Category: Political Science Notes

Some of the most important texts of behavioral revolution according to David Easton are as follows: 1. Regularities 2. Verification 3. Techniques 4. Quantification 5. Values 6. Systematisation 7. Pure Science 8. Integration.

1. Regularities:

If observed properly, some uni-formities in human behaviour can be observed, discovered and found. These uniformities or regularities lead to generalisations or theories to explain human behaviour. Such as, repression causes rebellion everywhere.

2. Verification:

These uniformities or generalisations should be valid, which means testable, at least in principle with reference to some relevant behaviour. It should be subject to checking and rechecking.

3. Techniques:

There are some acceptable, public and standard means and methods for observing, recording and analysing behaviour. They are regarded as methodological techniques, such as sampling, interview, panel studies etc. which should remain available to all. These techniques are continuously reformed and refined to make data of observation more reliable and communicable among scholars.

4. Quantification:

Uniformities obtained through observation should be precise, definite and measurable for this purpose; they should be quantified or expressed, either in numbers or symbols, as is done in natural sciences.

5. Values:

The behavioural scholar does not start with any preconceived notions, or values because it vitiates his findings. Even if he believes in certain values, he either keeps them separate or announces them beforehand. He remains fully convinced that ultimate values or ends cannot be scientifically proved or disproved as their source of origin, form and ambit cannot be identified empirically. A communalist or a communist cannot, while remaining as such, become a dispassionate political scientist.

6. Systematisation:

There should be close collaboration between theory and research, which are ‘closely interrelated parts of a coherent and orderly body of knowledge’. Research must be theory-oriented, and theory should be well-supported by data. Systematisation means close relationship between theory and data.

7. Pure Science:

Behaviouralists put great emphasis on developing a ‘pure science’ of politics and in conducting basic research. That knowledge alone can be rightly put to the solution of urgent problems of society. Understanding and explanation of political behaviour logically precede its practical application.

8. Integration:

It believes in interrelatedness of all social sciences and aims to make Political Science ‘interdisciplinary’. The ‘political man’ can be understood as a whole, by linking him with his other aspects: social, cultural, economic, religious, psychological and historical. Such an outlook is likely to make political studies again a ‘master science’ or an architechtonic discipline.

In this sense, behaviouralism is not merely an ‘approach’, a mere ‘mood’ as Dahl says, or an ordinary reform movement, but ‘a total commitment to the broad and essential requirements of scientific knowl­edge’. However, Easton’s enunciation of behaviouralism as above involves both its early and later phases. Early behaviouralism neglected values completely, and was individual-oriented. Later, it moved towards macro study and incorporating values as ‘facts’ or ‘givens’.

It would be quite clear that the main characteristic of political behaviouralism is not inherently different from Eastonian explanation. But it includes the perceptual, motivational and attitudinal aspects as well.

Upload and Share Your Article:

Growth of behaviouralism is the outcome of varied reasons marked mainly by a dissatisfaction with prevailing historical descriptive, legal-formal, and normative perspectives. In 1908, Graham Wallas (Human Nature in Politics) and Arthur F. Bentley (The Process of Government) advocated psychological and group-oriented approaches. Walter Lippmann (Public Opinion) in 1922 took up the study of public opinion and political attitude-formation.

In 1951, David B. Truman revived Bentley’s neglected orientation in his the Governmental Process. But the pioneering efforts were made by Charles E. Merriam (New Aspects of Politics, 1925) in early 1920s. His efforts came out in the form of famous ‘Chicago School’ which produced a host of political scientists, such as Harold F. Gosnell, Harold D. Lasswell, V.O. Key, Herbert A. Simon, Gabriel Almond, etc. In 1928, Stuart A. Rice (Quantitative Methods in Politics) used statistical techniques in election and roll-call studies.

In 1930s, a group of European scholars like Marx, Durkheim, Freud, Pareto, Mosca, Michels, Weber etc., in view of rising totalitarian regimes and other crises, presented ‘macro’ or broad approaches. But Paul F. Lazarsfeld, Theodore W. Adorno, etc., remained interested in the ‘indi­vidual’ as the unit of analysis.

So far behaviouralism remained only a ‘movement of protest’ against traditional methods of analysis. After the World War II, the movement came out in the form of an academic revolution. It was the result of interest taken by the Social Science Research Council and the^ American Political Science Association, and other social scientists belonging to Europe and Japan. New departments, chairs, professorships, project studies, etc., were started in most of American universities.

