International Politics

International politics is closely related to international relations, which is defined as the political relationship between foreign countries,study of the roles of sovereign states, inter-governmental organizations (IGO), international non-governmental organizations (INGO), non-governmental organizations (NGO), and multinational corporations (MNCs). IR explores how global, regional, and domestic factors influence relations between actors on the world stage.The study of international relations takes a wide range of theoretical approaches.Many theories of international relations are internally and externally contested, and few scholars believe only in one or another. In spite of this diversity, several major schools of thought are discernible, differentiated principally by the variables they emphasize — eg. military power, material interests, or ideological beliefs.

 International Relations - Theories : 

Realism

Realism is an international relations theory which states that world politics is driven by competitive self-interest.It emphasizes the role of the nation-state and makes a broad assumption that all nation-states are motivated by national interests, or, at best, national interests disguised as moral concerns.States are self-interested, power-seeking rational actors, who seek to maximize their security and chances of survival . Cooperation between states is a way to maximize each individual state's security (as opposed to more idealistic reasons). Similarly, any act of war must be based on self-interest, rather than on idealism. Many realists saw World War II as the vindication of their theory.

Realism is a tradition of international theory centered upon four propositions:

1.The international system is anarchic.

• There is no actor above states capable of regulating their interactions; states must arrive at relations with other states on their own, rather than it being dictated to them by some higher controlling entity.
• The international system exists in a state of constant antagonism .

2.States are the most important actors.

3.All states within the system are unitary, rational actors.

• States tend to pursue self-interest.
• Groups strive to attain as many resources as possible .

4.The primary concern of all states is survival.

• States build up military to survive, which may lead to a security dilemma.

In the domestic arena, the theory asserts that politicians do, or should, strive to maximize their power, whilst on the international stage, nation states are seen as the primary agents that maximize, or ought to maximize, their power. Most scholars and politicians during the Cold War viewed international relations through a realist lens. Neither the United States nor the Soviet Union trusted the other, and each sought allies to protect itself and increase its political and military influence abroad.

Realpolitik

Realpolitik is related to the philosophy of political realism, and both suggest working from the hypothesis that it is chiefly based on the pursuit, possession, and application of power. Realpolitik, however, is a prescriptive guideline limited to policy-making (like foreign policy), while realism is a descriptive paradigm, a wider theoretical and methodological framework, aimed at describing, explaining and, eventually, predicting events in the international relations domain.

Realpolitik -- "realistic", "practical", or "actual" politics -- is politics or diplomacy based primarily on power and on practical and material factors and considerations, rather than explicit ideological notions or moral or ethical premises. It is a system of politics based on a country's situation and its needs rather than on ideas about what is morally right and wrong.

In international politics it strives to be non-ideological, as in doing what is best for the national interest without getting hung up on unjustified diplomatic habits or popular sentiment.An example of Realpolitik would be the United States reaching out to China in the 1970s, despite protest that America should not associate with communists.

To its detractors, Realpolitik is sometimes seen as Machiavellian, based on "the ends justify the means," coercive, and amoral. To its proponents, Realpolitik is simply acknowledging reality and doing the best one can in international politics in light of obvious realities.

Liberalism

Liberalism is the theoretical perspective based on the assumption of the innate goodness of the individual and the value of political institutions in promoting social progress.According to liberalism individuals are basically good and capable of meaningful cooperation to promote positive change. Liberalism views states, nongovernmental organizations, and intergovernmental organizations as key actors in the international system. States have many interests and are not necessarily unitary and autonomous, although they remain sovereign.

Liberalism claims the following:

• The world is a harsh and dangerous place, but the consequences of using military power often outweigh the benefits. International cooperation is therefore in the interest of every state.
• Military power is not the only form of power. Economic and social power matter a great deal too.
• Exercising economic power has proven more effective than exercising military power.
• Different states often have different primary interests.
• International rules and organizations can help foster cooperation, trust, and prosperity. 

Example: Relations among the major Western powers fit a model of complex interdependence very well. The United States has significant disagreements with its European and Asian allies over trade and policy, but it is hard to imagine a circumstance in which the United States would use military power against any of these allies. Instead, the United States relies on economic pressure and incentives to achieve its policy aims.

More Info...

Liberalism resembles a family portrait of principles and institutions, recognizable by certain characteristics~such as individual freedom, political participation, private property, and equality of opportunity-that all liberal democratic societies,by definition, share to some degree. Political theorists identify liberalism with an essential principle: the importance of the freedom of the individual.Above all, this is a belief in the importance of moral freedom, of the right to be treated and a duty to treat others as ethical subjects and not as objects or means only.

The ideal version of liberalism is marked by a shared commitment to four essential institutions.First, citizens possess juridical equality and other fundamental civic rights such as freedom of religion and the press. Second, the effective sovereigns of the state are representative legislatures deriving their authority from the consent of the electorate and exercising their representative authority free from all restraint apart from the requirement that basic civic rights be preserved. Most pertinent, for the impact of liberalism on foreign affairs, the state is subject to neither the external authority of other states nor the internal authority of special prerogatives held, for example, by monarchs or military bureaucracies over foreign policy.Third, the economy rests on a recognition of the rights of private property, including the ownership of means of production. Property is justified by individual acquisition (e.g., by labor) or by social agreement or social utility. This excludes state socialism or state capitalism, but it need not exclude market socialism or various forms of the mixed economy.Fourth, economic decisions are predominantly shaped by the forces of supply and demand,domestically and internationally, and are free from strict control by bureaucracies.

Liberal internationalism consists, at its most fundamental level, in the attempt to promote the aforementioned principles and institutions across national borders and apply variations thereof to international relations.

Contemporary scholarship on liberalism and international relations looks back at three distinct traditions of liberalism, attributable to three groups of theorists: John Locke-the great founder of modern liberal individualism, who claimed that states have themselves rights derived from individual rights to life and liberty (political independence) and property (territorial integrity), thereby providing the liberal foundations of international law; Adam Smith, Baron de Montesquieu, and Joseph Schum peter-brilliant explicators of commercial liberalism and what they saw as its natural result, liberal pacifism; and finally, Immanuel Kant and Giuseppe Mazzini-liberal republicans who theorized an internationalism that institutes peace among fellow liberal republics.

Idealism

Idealism is a specific school of liberalism that stresses the need for states to pursue moral goals and to act ethically in the international arena. Idealists believe that behavior considered immoral on an interpersonal level is also immoral in foreign policy. Therefore, idealists argue that dishonesty, trickery, and violence should be shunned.

Neoliberal institutionalism (also called “neoliberalism” or “institutional liberalism”) emphasizes the importance of international institutions (Kant’s “federation of free states”) in maintaining peace. 

