Enhancing Representation, for a Just Electoral System

Proportional Representation in India

Syllabus: GS Paper 2 – Salient Features of the Representation of People’s Act, Parliament and State Legislatures—Structure, Functioning, Conduct of Business, Powers & Privileges and Issues Arising out of these.
Context: With the upcoming general election to the parliament looming large, conversations surrounding the delimitation exercise and the disparities in representation among states in the houses of parliament are gaining prominence.
Source: The Hindu | Editorial dated 14 November 2023

  • The Indian Parliament comprises three integral components:
    • the President
    • the Council of States (Rajya Sabha),
    • and the House of the People (Lok Sabha).
  • Rajya Sabha serves as the Upper House of Parliament and represents states and union territories of the Indian Union.
  • Rajya Sabha members indirectly elected through proportional representation.
  • The maximum strength of Rajya Sabha is 250, with 238 members from states and 12 nominated members.
  • Lok Sabha functions as the Lower House of Parliament and represents the people of India as a whole.
  • Lok Sabha Members are directly elected through the First Past the Post (FPTP) system.
  • The maximum strength of Lok Sabha is 550, with 530 members representing states and 20 members representing union territories.
  • Proportional Representation in India:
    • Enshrined in India’s constitution, proportional representation governs the allocation of seats in the lower house of parliament, the Lok Sabha.
    • According to Article 81, each state is entitled to seats proportionate to its population, further allocated to constituencies of approximately equal size.
  • Representation Ratio:
    • An Indian Member of Parliament (MP) is tasked with representing an average of 2.5 million citizens.
  • Legislative Composition:
    • India boasts approximately 4,126 Members of the Legislative Assembly.
    • The Lok Sabha comprises 543 MPs, while the Rajya Sabha consists of 245 MPs.
  • Concerns Regarding Representation:
    • Despite the significant number of citizens, there are notably too few parliamentarians and Assembly members entrusted with the responsibility of citizen welfare in India.
    • This raises questions about the effectiveness of representation and the ability of elected officials to address the diverse needs of the population.
  • In 1952, MPs represented a relatively uniform number of people, with around 4.32 lakh eligible voters per constituency.
  • Since then, there has been a substantial increase in the electorate size across all constituencies, leading to significant variation in the number of voters each MP represents.
  • A significant example from 2014 highlights the disparity between Lakshadweep, with less than 50,000 eligible voters, and Malkajgiri (now in Telangana), boasting over 30 lakh eligible voters.
  • The reduction of the voting age from 21 to 18 in 1988 contributed to a notable expansion in constituency size, with the average constituency accommodating nearly a million or 10 lakh voters.
  • Although there was minimal change between 1989 and 1991, the average electorate in a parliamentary constituency surpassed the one-million or 10-lakh mark in 1996.
  • By the 2014 elections, the average parliamentary constituency in India had more than 1.5 million or 15 lakh voters, with eight constituencies having over two million or 20 lakh voters.
  • Regulation of Lok Sabha Seats:
    • The constitution of India, through the Seventh Amendment in 1956, establishes a maximum limit of 520 elected seats in the Lok Sabha—500 from states and 20 from union territories (UTs).
    • Subsequent amendments, including the Fourteenth Amendment (1962), the Thirty-First Amendment (1973), and the Goa, Daman and Diu Reorganisation Act (1987), have expanded the Lok Sabha’s maximum sanctioned strength to 552.
  • Proportional Redistribution of Seats:
    • Article 82 of the constitution mandates the proportional redistribution of seats following each census based on updated population figures.
    • The Forty-Second Amendment in 1976, enacted during the Emergency rule led by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, suspended seat revision until after the 2001 Census.
    • This temporary halt was intended to endorse family planning policies, safeguarding states that effectively reduced fertility rates from facing adverse consequences.
  • Delayed Seat Reallocation:
    • In 2002, the Eighty-Fourth Amendment further delayed seat reallocation, extending the freeze until the next decennial census after 2026, scheduled for 2031.
    • The Eighty-Seventh Amendment in 2003 allowed for redistricting within states based on the 2001 population figures, though the overall number of seats allocated to each state remained unchanged.
    • By 2031, the population figures used to allocate parliamentary seats to each state will be six decades old, posing a potential challenge for accurate representation.
  • Population Dynamics Variation:
    • Varied population dynamics exist between non-Hindi speaking southern States and Hindi-speaking northern States.
  • Shifts in Population Share:
    • From 1971 to 2011, the population share in northern states, encompassing Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Uttarakhand, and Uttar Pradesh, increased from 44% to 48.2%.
    • Conversely, the population share in the five southern States (Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Telangana) decreased from 24.9% to 21.1%.
  • Impact on Seat Distribution:
    • Implementing equal-sized Lok Sabha constituencies based on current population projections (2023) would result in the southern States losing 23 seats, while the northern States would gain 37.
    • This would lead to a 6.81% increase in the share of political representation for northern States and a 4.24% decline for southern States.
  • Contradiction in Policy Goals:
    • Assuming an increase in parliamentary seats, there would be disparities in representation, favoring certain states and potentially disadvantaging those that have succeeded in population control.
