[6] J.W. Creswell,
‘Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among various approaches’
(2nd edn, Thousand Oaks, CA Sage (2007) )
[7] Online
Etymology Dictionary, Bicameral <bicameral
| Etymology, origin and meaning of bicameral by etymonline> accessed 18 October 2022
[8] Will Kenton, 'Bicameral System:
What It Is, How It Works, History in U.S.' (Investopedia,
21 September 2021)
accessed
1November 2022
[9] Robert Longley, 'The Great
Compromise of 1787' (ThoughtCo, 2 February 2022)
accessed 1 November 2022
[10] S. S. Nanda, Bicameralism in India (New Era Publications, 1st edn, 1988) <https://openlibrary.org/books/ol2168778m/bicameralism_in_india> accessed 1 November 2022
[11] Rajya Sabha, ‘Council of States’
<1657796269327.93_Council of
States(2) (1).pdf (rajyasabha.nic.in)>
accessed 1 November 2022
[16]
Ibid, Art 312
[35] Rajya Sabha, ‘Council of States’
<1657796269327.93_Council of
States(2) (1).pdf (rajyasabha.nic.in)>
accessed 1 November 2022
[41] Rajya Sabha, ‘Council of States’
<1657796269327.93_Council of
States(2) (1).pdf (rajyasabha.nic.in)>
accessed 1 November 2022
Article Information
POWER AND POSITION OF RAJYA SABHA AND THE U.S. SENATE: A COMPARATIVE STUDYBY - DEV DHAR DUBEY
Authors: DEV DHAR DUBEY
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2023/10/17
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.