Plato's Five Stages of Government

Plato was a philosopher in Classical Greece. He wrote a book entitled The Republic in which he explains  his philosophy on subjects ranging from education to government. Plato constructed a model by which he proposed all governments evolve. He called it the Five Stages of Government.'The Republic' of Plato establishes a solid formation of the five types of government discovered by Socrates, Glaucon, and Adeimentus. In 'The Republic' there is detailed discussion of five different kinds of government (and, by analogy, five different kinds of person), ranked in order from best to worst:The five types begin with aristocracy, timocracy, oligarchy, democracy, and then ending with tyranny-anarchy. 

Aristocracy

In this form of government, the head of state is a king who is also a philosopher, a wise and just man who has a balanced soul and an experienced world view. This philosopher-king does not rule alone, but has three classes or categories of people below him, the ones that make up the remainder of his aristocratic state. The king is supported by the auxiliary class or the soldier class of people whose job it is to enforce law and order, and protect the state from military aggressors. The third class of people are the worker class, who have the right to produce goods and services and trade in them, own property and have the rights of citizens.

According to Plato, the aristocratic system of government is the highest form that man can attain as individuals living in a collective environment. Plato outlines the philosopher-king as a man who has been given the best education, his wisdom is tempered by worldly experience and he has a soul of gold, he rules by the virtue of his merit and ability and because he has transcended the bonds of petty politics. The second class of auxiliaries, or soldiers are also men of high learning and have souls of silver, while the working class have souls of iron, they work hard to provide for themselves and the nation. Plato is of the opinion that such aristocratic system works as a benevolent government, seeking out the traits of these different classes of people, and educating and training them in a way which is suitable for their future positions in life.

An aristocratic person is one whose rational, spirited, and appetitive souls work together properly. Such governments and people are the most genuine examples of true justice at the social and personal levels.

Timocracy

The second form of government described by Plato is the timocratic form, this is a notch below the high idealistic form of aristocracy and comes into existence chiefly due to the failure of the government to develop individuals who have souls of gold. This degeneration gives rise to a leader who has the ideals of an aristocrat but is also aware of the nature of power he has inherited. Plato theorizes that the Timocratic man is the son of the aristocratic philosopher king, having the education and learning of his father, but wanting to expand his power by way of war and conquest. It is a form of government in which ambition for honor, power and military glory motivates the rulers.

The ruling class and its auxiliaries in a timocracy are men of inferior nature, because they hold the values of honor and victory to be greater than the philosophical truths that govern life. The timocratic man will lead his armies in battle and conquer foreign lands, bringing back spoils of war to enrich his own empire. However, he is not by nature barbaric and respects his elders, the citizens of his country and takes measures to better their lives in whatever way he can.

A timocratic person is therefore someone who is more concerned with belligerently defending personal honor than with wisely choosing what is truly best.

Oligarchy

The oligarchic form of government is a further degeneration of the timocratic form. Here society is divided into two distinct classes, the rich and the poor. The rich have the reigns of administration in their hands and the poor are the ruled class. Although the aristocratic form of government as described by Plato expressly forbids the king from owning property (his needs are satisfied by the voluntary contributions of his people) the kings in a timocracy and oligarchy are allowed to do so. They accumulate wealth and spend it, often in excess, leading to a dependence on monetary policy and increase in the demand of wealth in the general population. The laws are therefore changed to enable only the ruling class to hold great wealth, thereby guaranteeing their supremacy over the worker class. This is how a timocracy turns into an oligarchy, where riches are concentrated in the hands of a few.

The rich men will consolidate power and wealth leaving the poor desperate for social emancipation, causing them to rebel against the oligarchs.
Also, the threat from foreign aggressors may be greater, as the governing class, due to their far lesser numbers will be unable to amass a huge army, they will be reluctant to arm the oppressed working class too, fearing a revolt.

By analogy, an oligarchic personality is someone whose every thought and action is devoted to the self-indulgent goal of amassing greater wealth.

Democracy

Plato relegates the democratic form of government near the bottom of his list. This is the further degeneration of oligarchy as the working class, pushed to the brink of poverty rebel against the oligarchs and establish a government based solely on the principle of freedom. Freedom is the only good worth having in a democracy and people do what they want, even breaking the law if they have the opportunity. According to Plato, this is akin to anarchy, where there are little if any laws governing men. The democratic man is therefore a free spirit, spending as he wills, running after his desires, and having no set goal or focus in life.

The parallel case of a democratic person is someone who is utterly controlled by desires, acknowledging no bounds of taste or virtue in the perpetual effort to achieve the momentary satisfaction that pleasure provides.

Tyranny

The last and the worst form of government is the tyrannical form, where all power is with one man, a leader who rises from the chaos of democracy, thirsting for power but not having the wisdom or learning to use it wisely. He will merely take advantage of the lawlessness to seize power and rule with an iron fist, often unjustly, and the populace will fear and loathe him but remain helpless. The tyrant will spend his time wasting the vast volume of his ill-gotten wealth, living under constant threat of assassination or rebellion.

A tyrranic person, then, must be one whose entire life is focussed upon the satisfaction of a single desire at the expense of everything else that truly matters. Governments and people of this last variety are most perfectly unjust, even though they may appear to be well-organized and effective.

Division of House

In parliamentary procedure, a division of the assembly (also division of the house or simply division) is a voting method in which the members of the assembly take a rising vote (stand up) or go to different parts of the chamber, literally dividing into groups indicating a vote in favour of or in opposition to a motion on the floor.

It is one of the forms in which the decision of the House is ascertained. Normally, when a motion is put to the House members for and against it indicate their opinion by saying "Aye" or "No" from their seats. The Chair goes by the voices and declares that the motion is either accepted or negatived by the House. If a member challenges the decision, the Chair orders that the lobbies be cleared. Then the division bell is rung and an entire network of bells installed in the various parts and rooms in Parliament House and Parliament House Annexe rings continuously for three and a half minutes. Members and Ministers rush to the Chamber from all sides. After the bell stops, all the doors to the Chamber are closed and nobody can enter or leave the Chamber till the division is over. Then the Chair puts the question for second time and declares whether in its opinion the "Ayes" or the "Noes", have it. If the opinion so declared is again challenged, the Chair asks the votes to be recorded by operating the Automatic Vote Recording Equipment. 

This was the method used to decide motions in the Roman Senate (and was occasionally used in democratic Athens).

Divisions

There are three methods of holding a Division:

(i) by operating the Automatic Vote Recorder,
(ii) by distributing ‘Ayes’ and ‘Noes’ slips in the House, and
(iii) by members going into the Lobbies.

However, the method of recording of votes in Lobbies has become obsolete ever since the installation of Automatic Vote Recording machine. This procedure has not been used for the last two decades.