    • To minimize adverse effects, increasing the number of parliamentary seats significantly (around 848) is suggested to maintain democratic representation ratios.
    • Delimitation should consider factors beyond population, including geographical determinism, economic productivity, linguistic history, and fairness.
    • Reducing proportional representation for southern States not only discourages their efforts but also sends a counterproductive message to other states.
    • Ensuring a balanced representation where smaller states like Sikkim have a voice in Parliament alongside more populous states like Bihar is emphasized.
    • The fiscal impact of delimitation on future transfers to states needs careful reconsideration.
  • A U.S. House of Representatives member typically represents around 700,000 citizens.
  • In Pakistan, a member of the National Assembly represents approximately 600,000 citizens.
  • In Canada, each MP represents about 97,000 eligible voters.
  • A British MP is accountable to approximately 72,000 voters.
  • Similarly, in Bangladesh, a member of the National Assembly represents approximately 500,000 citizens.
  • MPs in countries like Britain, Canada, or the United States are elected from geographically determined constituencies.
  • Proposal for More States: Suggesting an increase in the number of states in India from 29 to potentially 50 or 75, drawing a parallel with the United States.
  • Historical Context: Referring to the creation of linguistic states and union territories by the States Reorganisation Commission in 1953, highlighting the potential benefits of having more and smaller-sized states.
  • Alleviating Dominance Concerns: Addressing worries about the dominance of North Indian or large states in politics by advocating for a New State Reorganisation Commission to assess socio-economic and administrative viability.
  • Potential New States: Listing examples of potential new states like Bundelkhand, Gorkhaland, Jammu, Karu Nadu, Kongu Nadu, Mithila, Saurashtra, Tulu Nadu, and Vidarbha.
  • Administrative Efficiency: Emphasizing the need to split or redesign existing linguistic states for improved administrative efficiency and democratic accountability.
  • Strengthening Local Democracy: Asserting that enhancing local democratic representation will contribute to strengthening India’s democracy and addressing concerns across diverse regions.
  • The freeze on seat distribution since 1971 may not align with current demographic shifts.
  • Varying population growth rates among states lead to unequal representation.
  • Delimitation may result in a biased representation favoring Hindi-speaking northern states.
  • Southern states, successful in reducing population growth, could face disproportionate consequences.
  • Despite contributing to 35% of the country’s GDP with only 18% of the population, the southern states may face a disadvantage in the delimitation process.
  • This situation may compromise democratic ratios, impeding MPs’ effectiveness in addressing the diverse needs of the citizenry.
  • Delimitation based solely on population may overlook important factors like geographical determinism, economic productivity, linguistic history, and fairness.
  • Ignoring these factors could lead to an inadequate representation of various societal and regional nuances.
  • Concerns arise regarding inadequate funding for southern states after the 15th Finance Commission based its recommendations on the 2011 Census instead of the earlier 1971 Census.
  • The exercise may also influence the allocation of seats reserved for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (SC/ST) in each state under Articles 330 and 332.
  • Commitment to Reallocation After 2031:
    • Advocating for a commitment to reallocate parliamentary seats after the 2031 Census.
    • Stressing the need to avoid further delay in addressing India’s representational future.
    • Highlighting the risk of potential damage to India’s federal design if the conversation is deferred.
  • Increase the Number of Lok Sabha Seats:
    • Proposing an increase in the number of seats in the Lok Sabha to address the current imbalance.
    • Acknowledging that this approach could be more politically feasible than reapportioning existing seats.
  • Politically Feasible Expansion:
    • Expanding the Lok Sabha to a size where the most overrepresented state does not lose any seats.
  • Reforming Rajya Sabha Composition:
    • Advocating for reform in the composition of the Rajya Sabha to address representation issues.
  • Addressing Indirect Election Challenges:
    • Tackling the challenge of indirect election in the Rajya Sabha by exploring the feasibility of direct elections.
    • Examining alternatives, such as transitioning towards a fixed number of seats for each state, mirroring the model observed in the U.S. Senate.
  • Promoting Timely Federal Dialogue:
    • Advocating for a timely and comprehensive federal dialogue concerning interstate inequality, with a specific focus on representation challenges.
    • Stressing the crucial need to address these issues in the broader context of a collaborative federal agreement between the central government and the states.
  • Integration into a Comprehensive Federal Agreement:
    • Proposing that the conversation on representational issues be part of a larger negotiated federal compact.
    • Highlighting the significance of encompassing various concerns, including taxes, fiscal allocations, migration, and interstate inequality, within this comprehensive framework.

In conclusion, delimitation processes should transcend a narrow reliance on population figures alone. It is essential to incorporate diverse criteria, including development indicators, human development indices, and the success of family planning programs. Recognizing and rewarding states with effective family planning initiatives becomes crucial in fostering continued commitment. A review of fund devolution guidelines is necessary to ensure a more balanced approach, reflecting varied state needs.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *