Chapter 7 Federalism

The political map of India has significantly changed since independence in 1947. Boundaries of States have been reorganized multiple times, and names have changed, reflecting regional identities and aspirations. India inherited provinces from British rule and integrated numerous princely states. The process of reorganizing States, often based on linguistic and cultural identities, tells a story about the functioning of federalism in India over more than seventy years.

After studying this chapter, you will understand:

• What is Federalism?
• The federal provisions in the Indian Constitution.
• Issues regarding relations between the central government and the States.
• Special provisions for certain States.

What Is Federalism?

Federalism is a system of government that accommodates two sets of polities: one at the national level and another at the regional level. Both levels of government are autonomous in their own spheres. The goal is to unite diverse regions and peoples while allowing them to maintain their distinct identities and some degree of self-governance. Many countries, including the former USSR, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, and Pakistan, were federations but faced disintegration, while Canada has experienced separatist movements. India, despite its immense diversities and the challenges of Partition, has remained united for over seven decades, suggesting that the nature and practice of its federalism are crucial factors.

India is a country of continental size with vast diversities in languages, religions, and indigenous populations. However, its people share a common landmass and history, particularly the struggle for independence, leading to a vision of India as a country with unity in diversity. Federalism, as a principle, has evolved differently in various historical contexts (e.g., American vs. German vs. Indian federalism).

Key ideas and concepts associated with federalism:

• Dual Polity: An institutional mechanism to accommodate two levels of government (national and regional/state), each autonomous in its defined area.
• Dual Identity and Loyalties: People have identities and loyalties associated with both their region/state and the nation.
• Division of Powers: Each level of polity has distinct powers and responsibilities, usually detailed in a written constitution. National concerns (defense, currency) are Union responsibilities; regional/local matters are State responsibilities.
• Supremacy of the Constitution: The written constitution is considered supreme and the source of power for both levels of government.
• Independent Judiciary: To prevent conflicts over power distribution, an independent judiciary settles disputes between the central government and States, interpreting the division of powers as laid down in the constitution.

The actual working of a federation is influenced by politics, culture, ideology, and history. Mutual trust, cooperation, respect, and restraint between units and political parties contribute to smooth functioning. Dominance by any single unit, group, or ideology can lead to resentment and demands for secession or conflict.

The example of the West Indies Federation (1958-1962) shows that a weak central government and independent units can lead to dissolution. Later, islands formed a Caribbean Community with joint authorities and economic cooperation, but remain separate countries.

Nigeria's federalism has faced challenges from ethnic and religious differences and conflicts over resource control (oil revenues), leading to military regimes and ongoing tensions despite the restoration of democracy. This shows that even with a federal structure, deep internal divisions can create problems.

Check your progress questions prompt thinking about how powers are decided in a federation (by the constitution), how conflicts are resolved (by the judiciary), the distribution of powers, and potential dissatisfaction among states.

Federalism In The Indian Constitution

Even before independence, Indian national leaders recognized the need for dividing powers between central and provincial governments to govern a large and diverse country. They were aware of regional and linguistic diversity and believed people of different regions should share power and govern themselves locally. The question was the extent of powers for regional governments.

During pre-Partition negotiations, a formula granting large powers to regions was discussed (influenced by the Muslim League's demands). After the Partition decision, the Constituent Assembly framed a government based on unity, cooperation between center and States, and distinct powers for States. A key feature is the principle of cooperation in center-State relations, emphasizing unity while recognizing diversity.

The Indian Constitution does not explicitly use the word 'federation'. Article 1 describes India as a 'Union of States'. This phrase suggests that India is a union comprising States, where the States are not results of an agreement between independent sovereign units (as in some federations), and they have no right to secede from the Union.

Division Of Powers

The Indian Constitution creates two levels of government with identified areas of activity: the Union government (central) and the State government. The Constitution clearly demarcates legislative subjects into three lists to divide powers between the Union and States (Study the chart on the next page for the division of powers).

Chart showing the subjects included in the Union List, State List, and Concurrent List, indicating which legislature(s) have powers to make laws on these matters according to the Constitution of India.