A few days after the constitution of new Lok Sabha, seats in the House which are the same as the Division numbers are allotted to all members. It is imperative that members besides speaking from the seats allotted to them also record votes therefrom at a Division, which reflects the correct position in respect of the voting results arrived at.

More Info.

Click Here

Legislative Procedure in Rajya Sabha

Important Issues / Topics - Rajya Sabha TV

Food inflation: Contributing factors & Solution

Women's rights in India

Does India need smaller states

Has CBI become independent of the Government

Secularism and political scenario in India

Relevance of Gandhi in today's India

Defense achievements of India

Gandhi's Ahimsa and Satyagraha in the 21st century



The condition of Parliamentary Democracy in India

Whistleblowers

who is a whistleblower ?

A whistleblower (whistle-blower or whistle blower) is a person who exposes misconduct, alleged dishonest or illegal activity occurring in an organization. The alleged misconduct may be classified in many ways; for example, a violation of a law, rule, regulation and/or a direct threat to public interest, such as fraud, health and safety violations, and corruption. Whistleblowers may make their allegations internally (for example, to other people within the accused organization) or externally (to regulators, law enforcement agencies, to the media or to groups concerned with the issues).

Types of Whistleblowers :

• Internal whistleblowers – Report the misconduct or illegal behavior of a fellow employee or superior within a company
• External whistleblowers – Not directly involved in a company, but report their actions to entities such as the media, law enforcement, and watchdog agencies
• Current Whistleblower - One who blows the whistle while he/she is still a member of the organization
• Alumni Whistleblower - One who blows the whisle after leaving the organization
• Open Whistleblower - One who reveals his or her identiity and/or makes no attempt to hide identity
• Anonymous Whistleblower - One who keeps his/her identity a secret

Many whistleblowers, such as Erin Brockovitch, Sanjiv Chaturvedi (IFS) ,S.K. Lamba (exposed Adarsh scam), Satyendra Dubey(NHAI),Jeffrey Wigand,etc. are considered public heroes. 

Perception about the whisteblowers 

Whistleblowers are sometimes seen as selfless martyrs for public interest and organizational accountability; others view them as "traitors" or "defectors," solely pursuing personal glory and fame, or view their behavior as motivated by greed in qui tam cases.

The role of whistleblowing in the fight against corruption and risk involved

Corruption is a notoriously secretive activity and it is usually only those engagedin corrupt deals or those who work with them that are aware of it. Insiders are among the few people who are able to report cases of corruption (past or ongoing) and identify the risk of future wrongdoing. By helping to detect corruption cases, whistleblowers play a critical role in converting a vicious cycle of secrecy into a virtuous cycle .Major bribery and corruption scandals demonstrate the damage done by the failure to report wrongdoing as soon as it is discovered. Yet indifference, fear of reprisal, and misplaced loyalty as well as an overall culture of silence often deter potential witnesses and whistleblowers from speaking out.

“Whistleblowing” or “public interest disclosure” entails disclosure made in good faith that the information revealed is true, serves the interest of the public at large, and increases accountability within Government (and/or the private sector, depending on the legislation). Most countries vary on the types and scope of subject matter that are covered, with some countries clearly defining the scope and others, such as India, leaving it more vague. Coverage for protection also ranges from only Central Government employees, to both State and Central Government employees, to Government contractors and the private sector.

Whistleblowing is increasingly recognised as an important tool in the prevention and detection of corruption and other malpractice.By disclosing wrongdoing in an organisation, whistleblowers can avert harm, protect human rights, help to save lives and safeguard the rule of law. The clandestine nature of corrupt behaviour means that it may never come to light unless cases are reported by people who discover them in the course of their work. But reporting can come at a high price: whistleblowers often expose themselves to great personal risks in order to protect the public interest. As a result of speaking out, they may lose their jobs, dampen their career prospects, and even put their own lives at risk. 

Persecution of whistleblowers has become a serious issue in many parts of the world:

Employees in academia, business or government might become aware of serious risks to health and the environment, but internal policies might pose threats of retaliation to those who report these early warnings. Private company employees in particular might be at risk of being fired, demoted, denied raises and so on for bringing environmental risks to the attention of appropriate authorities. Government employees could be at a similar risk for bringing threats to health or the environment to public attention, although perhaps this is less likely.

Whistleblower protection

Whistleblower protection refers to laws and policies meant to protect anyone who exposes alleged wrongdoing. The wrongdoing might take the form of fraud, corruption or mismanagement.

While countries such as the USA and the UK had enacted laws to ensure whistleblower protection in the late 1980s and late 1990s (respectively), the early 2000s saw a surge in such legislation around the world, such as in South Africa (2000) and Japan (2004). At the same time, the Right to Information and anti-corruption movements gathered speed around the world. The United Nations’ Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) was also set up in 2005 and part of the Group of 20 (G20)’s Anti-Corruption Action Plan drafted in Seoul in 2010 specifically focused on whistleblower protection.

There are still several countries, however, including India and Russia, which have yet to enact such legislation. In India, for example, while the proposed Public Interest Disclosure and Protection to Persons Making the Disclosure Bill, 2010 (PID Bill, 2010), was passed by the Lok Sabha (Lower House) in 2010, it has not yet been ratified by the Rajya Sabha (Upper House) of Parliament. 

Need/relevance of appropriate whistleblowing legislation of legislation

There have been multiple instances of threatening, harassment and even murder of various whistleblowers.

RTI activists are vulnerable human rights defenders (HRDs) in India. Unlike other HRDs, a majority of the RTI activists are not part of an organisation; they often act alone, moved by anger at corruption and other illegal activities. RTI activists are vulnerable because they live in the same areas as public authorities and political leaders who do not want information about their activities to be disclosed. For the most part, human rights defenders receive media attention only when killed or seriously injured. When complaints are made by RTI activists, law enforcement personnel (who often work with corrupt officials) do not take appropriate action. The Right to Information Act, 2005 provides inadequate protection to whistleblowers. The Central Information Commission and the State Information Commissions are not mandated to deal with such threats or attacks or to provide protection when needed.

So the demands are that a law should be framed to protect whistleblowers.

Appropriate whistleblowing legislation and the means to enforce it are necessary to support a culture of compliance and integrity. Several international conventions recognize whistleblowing as an effective tool for fighting corruption,fraud and mismanagement, and commit the signatory countries to implement appropriate legislation.However, existing legal provisions are fragmented and weakly enforced in most jurisdictions.Only in rare cases do they provide sufficient protection for whistleblowers. Many laws may cover only the public sector or may be not tailored to the specific needs of whistleblowers.Comprehensive legislation, as provided under the United Kingdom’s Public Interest Disclosure Act, is the exception rather than the rule.