Behaviouralism very soon became an irresistible, pervasive influence everywhere. David Easton, Karl Deutsch, Robert A. Dahl, Heinz Eulau and others led the behavioural persuasion in almost every branch of Political Science. The discipline was soon thronged with new theories, approaches, paradigms, and methodological tools and techniques.

Evolution of behaviouralism has witnessed certain trends also. In its first phase (1920-30), it paid more attention to quantitative aspects and less on substantive and theoretical problems. In its second phase, upto 1950, behaviouralists moved in both substantive and non-substantive areas. After that, they began to specialise in various directions: multi-methodologism, behavioural theories, behavioural positivism and Watsonian behaviouralism.

In the sixties, behaviouralists themselves were split as:

(i) Theoretical behaviouralists, and

(ii) Positive behaviouralists.

The latter were enamoured of mathematical techniques, multi-variate analysis and other quantitative strategies. Theoretical behaviouralists criticised them severely as having been only interested in general properties of human behaviour, imposing irrelevant models upon reality, inventing a jargon, and were unable to advance solutions to human problems. Of late, both of them are gradually coming closer to each other. Behaviouralism can also be broadly divided as (a) pure behaviouralism, and (b) applied behaviouralism.

Pure behaviouralism aims at contributing to theory and techniques of the discipline, and remains ready to study any problem its purpose is ‘pure research’, or knowledge for the sake of knowledge, seeking generalisations on the basis of technical judgements. It tries to gather all relevant facts for knowing the ‘basic processes’, and to say ‘why things so happen.’ The purists have their own technical language and a limited audience of their own persuasion.

Applied behaviouralists take up problems of important social consequences and collaborate with several disciplines to solve them. Often they behave like social reformers, administrators or engineers and have some consideration towards persons and situations. They take up cases without any intent to generalise, and accept importance of the role of differ­ences. Such researches are interested in ‘how’ can the things be changed; as such, they collect directly related facts.

Applied behaviouralists report in common language, and have wider audience of practitioners and their clientele is large. Their aim is to solve practical problems and they regard their job as a useful profession. Though the two types of researches are distinctly separate, yet, in principle, can be mixed up in a person or a team of researchers.

All later developments, in the beginning, have made, behaviourahsm, consequently. Political Science itself an ‘Interdisciplinary’ subject. It has gone from individual to groups and systems, techniques to theory, politics to social sciences, and outward human behaviour to ecology, bio-politics and genetics.

Some of the scholars like Norman Jacobson are worried about the independent status of the discipline ‘that politics is psychology, or it is sociology, that it is moral philosophy or theology, almost anything but politics.’ Hence, tracing out the elements of ‘polities’ in human behaviour becomes an urgent necessity to make Political Science ‘trans-disciplinary’, meta-theoretical or overarching.

Upload and Share Your Article:

A ‘political technology’ is manoeuvrable interpersonal human relationship aiming to bring about some desired political change or action. A man can act on his own based on his drives, motives or understanding. However, many other devices can activate him also.

Tools used for inducting political changes:

(i) Invoking authority of constitutional structures,

(ii) Enforcement of statutory laws,

(iii) Use of coercion and

(iv) Appeal on moral and spiritual grounds.

Their separation and relationship with political technologies should be made out clearly.

1. Constitutional Structures:

Normally a Constitution is an agreed form of the exercise of social and political power. Each Constitution provides many structures of power and gives in some cases details of their working by which power is generated, exercised, transformed, transferred and devolved. These structures and procedures attached with them aim at making of a particular form of polity.

The Constitutional Structures are captioned here as ‘Basic Structures’, ‘Basic Technologies’ or ‘Basic Political Technologies’ (BTs and BPTs). A constitution can be considered as the storehouse of such commonly ‘accepted’, ‘agreed’, ‘legitimised’, ‘constitutionalised’, ‘basic’, or ‘first-level’ political technologies. Inclusion of these Basic Structures in the Constitution provides form, structure, location, distribution and direction to the power of State.

The Constitution provides many legitimate, neutral and non-political structures along with their processes, viz. Government, Supreme Court, Reserve Bank, Election Commission, Armed Forces etc. Behind them, there is consensus of the people who render tacit obedience to them, even accept their coercive and non-coercive sanctions as normal.

Nevertheless, these structures also require and necessitate the prescription of mode, way and form of exercising that power. This is done through and by providing Next or Next-to-next Level Structures or some specific technologies in the Constitution itself. It can be seen in the unified structure of judiciary or bureaucracy. In some cases, procedural details to operate Basic or Next-level structures are also given in the Constitution.

