Comparison of Indian Constitution with Other Countries

India vs. France

• India and France have a written constitution however; France has changed its constitution quite often due to instabilities. Currently, it is the 5th constitution in the history of France.
• Type of Government: Both the countries have elected heads for respective terms.

• French Constitution can be amended with a 60% majority similar to India's process of amendments.

• Both the nations are Republic with the elected head of the State.

• India has borrowed ideas of liberty, equality and fraternity in the Preamble from the French Constitution.

• Both the nations have a power for emergency provision.

Political Model:

• France has adopted a semi–Presidential System with the President having more power than the Prime Minister whereas India has adopted a Parliamentary form of Government with more power vested with the Prime Minister.
• Tenure of Head of Government: Indian PM has a tenure of 5 years whereas French President has for 7 years.

Philosophical aspects:

• There is no provision for Procedure established by law or Due process of law in the French Constitution.
• France adopted complete separation of state from religion, while Indian is more of a principled distance but not complete separation.
• France operates on a unitary model rather than federalism as in India.

Judiciary setup:

• There is no role of the judiciary in conducting elections in India whereas in France the judiciary plays an important role.
• The French court is divided in two parts i.e., Judicial Courts and administrative courts but in India there is no such structure.

Unitary/Federal:

Both have a federal structure. Like India, Canada has residuary powers lies with the centre.Appointment of the Governor: Central government appoints the Governor for the States and Provinces.

Executive setup:

• Members are elected by the first past the post system
• Both have a responsible government which is collectively responsible to the lower house.

Judiciary setup:

• The appointment and advisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is the same as India.

Legislative setup:

• Law made by the Parliament is applicable to the whole country.

Written/Unwritten Constitution:

• Canada is guided by both written and unwritten law whereas India is guided as by the written Constitution.

Political setup:

• Canada has a monarchical system whereas India has the President as head of the State.

Executive setup:

• Governor-General is appointed by the monarch on the advice of the Prime Minister whereas in India the President is elected by an indirect election.

Citizenship:

• There is a provision of dual citizenship in Canada whereas India does not give dual citizenship.

Judicial setup:

• It has multiple legal systems whereas in the case of India it is absent.

Republic:

• Both the nations are Republic with the elected head of the State.

Political setup:

• Both have a Parliament form of Government in which the Chancellor/PM is head of the Government and the President has mainly ceremonial and supervisory duties.
• India has borrowed Emergency provisions from Germany.
• Both have a federal system.
• Both have the features of fundamental rights.

• Germany has a rigid Constitution whereas India has a flexible and rigid Constitution.

Citizenship:

• Dual citizenship is allowed under certain circumstances.

• Both have written constitutions.

Legislative setup:

• Both have the Parliament as the highest legislative body.
• Both have two houses in the Parliament in which the lower House is more powerful than the upper House.
• Just like in India, the No-Confidence motion led to the dissolution of the House.
• In Japan, Upper House members have a term of 6 years and every year half the members retire.

Philosophical aspects:

• Supremacy of Constitution and Judicial Review.
  Both the nations have Procedure established by Law.

Executive setup:

• Similar to India, the PM in Japan can belong to either House.
• The Council of Ministers is responsible to the Lower House, same as in India.

Judiciary setup:

• Appointment, removal and fixed retirement age of Judges in Japan is similar to India.

• Japan has a Rigid Constitution whereas India has a flexible and rigid Constitution.
• The Japanese Constitution provides for a unitary state.

Executive setup:

• Ministers are appointed by the Prime Minister but in the case of India it is appointed by the President on the advice of the PM.
• In Japan their Parliament elects the PM from the party with the majority whereas in India such does not happen.

Political setup:

• Japan is a Constitutional Monarchy whereas India is a Republic.
• In Japan, all the international treaties have to be ratified by the Diet, which is not the case in India.

Judiciary setup:

• Judges are appointed by the Diet but in India there is no role of Parliament.

• Both have written the Constitution.
• Both India and Australia have federal parliamentary nations with States and Territories.