There may be an over-reliance on general criminal laws that oblige individuals to report criminal offences to a country’s law enforcement authorities.In such circumstances, the assumption is that individuals would automatically be exempted from any form of retaliation if a crime was involved. Practice has shown, however, that the existence of a legal duty to report is seldom a satisfactory alternative to a proper whistleblowing policy and protective measures. The same problem applies to the reliance on witness protection mechanisms. Not all whistleblowers are witnesses. They often do not have any concrete evidence, but only suspect wrongdoing. As a result, witness protection mechanisms do not provide sufficient protection to whistleblowers, nor do they pursue the same goal.At the same time, the overall legislative framework needs to provide sufficient protections and compensation for those wrongly accused, even by whistleblowers who report in good faith. The assumption of innocence needs to be respected until responsibility is sufficiently proven.

The Public Interest Disclosure and Protection to Persons Making the Disclosures Bill, 2010

Analysis :

According to Indian law reports, the bill has faced considerable criticism because its jurisdiction is restricted to the government sector and encompasses only those who are working for the Government of India or its agencies; it does not cover the state-government employees. However, the draft bill aimed at protecting whistleblowers is seen as a welcome move.

The proposed law has neither provisions to encourage whistleblowing (financial incentives), nor deals with corporate whistleblowers; it does not extend its jurisdiction to the private sector (a strange omission, after the fraud at Satyam). The Directorate of Income Tax Intelligence and Criminal Investigation is one of the only agencies empowered for whistle blower protection.

The bill aims to balance the need to protect honest officials from harassment with protecting persons making a public-interest disclosure. It outlines sanctions for false complaints. However, it does not provide a penalty for attacking a complainant.

The Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) was designated in 2004 to receive public-interest disclosures through government resolution; there have been a few hundred complaints every year. The provisions of the bill are similar to that of the resolution. Therefore, it is unlikely that the number of complaints will differ significantly.The power of the CVC is limited to making recommendations. It cannot impose penalties, in contrast to the powers of the Karnataka and Delhi Lokayuktas.

The bill has a limited definition of disclosure, and does not define victimisation. Other countries (such as the United States, United Kingdom and Canada) define disclosure more widely and define victimisation.

It differs on many issues with the proposed Bill of the Law Commission and the Second Administrative Reform Commission’s report. These include non-admission of anonymous complaints and lack of penalties for officials who victimise whistleblowers.

If enacted, the law to protect whistleblowers will assist in detecting corruption, ensuring better information flow and paving the way for successful prosecution of corrupt individuals through clear and protected processes. However, the public in India have a low level of confidence in fighting corruption because they fear retaliation and intimidation against those who file complaints. Another worry pertains to the delay in disposing of these cases. Without public debate on the provisions of this proposed law, it is clear that people cannot measure its effectiveness when the draft bill comes into force as law.

TI recommendations
A single, comprehensive legal framework is most effective

To ensure a safe alternative to silence for whistleblowers, the legal framework should be clear, comprehensive and easy to use for protecting the whistleblower.Ideally, a single legislative framework should be in place, but provisions in different bills can fulfil the same purpose if they do not leave loopholes or become too complicated. In all cases,the legislation should cover the public,private and not-for-profit sectors and provide for reliable reporting channels to communicate concerns. Legislation should include a broad range of issues, from criminal offences to the potential harm that wrongdoing can cause, such as to the health and safety of citizens and the environment. Whistleblowing legislation should provide that organisations in the public and private sector establish,maintain, and routinely publicise appropriate mechanisms for internal reporting.

Safety should be ensured for whistleblowers

Both public and private employees and those outside the traditional employee-employer relationship (e.g. consultants,temporary workers, trainees, etc.) should be protected from reprisal for honestly reporting concerns. Protection should also be extended to those attempting to report or corroborating reports and include a right to refuse participation in wrongdoings. Any individuals closely associated with the whistleblower, such as family members, should be covered as well. In case of retaliation against the whistleblower, the burden of proof to show that this discrimination is not related should lie with the employer. These protections should be guaranteed by access to normal court procedures.Whistleblowers should be protected against any damages suffered as a consequence of their disclosure. They should receive some kind of professional or social recognition for having prevented excessive harm to the organisation or society. Such a system, potentially in cluding financial rewards, should be carefully designed, taking the particular national and legal contexts into account.

Internal and external reporting should be protected

Where possible, reports or concerns should first be raised internally and to the appropriate body set up by the organisation with assurances that whistleblower confidentiality is clearly established. This allows organisations time and space to investigate the nature and substance of a report without unfairly exposing the subject of a report or the organisation to unfounded allegations.In many instances, however, initially reporting internally might not be a possibility.Whistleblowers may fear retaliation for filing an internal report, the report may not be followed up internally for various reasons (e.g. where malpractices are institutionalised or where managers are concerned about the negative impact on the image of the institution or on themselves), or the public interest may be best served by immediately filing the report externally to the authorities or other agencies. Whistleblowers should have a safe option to report externally to the regulator, enforcement authorities or to other competent oversight bodies. This is particularly important in cases where there is an immediate risk to the health and safety of people. As a last resort, disclosures to the media should also be protected.The British Public Interest Disclosure Act (PIDA), for instance, takes different factors and consequences of whistleblowing for people and organisations into account. It is an example of a model that allows for internal and external reporting, establishing three levels of disclosure.

Enforcement is essential

While the existence of a legal framework is a pre-condition for whistleblower protection, it is not sufficient. Legislation needs to be effectively enforced and should be as sound and consistent as possible. To ensure the proper implementation of legal provisions, an independent public body with sufficient autonomy should be set up or designated to oversee the functioning of the law and to receive and investigate complaints. Enforcement should include consultations with key stakeholders like trade unions, business associations and civil society actors so that whistleblowing policies can be agreed upon and put into effect.

The need for effective follow-up mechanisms in organisations

To realise the potential of whistleblowing legislation, the legal framework should be complemented with effective follow-up mechanisms in organisations. There also must be a willingness in organisations (whether a public in stitution, private company or not-for-profit) to provide sufficient resources, to investigate cases through independent bodies, to implement necessary changes and to hold those responsible for wrongdoing to account.In recognition of the potential of whistleblowing for effective risk management in organisations, a number of related provisions and guidelines have been developed. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act, a law in the US which sets financial reporting standards for public companies, mandates whistleblower protection mechanisms for public companies registered in the country.The International Chamber of Commerce also has adopted voluntary guidelines and the British Standards Institute has developed a code which establishes best practice for whistleblowing in organisations.But recent cases show that existing laws and practices are not enough and that much more needs to be done to realise the potential benefits of whistleblowing.For example, the multi-billion dollar fraud scheme of Bernard L. Madoff, a US- based hedge fund manager, was first detected in 1992, but no action was taken.An official investigation into the case found that six substantive complaints were filed by whistleblowers to the appropriate bodies but the government never followed up on them. Madoff’s scheme eventually cost thousands of investors billions of dollars.