But, the selection of type, style, mode, and method of their exercise is left in the hands of political leaders. The latter determine the mode, method, and direction of the exercise of the power of basic and next-level structures. In a democracy or rule of law government, they operate over and above every type of political technology.

2. Statutory Laws:

Below Basic Structure level, there are statutory laws passed by the Legis­lature. They are subordinate additions to the above-mentioned constitutional structures made by the ruling political party or group of political parties in a coalition government. Often they are made in terms of promises stated in its agenda or election manifesto. Laws passed according to an established constitutional procedure, are not considered part of active or day-to-day politics.

They become part of impersonal laws of governance. However, they are outcomes of majority voting on the floor of the House, and a new majority after the formation of another government can change or modify those laws. Until that moment arrives, those laws continue to display people’s consensus and represent legitimacy of the regime.

These Basic and Next-level Structures are found in the Constitution of every country. Statutory laws passed by the Parliament are separate from political technologies. They are different from political technologies as those permanent or basic structures, which were originally ‘political’, but had gone out of the field of active politics, rivalry and opposition. They largely attained legitimacy earned on grounds of consensus and common accep­tance over a long period of duration. Now they happen to control modes of politics.

Nevertheless, politics can demote a Basic political structure or a Next-level structure or statutory laws again to the level of political technol­ogies. It can also promote the latter two to upper levels. All the four: Basic Structure, Next-level Structures, Statutory Laws and Political Technologies may clash against or co-operate with each other from time to time around demands of politics.

Gaining more and more consensus, the number of Basic or Next-level structures, due to deference of the people to them, may increase. Their number would decrease with the spread of dissent, dissatisfaction, estrangement and rebellion. Even maintenance and continuation of Basic technologies (BTs) depends upon availability and proper exercise of political technologies.

Ignorance, lack of knowledge, experience and skill, neglect and misuse of political technologies may ultimately result in the erosion of the effect of basic structures of a Constitution, and weakening of the democratic system. However, Basic and Next-level structures of the Constitution and Statutory laws are not permanent fixtures of a democratic system, and their form, scope and authority can change under pressure of politics.

Politics is largely the result of exercise of free will and influence. However, coercion and morality also play the role in the operations of democratic politics. Political technologies may make use of any one of them or all together.

3. Use of Coercion:

In order to ensure compliance on a continuous basis, political leaders both motivate the people, and also advance allurements and deprivations to them in many ways. There can be milder or harsh forms of threats and coercion.

All political technologies, exercising mild or severe form of coercion in favour of democratic values, are considered ‘political’. Conventionally, when the form of coercion is either absent or is mild, it comes under the category of ‘Political’ technology. However, there can be ‘coercive’ or ‘coercion-based’ political technologies.

Quantum of coercion in them is comparatively more harsh or severe. Still their use is considered political and permissible in democracies. In democratic systems, the use of Non-coercive Political Technologies (NPTs) and Coercive Political Technologies (CPTs) are found subordinate to the demands of popular opinion and democratically elected institutions.

Therefore, after exhausting all political and legal avenues, sometimes even before that, the use of force or power is considered permis­sible within the parameters of the democratic system. Coercion in democracy can be used, with the approval of the consent-giving majority, against the hostile and non-complying elements.

4. Appeal on Moral and Spiritual Grounds:

Identification with common grounds of mores, norms or values also activate humans, including a deep desire to tread on the path of salvation. Gandhi, in the pre-independence era, created such technologies based on his under­standing of metaphysics and his sense of morality, which he regarded as a way to salvation.’

In this sense, his technologies of ‘satyagraha’ appear ‘moral’ and ‘apolitical’ or ‘non-political’. He claimed to have developed a science of ‘satyagraha’.’ However, his ultimate goal was to be realised by launching those technologies to attain Swaraj (Self-Government), for redressal of the grievances of the peoples of South African colonies, and, for the people of India against the British Rule. The Goal of independence was attained in his lifetime. Therefore, all the Gandhian methods are put here under the category of either ‘Non-coercive Political Technologies’ or ‘Gandhian political technologies’.

After spelling out the concept of ‘political technology’ and ascert
aining its relationship to and difference from other tools of political operations, it can be feasible to identify political technologies out of the raw material of past politics of the developing countries, including India. For this, we have to make search for raw material, devise a plan to make and apply them, and calculate the cost of investment.

Upload and Share Your Article:

Meaning of Nationalism:

Suffice it to say here that the people who have same race, language, religion, history, literature, economic interests and political aspirations, feelings of nationalism are aroused among them. Nationalism teaches us to love our motherland.