• Union List: Subjects of national importance (defense, atomic energy, foreign affairs, banking, railways, currency). Only Union Legislature (Parliament) can make laws.
• State List: Subjects of regional/local importance (agriculture, police, prison, local government, public health, land). Normally only State Legislature can make laws.
• Concurrent List: Subjects where both Union and State Legislatures can make laws (education, forests, trade unions, succession). If there is a conflict between a Union law and a State law on a Concurrent subject, the Union law generally prevails.
• Residuary Powers: Subjects not mentioned in any list. Union Legislature alone can make laws (e.g., Cyber Laws).

Disputes over power distribution are resolved by the Judiciary based on constitutional provisions. A notable aspect is the centralization of economic and financial powers with the central government. States have many responsibilities but limited revenue sources, making them dependent on central grants. This is a common point of dissatisfaction for States.

Check your progress questions prompt consideration of why Residuary powers are listed separately (to cover subjects not foreseen at the time of constitution making and avoid ambiguity in future) and reasons for States' dissatisfaction (especially limited financial autonomy despite responsibilities).

Federalism With A Strong Central Government

The Indian Constitution is widely considered to have created a strong central government. This was a conscious choice by the framers, necessary for a country of India's size, diversity, and socio-economic problems. They believed a strong center was needed to prevent disintegration and drive social/political change, especially given the need to integrate over 500 princely states post-independence. Concerns for unity and development prompted this design. T.T. Krishnamachari's quote emphasizes the global trend towards stronger centers in welfare states and the center's ultimate responsibility for economic well-being.

Important provisions creating a strong central government:

• Parliament's power over State existence: Parliament can form new States, alter boundaries, or change names without the State's mandatory consent, although it must seek the concerned State legislature's views.
• Emergency provisions: Powerful provisions allow the federal system to become highly centralized during emergencies, with Parliament gaining power to legislate on State subjects.
• Financial powers: Central government controls major revenue sources and collects most taxes, making States financially dependent on grants and assistance from the center. Planning (historically) also led to centralized economic decision-making. The discretionary power of the Union to give grants can lead to discrimination charges against States ruled by opposition parties.
• Governor's role: Governors (appointed by the center) can recommend dismissal of State governments and dissolution of Assemblies (President's Rule, Article 356), reserve State bills for President's assent (giving center veto power or delaying legislation). Governors' actions are often seen as central interference.
• Parliament's power to legislate on State list subjects: Possible if Rajya Sabha ratifies the move in national interest.
• Superiority of Union executive power: The Constitution states the Union's executive power is superior to States'. Union government can issue directives to State governments.
• Integrated administrative system: All-India services (IAS, IPS) serve both Union and State governments. Officers in these services are recruited by the center, assigned to states but remain under central control for disciplinary action. This strengthens central government control over State administration.
• Special powers under Articles 33 and 34: Authorize Parliament to protect personnel involved in maintaining order during martial law, further empowering the Union government.

These provisions contribute to a unitary bias within India's federal framework. States often complain about central government overreach and dependence. Debates exist on whether a strong center weakens States or if strong States would weaken the center. The Constitution designed federalism to suit India's specific needs, balancing diversity with unity and the need for a strong center for development and stability.

A political cartoon illustrating the perceived dominance or strength of the central government in India relative to the State governments, suggesting a unitary bias in the federal structure.

Check your progress questions prompt identifying reasons for unitary bias (Parliament's power over States, emergency provisions, financial centralization, Governor's role, All-India Services, Union executive superiority, specific articles) and discussing the relationship between central and state strength (whether one necessitates the other's weakness or if they can be mutually reinforcing in a cooperative federalism).

Conflicts IN India’s Federal System

Despite the principle of cooperation, tensions and conflicts are inherent in India's federal system due to the strong powers vested in the center and the diverse aspirations of the States. States often demand greater autonomy and powers.

