Decline Thesis of Indian Parliament

Home > UPSC  > Decline Thesis of Indian Parliament

24 Jul Decline Thesis of Indian Parliament

Posted at 24 Jul 2026 in UPSC by
0 Likes

‘Decline-Thesis’ of Indian parliament

India has opted parliamentary democracy with a federal system of government. Parliament consists, Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha and the President. Although the President is not a member of either of the houses, S/he is an integral part of the Parliament. In the 1950s and 1960s, Parliament had the highest performance in terms of law-making including the law made by the private members, deliberation, and representation of interests. In later decades, The Parliament has witnessed its decline in terms of its effectiveness, institutional delivery and performance. 

Indian parliament has declined in its efficiency and performance since the 1980s; the decline of parliament continued due to corruption and criminalization of politics. However, the constitution of the Department-related Standing Committee and electoral reform like anti-defection law have contributed to parliamentary reform, still the growth  in the power of executive and judiciary, presidentialization of the office of the PM, frequent use of ordinances led to decline of Indian parliament.

 

Following factors are responsible to decline of Indian parliament-

  1. Performance of Indian parliament: the decline of Indian parliament is due to decreasing number of hours or time spent in the parliament. In the 1960s, the working day of the parliament was 160 days per year which was reduced to only 40 days per year in 2008. Based on data from PRS Legislative Research, the 17th Lok Sabha (2019–2024) had the fewest sitting days of any full-term Lok Sabha in Indian history, with an average of only 55 working days per year. The lowest number of sitting days in a single year occurred in 2020, with only 33 days.

  2. Death of Private Members Bill: In the first two decades is known as the golden age of Private Members Bills (PMBs). Since 1970, not a single PMB has been passed by the Parliament. However, there are numbers of Private Member Bills introduced each year but only four percent PMBs are debated and discussed but unable to pass even a single one. It led to the death of PMBs in the Parliament.   

  3. Decreasing role of parliamentary committee: the role of parliamentary committee has been undermined. For example: about 60% and 70% bills were referred to the Department Related Standing Committee in the 14th and 15th Lok Sabha whereas this was reduced to 27% and 13% in the 16th and 17th Lok Sabha. The role of Financial Committee like Public Account Committee is limited to the post mortem report of the CAG’s Audit report. It does not work effectively.

  4. Increasing number of ordinances: the executive has issued ordinances and it has increased in the recent decay, for example, during the 14th and 15th Lok Sabha 54 and 61 ordinances were issued which increased to 76 ordinances during 16th and 17th Lok Sabha. It shows the bypassing of the legislature.

  5. Criminalization of Politics: Since the 1980s, the number of members in the Parliament has increased whose background is related to crime. For instance, in the 15th Lok Sabha, there were 30% MPs who had criminal cases which increased to 34% in the 16th Lok Sabha which further increased to 43% in the 17th Lok Sabha. In the 18th Lok Sabha election, 46 % MPs have criminal cases against them, according to an ADR report. 

  6. Money power and politics: Indian parliamentary democracy is becoming elite. Here, politicians are elite but voters are poor. For example, the 15th Lok Sabha has 58% MPs who were crorepati which was increased to 83% in the 16th Lok Sabha which further increased to 88% in the 17th Lok Sabha. In the 18th Lok Sabha, the percentage has increased to 93 %, according to the ADR Report.  Out of 10 MPs, 9MPs are super-rich. Has the Indian Parliament become an institution of “elite and wealthy”? Can the super-rich MPs which are in minority decide the fate of the poor who are in majority? Is India in danger of becoming a plutocracy? There are few questions that need to be investigated in relation to the Indian Parliament. 

The decline of the Indian Parliament has given opportunities to the executive and judiciary to gain power. The Indian political system has appeared to be judiciary driven rather than Parliamentary.

B.L. Shankar and Valerian Rodrigues have argued that those who advocate decline of the Indian Parliament on the basis of its performance have ignored the changing nature of representation in the Parliament. It is due to the changing nature of society and economy in India. There are a series of factors and reasons in the context of Indian democracy which interact with each-other. There are changes in the nature of representation, changes in the nature of interest to be represented and the changing vision of the nation as a whole. This is a time of transformation. It does mean that everything is going well in the Indian parliament. B.L. Shankar and Valerian Rodrigues  rejected the ‘decline thesis’ of the Indian Parliament and argued that the Indian Parliament needs reform in terms of inclusion and representation. 

 

 

Bijendra Jha
Latest posts by Bijendra Jha (see all)
No Comments

Post A Comment