Recommendations:

Strong and transparent internal policies are needed in organisations

Trustworthy and effective policies and procedures are essential to create the right environment for honest reporting in organisations. As part of well-designed ethics and anti-corruption codes, organisations should implement a clear and distinct whistleblowing policy. Whistleblowing procedures should provide for a variety of easy and accessible channels that can be used to disclose information,such as to the line manager, an ethics committee, the ombudsperson, internal hotlines or web-based reporting tools.Policies and procedures should also clearly separate personal grievances from whistleblower reports, offer guidance and procedures for internal and external reporting, provide sufficient feedback to the whistleblowers, establish appropriate follow-up mechanisms with timeframes,and protect people from retaliation. It is essential that whistleblower procedures are supported by the top management and accepted and well-known by the members of the organisations.

Confidential reporting must be ensured

Reporting channels in an organisation should offer people the opportunity to report concerns confidentially or even anonymously. Confidentiality is needed to establish trust with the whistleblower who faces numerous risks when reporting,while also allowing the organisation to establish the facts of a case. The whistleblower’s identity should be protected and only be disclosed if she or he agrees to this or if it is required by law.Confidentiality also helps to protect thefundamental rights of the person suspected of wrongdoing.

Impartial and accountable investigations need to be carried out

After a disclosure is received, the organisation should focus on the nature and substance of a report, and not on the person making it. Reports should be fully and fairly investigated; while the organisation should also take suitable correctiveaction when a report is well-founded. A record should be kept on how a reportwas managed so the organisation can learn from the experience.

Good communication and consultation with staff is needed

Whistleblowing policies must be fully supported by the leadership of the organisation and should be adequately promoted and clearly communicated throughout the organisation. When designing and implementing the policy,employees, directors and other stakeholders should be properly consulted,briefed and trained. The achievements of whistleblowing mechanisms shouldbe regularly communicated to the members of the organisations and to the public, and staff should be consulted regularly in order to identify areas for improvement.

The demand for a shift in culture

The importance of whistleblowing in the detection and prevention of wrongdoing is still generally under-valued. It is an inexpensive risk management tool with particular benefits for emerging democracies with less established oversight mechanisms. Whistleblowing is also a tool to sound the alarm at early stages, potentially even before any damage has been caused.Nevertheless, whistleblowers are often perceived as disloyal, rather than as champions of the public interest. In many countries they are viewed as untrustworthy, and sometimes even as spies or traitors.

Recommendations

Public support is needed to promote whistleblowing To change this perception, whistleblowing needs to be promoted as an effective tool for stopping corrupt ion and serving the public interest.Governments should lend their support to public information campaigns as well as initiatives to promote whistleblowing that are carried out by professional groups, Ombudspersons,industry, media, trade unions and other civil society organisations. Whistleblowers should not only be protected by public authorities, but also honoured and actively supported.

Data on the public benefit of whistleblowing should be collected and published

Data from the United States show the relevance of whistleblowing for the recovery of public revenues (see side bar on page 6). Yet on a global scale there is little data available on the number of cases reported, the effectiveness of reporting channels and the financial benefits due to whistleblowing. This lack of data could be addressed by making more court and tribunal decisions public and by standardising whistleblowing procedures across the public sector. Given the central role of whistleblowing in detecting and preventing wrongdoing, gathering reliable statistics will greatly help decision-makers and the public to measure progress in uncovering corruption.

A proper societal and legal environment is needed

A legislative environment, ensuring freedom of expression, access to information and the existence of an independent media are critical to enable a culture of whistleblowing. Protection of journalists’ sources should include information provided by whistleblowers, even if journalists might base their reports at times on erroneous information given in good faith. The growing relevance of internet tools provides whistleblowers with new channels for reporting and thereby creates a global platform which increasingly can help ensure that whistleblowing becomes and remains an important issue in the public debate.

TI’s Recommendations for Whistleblowing: At a Glance

A single, comprehensive legal framework is most effective.
Safety should be ensured for whistleblowers.
Internal and external reporting should beprotected.
Enforcement is essential.
Strong and transparent internal policies are neededin organisations.
Confidential reporting mustbe ensured.
Impartial and accountable investigations need to becarried out.
Good communication andconsultation with staff isneeded.
Public support is needed topromote whistleblowing.
Data on the public benefit of whistleblowing should becollected and published.
A proper societal and legal environment is needed.

Citizen Centric Governance

2nd ARC Report

Financial Stability and Development Council

Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA)

Introduction

The Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA)-1958 was enacted by the Parliament on September 11, 1958, to provide necessary powers and legal protection to the Armed Forces while carrying out proactive operations against the insurgents in a highly hostile environment. Since then, the Armed Forces have been able to effectively contain insurgency and establish stability in the region. It grants special powers to the armed forces in what the act calls "disturbed areas". AFSPA was first applied to the Northeastern States of Assam and Manipur, and was amended in 1972 to extend to the other States of Tripura, Meghalaya, Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram and Nagaland.It was later extended to Jammu and Kashmir as The Armed Forces (Jammu and Kashmir) Special Powers Act, 1990 in July 1990.

Operational Importance of AFSPA

 An analysis of ground realities vis-a-vis the situation in early 1950s makes it evident that the fighting capability of the militants in the North East and J&K has improved considerably over the years. They possess sophisticated weapons, modern communication equipment and have moral and financial support from across the borders. Areas close to the international border witness trans-border movement of militants from their camps and hide-outs in neighbouring countries.

The Armed Forces are required to operate in varied terrain such as thick forests, in far flung areas and also in the built up areas ranging from small hutments and villages to towns and cities, where the insurgents have established their training camps and support bases. Not only do the troops operate in hostile terrain, they also work in an unfriendly population environment exposing themselves to grave dangers demanding very high degree of operational effectiveness. At the same time, the Armed Forces are under pressure to be extremely cautious and avoid collateral damage and loss of innocent lives or property. Any violation or perceived violation attracts media attention and provides a opportunity for propaganda to factions with vested interests. On most occasions, allegations have been found to be false and evidence fabricated but nevertheless, have to be answered, rebutted or contended with. Operating under such environment requires a protective law lest the forces get embroiled in legal battles and their effectiveness is reduced in operations for which they have been deployed in the first place. 