While legal disputes between center and States (or States themselves) are resolved by the judiciary, demands for autonomy are primarily political issues requiring negotiation. The nature of India's political process has shaped federalism. The foundation was laid under Nehru with Congress dominance, leading to relatively smooth center-State relations initially (except State formation issues). Grants from the center and development policies fostered cooperation.

From the mid-1960s, Congress dominance weakened, and opposition parties formed governments in many States. This led to demands for greater State powers and autonomy, fueled by political differences between State governments and the Congress government at the center. This phase saw political discussion about autonomy within a federal system.

Since the 1990s, coalition politics at the center and the rise of various national and regional parties in States have led to more mature federalism, with States having a greater say and diversity being more respected. The issue of autonomy gained political potency in this second phase.

The statement "So, laws and constitutions alone do not decide everything. After all, actual politics decides the nature of our government!" highlights that constitutional frameworks provide a structure, but the real-world political processes, power dynamics, and actions of actors determine how federalism functions in practice.

Centre-state Relations

Demands for greater autonomy from the central government by States and parties are a recurring feature. 'Autonomy' means different things in different contexts:

• Redistribution of powers: Demands for changing the division of powers to assign more significant powers to States (e.g., demands from Tamil Nadu, Punjab, West Bengal).
• Financial autonomy: Demand for independent revenue sources and greater control over resources for States (e.g., support for greater financial powers in Tamil Nadu, Punjab demands, document from West Bengal Left Front government in 1977).
• Administrative autonomy: States resent central control over the administrative machinery (e.g., through All-India Services).
• Cultural/Linguistic issues: Autonomy demands linked to protecting regional languages and cultures from perceived central domination (e.g., opposition to Hindi imposition in Tamil Nadu, demands for promoting Punjabi language/culture).

These demands reflect the States' desire for a greater role and powers in both State and national governance within the federal framework.

A political cartoon illustrating protests against the imposition of a language, highlighting cultural and linguistic issues within the federal system.

The question "Yes, I know that Hindi is India’s official language. But many of my friends from different parts of the country don’t know Hindi." relates to the sensitivity of language issues and regional identities in a diverse federation, where imposing one language can lead to resentment and conflict, underscoring the importance of accommodating linguistic diversity.

Role Of Governors And President’s Rule

The role of the Governor is a frequent source of conflict between States and the central government. Governors are appointed by the central government (on advice of central government) and their actions are often seen as central interference in State affairs, especially when the State is ruled by a different party than at the center. Governors have discretionary powers, adding to controversy. The Sarkaria Commission recommended non-partisan appointments for Governors. Article 356, providing for President's rule (takeover of State government by Union government) if the State government cannot function constitutionally, is highly controversial. The Governor recommends President's rule, which must be ratified by Parliament and can extend for three years. This provision has been misused to dismiss State governments having majority support, or preventing majority parties from forming government. Courts can examine the constitutional validity of President's rule. The use of Article 356 increased after 1967 when non-Congress governments came to power in States while Congress was at the center, leading to conflicts.

A political cartoon illustrating the frequent dismissal or removal of State governments as a game, highlighting the political instability and use of powers like President's rule in center-State relations.

The cartoon "When Nehru was appointing governors, some were reluctant to quit ministerial chairs" suggests that even early on, appointments were potentially political, with politicians seeing governorships as lesser positions than ministerial roles.

A political cartoon by Shankar, suggesting that some politicians might be hesitant or reluctant to accept the position of Governor, perhaps viewing it as less influential or desirable than other political roles.

Demands For New States

Demand for creating new States is another source of tension. The national movement fostered both national unity and regional unity based on language/culture. The democratic ideals led to decisions to create States based on common cultural and linguistic identity. The demand for linguistic States grew after Independence, leading to the setting up of the States Reorganisation Commission (1953) and reorganisation of States in 1956. This process continued, creating States like Maharashtra/Gujarat (1960), Punjab/Haryana (1966), northeastern States, and later, Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, Jharkhand (2000), and Telangana (2014) by dividing existing large States based on demands and administrative efficiency needs. Struggles for new States based on regional identity continue (e.g., Vidarbha in Maharashtra).