The nationalist love their motherland, rivers, mountains, flowers, animals and birds very much and they say that motherland is better than paradise. Hans Kohn writes, “Nationalism is an idea, an idea-force which fills man’s brain and heart with new thoughts and sentiments and drives him to translate his consciousness into deeds of organised action”.

According to Dr. Gamer, “It is one of the characteristic features of modem nationalism that most peoples who constitute a nationality aspire either to be independent and to be under a state organisation of their own choice and creation or at least to be accorded a large political autonomy where they are united with another nationality or nationalities in the same state”.

Merits of Nationalism:

(1) Helpful in liberating the country from foreign yoke:

Nationalism infused the spirit of patriotism in the minds of the people. If a country is under the yoke of a foreign rule as was the case in India before 1947, the people can be united for attaining freedom through nationalism.

In the nineteenth century, in Greece, Italy, Bulgaria, Serbia and Poland and in the twentieth century in many countries of Africa, Asia and South America many freedom movements were started. Inspired by the national feelings, the people of these countries freed themselves from the foreign rule.

(2) It leads to social unit:

Through nationalism the feelings of the high and low and cateism are banished from the minds of the people, and social unity is achieved. The nationalist leaders make the people understand with full force that our nation can progress and can have a prestigious place in the world only, when all disparities are removed.

(3) It leads to the spirit of heroism and self-sacrifice:

Nationalism creates the feeling of heroism and self-sacrifice. Every nation has to make several sacrifices for the attainment and protection of its freedom. India at first freed itself from the Turks and the Mughals and later from Britishers.

In order to achieve this aim, our people made many sacrifices which have gained an important place in our history. Similarly, our countrymen made several sacrifices to face the Chinese and Pakistani aggressions and our armed forces displayed a spirit of unique heroism. It forms a golden chapter of our history.

(4) It leads to economic prosperity:

The feeling of nationalism unites the people and they work for the economic prosperity of the country. They bear the burden of extra taxes in order to implement plans in the national interest.

(5) Nationalism enables the country face the economic and political crisis effectively:

Every nation faces an economic or political crisis once or twice in its career, and the world history is a clear proof of it. If the people have national feelings, they will have unity, and the spirit of self-sacrifice. With the help of this spirit, the people of that country shall be able to face the crisis boldly.

(6) It leads to political unity and stability:

Nationalism is a great organising force. Through this force, the leaders create political unity among the people and they crush disintegrating tendencies. It brings about stability in the nation. For example, when on October 20, 1962, China invaded India, the spirit of nationalism was aroused among the people but the Leftist Communists preached in favour of China and their anti-national tendency was clearly seen. Therefore, the then Minister for Home Affairs, Shri Gulzarilal Nanda, put them behind the bars and created political unity and stability in the country.

(7) Nationalism helps in curbing mutual conflicts and quarrels and the attention of the people is drawn towards big problems.

(8) The individual gives up his selfish interest and works for national interest.

(9) True nationalism is an important link between different countries of the world. Mahatma Gandhi, Shri Jawaharlal Nehru and Mrs. Indira Gandhi being true nationalists, were Internationalists also. Under the inspiration of Shri Jawaharlal Nehru, the U.N. declared the year 1965 as international co-operation year.

India under the leadership of Mrs. Gandhi had become President of Non- Aligned Movement. After her assassination on October 31, 1984, Mr. Rajiv Gandhi became the President of Non-Aligned Movement. If the nationalism is liberal, it is not harmful. Liberal nationalists want world peace. They believe in equality, liberty and prosperity of all nations. However, sometimes it becomes aggressive nationalism.

The following are the drawbacks of aggressive nationalism:-

Demerits of Aggressive Nationalism:

(1) Aggressive nationalism leads to racism:

Aggressive nationalism leads to racism. Hitler encouraged racism in the name of nationalism and said that Aryan race was the best race and it had been made to rule all over the world. He turned the Jews out of Germany. Mussolini also believed in racial supremacy. The British likewise believed in the supremacy of the white race.

(2) It encourages Colonialism and Imperialism:

In the name of nationalism many European races discovered many new markets for their goods in the name of racism and established colonies. Later on for the sake of their national interests, they conquered many parts of the world and expanded their empire. The English, Dutch, French, Russians, Japanese, Germans, Italians and Spanish people acted similarly during the nineteenth and twentieth century’s.