Militants in different parts of the country exploit popular anger and frustration of the people at the failures of the civil administration on the development and welfare fronts. It has to be stopped. In order to get to the root of the problem one needs to take a look at the wider scenario where underground outfits have created violent security situations to further their causes and AFSPA had to be enforced.

It is the duty of the State to harmonize the rights of the individual on one hand and with the requirement of the community on the other. The Central Government vide Art 355 of the Constitution of India is duty bound to protect every State not only against the external aggression but also internal disturbances and to ensure that the governance of every State is carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution of India. 

Provisions under AFSPA

Powers to declare areas to be disturbed areas (Section 3 of the Act)

In relation to any state or Union Territory to which this act extends, the Governor of that State or the administrator of that Union Territory or the Central Government, in either case, if of the opinion that the whole or any part of such State of Union territory, as the case may be, is in such a disturbed or dangerous condition that the use of armed forces in aid of the civil power is necessary, the Governor of that State or the Administrator of that Union Territory or the Central Government, as the case may be , may by notification in the Official Gazette,declare the whole or such part of such State or Union territory to be a disturbed area

The Governor is empowered to declare any area of the State as “disturbed area’. It could not be arbitrary on ground of absence of legislative guidelines (Inderjit Barua v.State of Assam)

Section 3 cannot be construed as conferring a power to issue a declaration without any time limit. There should be periodic review of the declaration before the expiry of six months; Naga People’s Movement of Human Rights v. Union of India.

Special Powers of the armed forces (Under the AFSPA)

 Any commissioned officer, warrant officer, non-commissioned officer or any other person of equivalent rank in the armed forces may, in a disturbed area can

• Fire upon or use other kinds of force even if it causes death, against the person who is acting against law or order in the disturbed area for the maintenance of public order, after giving such due warning.

• Destroy any arms dump, prepared or fortified position or shelter or training camp from which armed attacks are made by the armed volunteers or armed gangs or absconders wanted for any offence

• To arrest without a warrant anyone who has committed cognizable offenses or is reasonably suspected of having done so and may use force if needed for the arrest.

• To enter and search any premise in order to make such arrests, or to recover any person wrongfully restrained or any arms, ammunition or explosive substances and seize it.

• Stop and search any vehicle or vessel reasonably suspected to be carrying such person or weapons.

• Any person arrested and taken into custody under this Act shall be made over to the officer in charge of the nearest police station with the least possible delay, together with a report of the circumstances occasioning the arrest.

• Army officers have legal immunity for their actions. There can be no prosecution, suit or any other legal proceeding against anyone acting under that law. Nor is the government's judgment on why an area is found to be disturbed subject to judicial review.

• Protection of persons acting in good faith under this Act from prosecution, suit or other legal proceedings, except with the sanction of the Central Government, in exercise of the powers conferred by this Act.

  
Demand to Repeal/Revoke AFSPA

According to those who want repeal of AFSPA,the large scale violations of  fundamental rights in the north eastern states and kashmir is a direct consequence of the provisions of the AFSPA.The AFSPA, which grants armed forces personnel the power to shoot to arrest, search, seize and even shoot to kill, violates the Right to Life enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India which guarantees the right to life to all people.The AFSPA also violates the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). India signed the ICCPR in 1978, taking on the responsibility of securing the rights guaranteed by the Covenant to all its citizens. In particular, the Act is in contravention of Article 6 of the ICCPR guaranteeing the right to life.Some believe that AFSPA seeks to supplant rather than supplement civil authority with military authority in the administration of everyday life.It  blurs the necessary distinctions between the police and the military, between the civilian and the combatant, and between ‘domestic’ and ‘alien’ space.

Jeevan Reddy Commission on AFSPA stated that "the Act, for whatever reason, has become a symbol of oppression, an object of hate and an instrument of discrimination and high handedness." The report also stated that "It is highly desirable and advisable to repeal the Act altogether, without of course, losing sight of the overwhelming desire of an overwhelming majority of the (North East) region that the Army should remain (though the Act should go)".The report recommends the incorporation of AFSPA in the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, which will be operable all over India.

Provisions against misuse of the Act

It is also an established fact that the judiciary is the custodian of the Constitution. An independent judicial system performs better than any other agency to maintain prefect equilibrium between the liberty of the. individual and the powers of the State. It is in this light, it is emphasized that the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has upheld the constitutional validity of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act. The court further observed that the instructions issued by the military authorities in the form of 'DO's' and DON'Ts while acting under the AFSPA are to be treated as binding instructions which are required to be followed by the members of, the Armed Forces. 

Adequate checks and safeguards are built in the AFSPA to prevent the Armed Forces from assuming sweeping powers. Violations of its provisions are liable for legal action and prosecution. The DO's and DON'Ts issued to the units having found approval of Apex Court have acquired legal status, are binding on the troops which are restraining factors to ensure the guidelines are taken very seriously and promt disciplinary action is taken against the defaulters under Army Act 1950.

It is reiterated that the Armed Forces of the Union deployed in aid of the Civil Powers have to operate in the State concerned in co-operation with the Civil Administration to deal with the situation affecting maintenance of public order which has necessitated the deployment or Armed Forces so that normalcy is restored. Thus the governance of the State yet remains in the hands of Civil Administration and not taken over by the Armed Forces, as is wrongly perceived by many people.The armed forces must act in cooperation with the district administration and not as an Independent body. Armed Forces could work in harmony when they deployed in disturbed area.

From bare reading of the Act, it appears that security forces enjoy vast powers, which are akin to the powers vested in the local police, yet power to investigate the offences remains reserved with the police alone.Arrested persons to be made over to the police –Any person arrested and taken into custody under this Act shall be made over to the officer in charge of the nearest police station with the least possible delay, together with a report of the circumstances occasioning the arrest.

By analysing the issue of safeguard further, it would transpire that the protection envisaged is for only those persons, who act in good faith in discharge of their official duties and not otherwise. Acting in good faith would mean to act without any malice in the discharge of the official duties, i.e., exercising due care and caution. Sec 7 of the Act reads thus :-­

"Protection of persons acting in good faith under this Act. No prosecution, suit or other legal proceeding shall be instituted except with the previous sanction of the Central Government against any person in respect of anything done or purported to be done in exercise of the powers conferred by this Act."

The protection under Section 7 would not be available to a member of the security forces, who commits acts which constitute criminal offences not in the discharge of his official duties even in the area which has been declared as disturbed. 

Supreme Court Judgements

Conferment of power on non-commissioned officers like a Havaldar cannot be said to be bad and unjustified ( Inderjit Barua v .State of Assam )

The Governor is empowered to declare any area of the State as “disturbed area’. It could not be arbitrary on ground of absence of legislative guidelines (Inderjit Barua v.State of Assam)

Section 3 cannot be construed as conferring a power to issue a declaration without any time limit. There should be periodic review of the declaration before the expiry of six months; Naga People’s Movement of Human Rights v. Union of India.

