A MISSED CHANCE TO STRENGTHEN INDIAN FEDERALISM

The Constitution is not always clear on the balance of power between the Centre and states. The Supreme Court's J&K ruling stopped short of clarifying it

- KALEESWARAM RAJ

INDIAN federalism is unique. The Constitution does not use the || word federalism anywhere. However, it prescribes a federal scheme of governance almost throughout. It tries to strike a balance between the Union and the states. It contemplates the division of powers and responsibilities between the Union and the states. Unlike in the US, Indian federalism was not spontaneous. We have been "holding together" the states which were not "coming together", as it is often said.

Federalism addresses various concerns such as national security, people's welfare, preservation of identity and diversity of communities, and administrative efficiency, among other things. India became a Union according to BR Ambedkar's prescription. In certain areas, unitary features do overshadow the Constitution's federal features. For example, parliament has the power to alter the very scheme of the Constitution. Provisions such as Article 352 on proclaiming Emergency and Article 356 on proclaiming president's rule in the states empower the Union to act over the states.

There is no reciprocal power for the states in such contingencies. In the realms of administration, the Centre can appoint governors as the titular heads of states. We also have a fiscal scheme where the Union often enjoys superiority over the states.

Thus, Indian federalism is said to possess strong centralist traits.

Because of this centralist character, conscious efforts should be made to maintain the balance of powers and cordiality in Centre-state relation. The Centre should itself be cautious about the perils of centralisation. A situation of the powerful Union taking a hostile attitude to oppositionruled states should be avoided, as it might create dissatisfaction and a feeling of dismemberment among the people.