Legislative setup:

• There is a provision for 2nd reading and refer it to a committee which can suggest some recommendations similar to India.
• India borrowed a concurrent list from Australia.
• Both the nations have a provision for joint sitting to resolve the deadlock between both the Houses.

Judiciary setup:

• The Supreme Court is the final court in Australia in all matters just like in India.
• Both the nations have an independent judiciary and emphasises on separation of power.
• Procedure for appointment and removal of Judges in Australia is the same as in India.

• Unlike India, State of emergency legislation differs in each state of Australia.
• There is a dual provision of citizenship in Australia, this provision was added on 4th April, 2002.

Political setup:

• In Australia the head of the Government in the commonwealth Queen is represented by a Governor general.

Legislative setup:

• The Australian Constitution can be amended only with the approval of the electorate through a national referendum in which all the adults of the electorate must participate.
• The Upper house is elected through the list system whereas in India it is elected by Single Transferable Vote.
• Legislators of lower House are elected for 3 years in Australia whereas in India they are elected for 5 years.

• Both nations have written a Constitution.
• Both the Nations have the concept of Fundamental Rights.
• Both the nations have Preamble as their introductory statements.
• Both nations have the office of Vice-President.

Legislative setup:

• Both the nations have representatives from their states in the Legislature.
• Both the nations have provision for removal of the President i.e., Impeachment process.

Philosophical aspects:

• The concept of Judicial review in India is borrowed from the USA.
• The concept of Procedure Established by Law in India is borrowed from the USA.
• There is a separation of powers between the different organs of the government.
• There is a federal system in the USA similar to India.
• The USA has a Supremacy of Constitution similar to India.

• The USA has a rigid constitution whereas India has a rigid and flexible Constitution.

Political setup:

• The USA has a presidential form of government whereas India has a Parliamentary form of Government.

Executive setup:

• In the USA the President is directly elected by the people whereas in India the President is indirectly elected.

Amendability:

• The US Constitution has only been changed 27 times in 200 years.
• Residuary power is vested with the states whereas in India it is vested with the Union.

Judiciary setup:

• In India judges have retirement age whereas in the USA judges can be in the office until they enjoy good health.
• Each States has its own Constitution and Supreme Court which is absent in the case of India.
• USA offers dual citizenship which is absent in case of India.

• Type of Government: Both have a Parliamentary form of Government.
• India has adopted the Rule of Law from Britain.

Executive setup:

• Both the nations have a presence of Cabinet system.
• Both the nations have the presence of Dual heads of Government.
• Both the nations have multiple parties’ representation in the Parliament.

Amendability:

• The British law can be passed, amended and repealed by a Simple Majority like in India.

Judiciary setup:

• Removal of Judges is the same as in India.

Written/Unwritten:

• The UK has an unwritten Constitution only a small portion is covered in a written document whereas India has a written constitution.
• The UK has a flexible Constitution & it is the unitary state.

Political setup:

• The UK is a Constitutional Monarchy whereas India is a Republic.
• Offer dual citizenship in the UK.
• In the UK the Prime Minister has to be elected from the lower House whereas in India he can be from either House of Parliament.

Legislative setup:

• In the UK there is a convention that once a Speaker, always a Speaker, thus a former Speaker holds no political membership whereas in India the Speaker is still a member of the party.
• Parliament has the supreme power in the UK whereas the Indian Constitution has supreme power.

Executive setup:

• In both countries the Prime Minister is appointed by the President.

Legislative setup:

• The Lower House is more powerful just like in India.
• They both have a provision for fundamental rights.

Political Model:

• Russia has a Semi Presidential system of Government while India has a Parliamentary form of Government.

Executive setup:

• Russia PM performs President’s Duty in case of his death or resignation while the same responsibility is given to Vice-President in case of India.
• In Russia the President can’t have more than two consecutive terms in a row but there is no such limitation in India.
• The President is Stronger in Russia while the PM enjoys more power in the case of India.
• Term of the Russian President is 6 years while it is 5 years for the Indian President.

Legislative setup:

• Members of Lower House in Russia are chosen by Proportional Representation System while in India they are chosen by First Past the Post System

Judicial setup:

• There is not a Single Integrated Judiciary in Russia like in India.