In the stringent operating environment it is but human to make mistakes. While mistakes do occur the guilty must be justly punished. Army has been unilaterally taking disciplinary actions against defaulters under the Provision of the Army Act.

Soldier functioning in areas where AFSPA is in place is not above the law of the country. If and when the government feels that a crime has been committed which requires punishment in accordance with the law of the land it retains the right to give sanction for prosecution and put the process of civil law into motion; this by itself places a huge check on the conduct of the forces personnel. Also, trial by a military court is not easy on an offender; military courts are known to mete out swift and more severe punishment than that given by the civilian courts.

The nation has to be assured that personnel from the army, the Para-military forces, the Police services or any other government agency are subject to stringent disciplinary procedures which greatly reduce the possibility of their indulging in such heinous crimes and that the miniscule few who do so are brought to book much faster than their civilian counterparts. The army in particular needs to inform the public about the actions that it has taken and is taking to ensure that its soldiers are properly educated, indoctrinated and monitored to ensure that they do not indulge in barbaric acts. Also the process by which such heinous crimes, if committed, would be handled in places which are under AFSPA should be made public.

The common ground between the supporters and detractors of AFSPA is that, AFSPA can only be a temporary phase to bring normalcy to a disturbed area, restore democratic institutions and create an atmosphere where these institutions can function normally. The main disagreement is on the timing of it’s removal. Increasingly, the public, rightfully, is emerging as an important stakeholder whose opinion has started to matter a lot in issues such as AFSPA.

Details of the Act -- Click Here

Parliamentary Questions

Parliamentary Questions are one of the important procedural devices that empower Members of Parliament to elicit factual information from the Government on a matter of public interest. Parliamentary Question is a unique mechanism to exercise surveillance over the administration, it is an important instrument in the hands of the members to ensure answerability or accountability of the administration for its acts of omission or commission to the Parliament and the people. The entire range of governmental activities comes under the scrutiny of Parliament by this procedure. Very often, members are able to pinpoint the administrative lapses and extract certain information and assurances or even commitments from the Government.

Generally, the first hour of every sitting of Lok Sabha, known as the “Question Hour”, is available for asking and answering of questions. In very exceptional cases, the  ‟Question Hour‟ is dispensed with to take up some other urgent business only if the House unanimously agrees.

Asking of questions is an inherent and unfettered parliamentary right of members. It is during the Question Hour that the members can ask questions on every aspect of administration and Governmental activity. Government policies in national as well as international spheres come into sharp focus as the members try to elicit pertinent information during the Question Hour.

The Government is, as it were, put on its trial during the Question Hour and every Minister whose turn it is to answer questions has to stand up and answer for his or his administration’s acts of omission and commission. Through the Question Hour the Government is able to quickly feel the pulse of the nation and adapt its policies and actions accordingly. It is through questions in Parliament that the Government remains in touch with the people in as much as members are enabled thereby to ventilate the grievances of the public in matters concerning the administration. Questions enable Ministries to gauge the popular reaction to their policy and administration. Questions bring to the notice of the Ministers many an abuse which otherwise would have gone unnoticed. Sometimes questions may lead to the appointment of a commission, a court of enquiry or even legislation when matters raised are grave enough to agitate the public mind and are of wide public importance.

The Question Hour is an interesting part of the Parliamentary proceedings. Although a question mainly seeks information and tries to elicit facts on a particular subject, there are many a time lively and quicksilver repartees between the Members asking the questions and the Ministers answering them. These repartees are sometimes coupled with flashes of wit and humour. That is why the public galleries and the press galleries are packed to capacity during the Question Hour.

Types of Questions

Questions are of four types:—

Parliamentary questions are categorized as Starred, Unstarred and Short Notice Questions.

A Starred Question is one to which a member desires an oral answer on the floor of the House. Answers to such questions may be followed by Supplementary Questions by Members. Starred Questions derive their name from the fact that they are always distinguished by an asterisk.Only 20 questions can be listed for oral answer on a day.

An Unstarred Question is so named because it does not carry an asterisk mark. Answers to such questions, unlike a Starred Question, is not given orally, but, in a written form. Only 230 questions can be listed for written answer on a day. In addition to this, 25 more questions can also be included in the Unstarred List relating to the States under Presidential Rule and the total number of questions in the list of Unstarred Questions for a day may not exceed 255 in relaxation of normal limit of 230 questions.

A Short Notice Question is one which is related to a matter of urgent public importance and can be asked with shorter notice than the period of notice prescribed for an ordinary question.

A question may also be addressed to a Private Member provided the subject matter of the question relates to some Bill, Resolution or other matter connected with the business of the House for which that Member is responsible. No supplementary can be asked on such a question. Similarly, no short notice question can be addressed to a Private Member.

Besides, members may raise Half-an-Hour Discussion on matters arising out of questions recently answered in the House and which needs elucidation on a matter of fact. Such discussion is limited to half-an-hour and generally held in the last half-an-hour of the sitting on three days in a week, namely Monday, Wednesday and Friday. During the Budget Session, no half-an-hour Discussion is normally held till the transaction of financial business is completed.

In the Lok Sabha, the list of Starred Questions is printed on green paper, the list of Unstarred Questions on white paper, the list of Short Notice Questions on pink paper and the list of Questions to Private Members on yellow paper, so that Members can distinguish these lists easily.

Period of Notice

A Member is required to give not less than ten and and not more than twenty-one clear days notice in writing in the prescribed form to table a question(The normal period of notice of a question is not more than twenty-one and not less than ten clear days). Members can give notices of questions from the day following the day on which the summons for a session are issued. Such notices are addressed to the Secretary-General, Lok Sabha, and specify the official designation of the Minister to whom the question is addressed.

A short notice question can be asked with a notice shorter than ten days, but the member has to state briefly the reasons for asking the question at short notice.

Limits on the number of Questions

There is no restriction on the number of notices of Starred and Unstarred Questions which a member can give under the rules. But not more than five questions are admitted in the name of a member for each sitting, out of which not more than one is entered in the Starred list for oral answer. Admitted Notices of Questions in excess of Five are returned to members for revival for another date. Normally, not more than twenty questions are placed on the list of Questions for oral answer on any one day. The number may rise on account of postponed Questions. Questions in excess of twenty are transferred to the List of Questions for written answer. Not more than one Short Notice Question is put down for answer on any one day. Further, not more than 230 Questions are normally included in the list of Questions for written answer on any one day. However, the overall limit of 230 Questions may exceed by the number of Questions pertaining to a State or States under President's Rule, subject to the maximum limit of 25. Questions in excess of 230 in a day's list of Questions are re-examined for inclusion in the list of Unstarred Questions for subsequent available dates. All those notices of questions which could not be included in lists of questions lapse at the end of the Session. While compiling the list of Unstarred Questions, it is ensured that one question of each member is picked up in each round, till the list of Questions of a date is finalised.