A political cartoon by Shankar, humorously depicting a large number of people or demands representing the push for creating new States in India, suggesting the frequency and intensity of these demands.

The cartoon "Flood of demands for creating new States" illustrates the numerous and persistent demands for new States based on various factors like language, region, or identity.

Interstate Conflicts

Disputes also frequently arise between two or more States. While legal disputes are settled by the judiciary (arbitration mechanisms), many disputes have political implications requiring negotiation. Two types of disputes recur:

• Border disputes: States claim territories belonging to neighboring States. These are often challenging due to linguistic diversity in border areas (e.g., Maharashtra-Karnataka over Belgaum, Manipur-Nagaland, Punjab-Haryana over Chandigarh).
• Sharing of river waters: Disputes over sharing waters of interstate rivers are very serious as they affect drinking water and agriculture (e.g., Cauvery water dispute between Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, Narmada water dispute between Gujarat, MP, Maharashtra). Despite river water tribunals, disputes often reach the Supreme Court. Conflicts over this vital resource test the cooperative spirit of States.

The statement "So, federalism is all about conflicts! First, we talked about Centre-State conflicts and now conflict among States. Can’t we live together peacefully?" reflects a view that sees federalism primarily as a source of conflict, questioning whether peaceful coexistence is possible amidst these tensions. However, federalism aims to manage these inevitable conflicts peacefully through institutional mechanisms and political processes like negotiation, rather than avoiding them entirely.

Special Provisions

An extraordinary feature of India's federal arrangement is the differential treatment provided to certain States through special provisions in the Constitution. While representation in Rajya Sabha is asymmetrical based on population, providing minimal representation to smaller States while giving more to larger ones, other special provisions address unique social, historical, and geographical circumstances of some States.

Most special provisions pertain to the northeastern States (Assam, Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram, etc.) due to their distinct indigenous tribal populations, culture, and history. While intended to protect unique identities and promote development, these provisions have not always prevented alienation and insurgency in parts of the region. Special provisions also exist for hilly States like Himachal Pradesh and some other States (Andhra Pradesh, Goa, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Sikkim, Telangana), often related to developmental needs, historical circumstances, or safeguarding cultural identities.

The statement "I now understand what they meant by ‘intelligent and balanced design’ in the first chapter" suggests that the complex and varied arrangements within India's federalism, including special provisions, reflect a deliberate attempt by the Constitution makers to create a framework that is both balanced and adapted to India's diverse realities, aiming for long-term stability and unity.

Jammu And Kashmir

Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) historically held a unique special status under Article 370 of the Constitution. As a large princely State after independence, it had the option to join India or Pakistan or remain independent. Following tribal infiltrators from Pakistan in 1947, the Maharaja acceded to India, seeking help.

Due to its unique circumstances and being a Muslim-majority State unlike other such areas joining Pakistan, J&K was granted significant autonomy. Article 370 required the State government's concurrence for Union laws on subjects in the Union and Concurrent Lists to apply to J&K. This differed from other States where the division of powers applied automatically. The central government had limited initial powers in J&K, expanding only with the State government's consent. J&K had its own constitution and flag.

However, the special status under Article 370 was removed by the government in August 2019. Subsequently, the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act 2019 bifurcated the State into two Union Territories: Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh, effective from 31 October 2019. This ended J&K's special status and autonomy, making it subject to the same constitutional provisions as other Union Territories of India.

Conclusion

Federalism in India is likened to a rainbow – distinct elements (States) forming a harmonious pattern together. It requires continuously balancing the powers and needs of the central government and the States. No mere legal or institutional formula can guarantee smooth functioning. Ultimately, a federal polity's success depends on people and political processes developing a culture of mutual trust, toleration, cooperation, and restraint.

Indian federalism celebrates both unity and diversity. Forcing unity by suppressing differences leads to social strife, alienation, and undermines unity. A responsive political system sensitive to diversities and open to demands for autonomy provides the basis for a cooperative federation, ensuring that different regions and identities feel valued and included within the national framework.

Exercises

Content for Exercises is excluded as per your instructions.