(3) It is likely to endanger world peace:

When nationalism takes the extreme form in any country, that country invades other weaker countries, which becomes the basis for a world war. For example, Hitler invaded Austria, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Denmark, Norway, Belgium and France and Russia.

Mussolini invaded Ethiopia, The result of all these invasions, was the Second World War in which there occurred a great destruction of men, money and material. After the Second World War, Pakistan followed this policy and, first in 1947, and later in 1965 and 1971, she invaded India. It resulted in a great loss of life and property to both the countries.

(4) It is hindrance in the way of World Federation and international co­operation:

Militant or aggressive nationalism is a great hindrance in the way of international co-operation. Many modern intellectuals are of the view that in order to establish world peace, it is essential that every state should give up a part of its sovereignty and give it to the world-federation. But militant nationalism proves a hindrance in its way.

Conclusion:

If the nationalism does not take the militant form, it is a good thing. It will help in settling international conflicts. Unity will be established and mutual goodwill and co-operation will be increased. As Hayes has said, “Nationalism will prove a boon for the humanity and the world if it means pure patriotism. If it takes a militant form, it will result in mutual enmity and non-co- operation among the nations and the world peace will be disturbed. In that situation, it will prove a curse”.

Upload and Share Your Article:

Meaning of the Rule of Law:

The Rule of Law is an important contribution of the British Constitution. It means that in the eyes of the law all persons, whether big or small, the highest government official or ordinary citizen, a big capitalist or a poor man, are equal. It also means that in the eyes of law, there is no privileged class.

Irrespective of his or her social status. Everybody will be equally punished for the violation of law. Secondly, nobody is punished in England until his guilt is proved in a law court. Thirdly, there is only one type of laws ordinary laws for deciding disputes between the citizens and the government and there are only one type of courts-Ordinary Courts.

On the contrary, there are separate courts and laws to decide disputes among the citizens, and between the citizens and the government. In France, there are ordinary courts for deciding the disputes between the citizens and there are Administrative Laws and Administrative Courts for deciding disputes between the citizens and the government.

In England, the people attach a great importance to the fact that in their country everybody is equal in the eyes of law and there are equal laws for all the people and no body or class of the people is given any special privilege in this regard.

Even the Queen cannot violate any law because nobody is above the law, but everyone is bound by the law. In England the people have secured this right after a long struggle against the absolute Kings. First of all the people obtained a charter from King John.

This charter is called Magna Carta. Later, people opposed the Kings who violated the rights of the people. During the regime of Charles I, Civil War broke out in England and consequently the Parliament protected these rules.

After the Glorious Revolution and during the regime of Queen Victoria these rules were firmly established. There is no list of Fundamental Rights in the British Constitution and the rights of the people are protected through these rules.

Dicey has given three meanings of the rule of law. According to him, “It means in the first place, the absolute supremacy or predominance of regular laws as opposed to the influence of arbitrary power and excludes the existence of arbitrariness, of prerogatives or even of wide discretionary authority on the part of the Government. Englishmen are ruled by the law and by the law alone a man may be punished for a breach of law but he can be punished for nothing else no man is punishable or can be lawfully made to suffer in body or in goods except for a distinct breach of law established in the ordinary legal manner before the ordinary courts of the land.”

Further Dicey writes, “It means again equality before the law or the equal subjection of all classes to the ordinary law of the land administered by the ordinary law courts.’ Dicey continues that, “Not only that with us no man is above the law but (what is a different thing) that here every man, whatever be his rank or condition is subject to the ordinary law of the realm and amenable to the jurisdiction of the ordinary tribunals.”

Prof. Dicey while elaborating the equality of all before law, says, “With us every official, from the Prime Minister to a constable or a collector of taxes, is under the same responsibility for every act done without legal justification as any other citizen”.

Thirdly, according to Dicey, the Rule of Law may be used as a formula for expressing the fact that with us the law of the constitution, the rules which in foreign countries, naturally form part of the constitutional code, are not the sources but the consequences of the rights of individuals as defined and enforced by the courts….. It means that the main principle of the constitution, such as the right to personal or of public meeting, has been set up on the foundation of the old common law and not as things derived from any general Constitutional Theory. Rights in brief, do not flow from the constitution but from judicial decisions as in the famous Wilkes, case.

It is, therefore, clear that the British are not governed by any individual arbitrarily but by the Rule of the law. The criminal has the right to defend himself. Nobody will be punished without his crime being proved against him.