After the Starred Questions have been answered, Short Notice Questions, if any for that day, is taken up and disposed of in the same way as the questions for oral answers.

Allotment of Days for Answer to Questions

As soon as the dates of sittings of a session of Lok Sabha are fixed, days are allotted to different Ministries/Departments of the Government of India for answering of questions relating to them. For this purpose, the Ministries/Departments are divided into five Groups, viz. Groups A,B,C,D and E and fixed days of the week are allotted to Groups of Ministries/Departments for answering questions. There is no Question Hour on a Saturday even if a sitting of the House is fixed on that day for any special reason. Similarly, no question time is usually allotted when a session is extended by a day or a few days beyond the originally scheduled date of termination of the session unless the condition of ten clear days for giving notices of the questions is satisfied.

The classification of Ministries into groups for the purpose of answering questions is done in such a way that each group of Ministries has, as possible, approximately the same number of questions. It is also ensured
allotment of Ministries does not clash with the allotment decided for answering questions in the Rajya Sabha so that the Ministers are able to be present in both Houses on the respective days allotted for answering questions.

Mode of Asking Questions

The member whose question has been admitted and which is included in the list of questions for oral answers for a particular day, rises in his/her seat when the turn of his/her question comes and asks his/her question by reading out its number on the list of questions. The Minister concerned answers the question. Thereafter the member who had asked the question can ask only two supplementary questions. After him/her the second member whose name is clubbed on the question is allowed to ask one supplementary question. Thereafter, the Speaker allows one supplementary each to members who are able to catch his eye. The number of such members depends on the importance of the question. Then the next question is taken up. The replies to questions not reached for oral answer during the Question Hour are deemed to have been laid on the Table of Lok Sabha.

At the end of the Question Hour, i.e. after the questions for oral answer have been answered, Short Notice Question, if any, for that day is taken up and disposed of in the same way as the questions for oral answers.

Conditions of Admissibility of Questions

A question is primarily asked for the purpose of obtaining information on a matter of public importance within the special cognizance of the Minister to whom it is addressed. However, the right to ask a question is governed by certain conditions. Questions which are vague or are too general or roving in nature or give information instead of seeking it are not admitted. Questions which are not the primary concern of the Government of India are disallowed. Questions that contain arguments, inferences or defamatory statements or otherwise refer to the character or conduct of any person, except in his official or public capacity, are not admitted. Questions which are covered by answer to a question given in the recent past or in regard to which information is available in accessible documents or in reference works, are also not admitted. Besides, if the subject matter of a question is pending for judgment before any court of law, or any other tribunal or body set up under the law, or is under consideration before a Parliamentary Committee, the same is not permitted to be asked. Questions making discourteous references to foreign countries with whom India has friendly relations are disallowed. Similarly, questions raising larger issues of policy are not allowed for it is not possible to enunciate policies within the compass of an answer to a question. Questions seeking information regarding matters exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Speaker are also not admitted.

Answers to Questions

Notices of Questions which have been admitted are segregated. Separate lists are prepared for Starred and Unstarred Questions. Admitted notices of questions are entered in the Lists of Questions for the day for oral or written answers, as the case may be, in the order or priority obtained in the ballot.

Answers to questions orally given in the House on any date are printed in the day's proceedings. In the case of Unstarred Questions, written answers thereto are laid on the Table by the Ministers concerned. Further, if any question placed on the list of questions for oral answer on any day is not called for answer within the time available for answering questions on that day, the Minister to whom the question was addressed lays on the Table a written reply to the question. Written answers to questions are not formally laid by the Ministers, but are deemed to have been laid on the Table at the end of the Question Hour. In the event of the Question Hour having been dispensed with or where questions are not taken up for oral answer owing to disorder and continuous interruptions, all Starred Questions for the day are treated as Unstarred and their answers, together with answers to the Unstarred Questions, if any, are printed in the debate of that day. When the Question Hour is dispensed with owing to cancellation of one or more sittings of the House or adjournment without transacting any business, the Questions entered in both Starred and Unstarred lists of Questions for the days are deemed to be Unstarred Questions for the next sitting and such Questions along with their answers are deemed to have been laid on the Table and are included in the Debates of the next date of sitting.

Procedure in Lok Sabha Secretariat

On receipt of the notice of a question it is scrutinised to see that the designation of the Minister and date of answer have been correctly mentioned in the notice. A preliminary ballot of identical questions is held and the member who obtains priority is deemed to have tabled the question. A ballot is then held in respect of notices received in this Secretariat at the same time to determine their inter se priority. Separate ballots are held for starred and unstarred questions. Starred, unstarred and short notice questions are numbered separately and entered in separate diaries on computer software.

The next stage is to examine the question as to whether or not it is admissible under the rules and past precedents. A question is primarily asked for the purpose of obtaining information on a matter of public importance. Questions that contain arguments, inferences or defamatory statements or otherwise refer to the character or conduct of any person except in his official or public capacity, are not admitted. Questions which are in substance repetitions of those that have been answered previously or in regard to which information is available in accessible documents or in ordinary works of reference are also not admitted. Besides, if the subject matter of a question is pending for judgement before any court of law or any other tribunal or body set up under law or is under consideration before a Parliamentary Committee, the same is not permitted to be asked. Questions making discourteous references to foreign countries with whom India has friendly relations are disallowed. Similarly, questions raising larger issues of policy are not allowed for it is not possible to enunciate policies within the limited compass of an answer to a question. Questions containing more than 150 words or relating to a matter which is not primarily the concern of the Government of India are not admitted. Questions going into minor details of administration and day-to-day working of the Government/Organisations are also not admitted.

Keeping the above rules and precedents in view, a question is admitted or disallowed. Typed copies of the admitted and edited questions are then made out on a standard form. An advance copy of the admitted question is informally collected by the Ministry/Department concerned so that they may on their side initiate the action for collection of information asked for in the question to prepare a reply.

A Short Notice Question which is of wide public importance is first referred to the Ministry concerned if necessary for furnishing factual information in the matter and also for indicating whether the Minister concerned accepts the short notice and, if so, what date will be convenient to him to answer the question. If the Minister accepts the short notice and the matter sought to be raised is considered by the Speaker, urgent, the Short Notice Question is admitted and printed in a separate list on the light pink paper in order to distinguish from lists of ordinary questions. The Short Notice Question is taken up after the Question Hour.