Compare and contrast the British and Indian approaches to Parliamentary sovereignty. (2023, 10 Marks)

Paper	GS Paper 2
Word Limit	150 words
Syllabus Topic	Comparison of the Indian constitutional scheme with that of other countries; Parliament

Model Answer

Parliamentary sovereignty means Parliament is the supreme law-maker. Britain follows it fully. India adopted the Westminster model but placed Parliament under a written Constitution.

British Approach

• Based on A.V. Dicey: Parliament can make or unmake any law.
• No codified constitution; courts cannot strike down an Act of Parliament.
• Under the Human Rights Act, 1998, courts can only issue a “declaration of incompatibility”.

Indian Approach

• The Constitution is supreme; Parliament works within it.
• Judicial review under Articles 13, 32 and 226.
• Federal division of powers through the Seventh Schedule.
• Amending power under Article 368 is limited by the basic structure doctrine (Kesavananda Bharati, 1973).

Similarities

• Cabinet is collectively responsible to the lower house (Article 75(3) in India).
• Both protect parliamentary privileges (Article 105 in India).

Conclusion

India blends parliamentary sovereignty with judicial supremacy. This balance keeps Parliament strong while protecting constitutionalism and citizens’ rights.

Related PYQs

• “The growth of cabinet system has practically resulted in the marginalisation of the parliamentary supremacy.” Elucidate. (2024)
• “Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution is a limited power and it cannot be enlarged into absolute power.” In the light of this statement explain whether Parliament under Article 368 of the Constitution can destroy the Basic Structure of the Constitution by expanding its amending power? (2019)
• What was held in the Coelho case? In this context, can you say that judicial review is of key importance amongst the basic features of the Constitution? (2016)