Exceptions or Limitations to the Rule of Law:

When in 1885 ‘Law of the Constitution’ by Dicey was published for the first time, the primary functions of the state were the maintenance of law and order, defence and foreign relations. But today, since welfare state has been established in Great Britain, the functions of the state and its Discretionary Powers have been increased. Dicey himself felt in 1915 that there was a new danger to the Rule of Law because at that time the First World War was being fought and the British Government was using many discretionary powers.

Since then many limitations have arisen which are as under:

(1) Delegated Legislation:

Today the British Parliament has no time to go into the details of the law, because the number of laws which are introduced in the Parliament, is very high. Secondly, the parliament lacks technical knowledge which is needed for the formulation of complicated laws.

Therefore, the parliament only discusses the outlines and the main principles of the Bills and passes them. The responsibility for framing detailed rules and regulations lies with the cabinet or the executive. This system is called Delegated Legislation. The ministers, with the help of their permanent secretaries, make many rules and regulations for every law.

These rules and regulations remains in operation till they are declared illegal by the courts. Therefore, the power of making rules and regulations for each and every law is a great limitation on the Rule of Law, because this system gives many discretionary powers to the executive, and the citizens very rarely challenge these rules and regulations in the law courts.

(2) Administrative Adjudication:

In England many departments have been given judicial powers. Certain officers are given legal rights under which they decide the departmental disputes or the disputes of the citizens. Administrative officers have been given judicial powers through the parliamentary laws, such as Factory Act, Trade Board Act, Public Health Act, Town and Country Planning Act, etc.

These officials decide many cases in the interest of the citizens and no appeal can be brought into the courts against their decisions. These officers do not follow any legal procedure at the time of deciding such cases.

The people, who are affected by the decisions mentioned above, sometimes do not get the opportunity of producing evidence in support of their cases. In this way the Administrative Adjudication is a great hindrance in the way of the Rule of Law.

(3) Lack of Equality before Law:

Many critics are of the view that the principle of equality before law has become a myth in England. They say that in 1947 Crown Proceedings Act, was passed and in spite of that Act, the public servants enjoy certain privileges and immunities. For example, we can quote the Public Authorities Protection Act, 1893. This Act was amended through Section 21 of the Limitation Act, 1939. In this Act, the provision was made that in case a private citizen brings in allegations against the high-handedness of any government servant, the matter will be heard within six months.

Otherwise, no action will be taken in the matter. Secondly, if a citizen fails to win a case against a government servant, that citizen will have to pay a huge sum of money as expenses of the suit, to the government. Therefore, the citizens do not like to file suit against the government servants.

Thirdly, no legal proceedings can be initiated in any law court in England against the judges, whether their decisions are right or wrong. No action can be taken against the judges even if they go beyond their
jurisdiction knowingly or unknowingly.

Fourthly, the foreigners and their property have been exempted to some extent in England. It means that diplomats and Embassies, foreign rulers, recognized international Institutions and their staff have been granted certain immunities. It means that they are governed only by the law of their country and not by that of England.

Fifthly, according to Trade Disputes Act of 1906 no action can be taken by anybody against the Trade Union for violation of any legal duty.

Sixthly, the Armed Forces personnel are governed by only Military rules, and they can be tried only in Military Courts and not in ordinary courts.

Seventhly, the Bishops are governed by the Church rules and the doctors remain under the rules made by the General Medical Council.

(4) Discretionary Powers:

Today the administration cannot be run smoothly without giving certain discretionary powers to the government officers. It is in the discretion of the Home Secretary whether to give a certificate of citizenship to a foreigner or not.

In case a foreigner is considered an undesirable person, the Home Secretary can order him to leave the country. In England, the executive issues Passports, but in case of the refusal to issue Passports, no suit can be filed in the court against the authorities.

(5) Rights do not emanate from the judicial decisions alone:

According to Dicey fundamental rights and liberties emanate from the judicial decisions. But this is a one-sided view. The reason for this is that in England the people have got many rights through the laws of the Parliament and the Charters issued by the monarchs. For instance, the right to Unemployment Insurance has been given to the people under the Parliamentary Acts.

Dicey has ignored the rights based on the common Law. For example, the famous Habeas Corpus Act was based on the Common Law but later, it was made effective under the Habeas Corpus Acts of 1679 and 1816. Similarly the Libel Act of 1888 gave certain special rights to the press. In 1936 an important Act, i.e. the Public Order Act, was passed in respect of Public Meetings.

Ordinary and Administrative Courts:

In France and some other European countries there are two types of courts and laws:

(1) Ordinary courts and laws.

(2) Administrative courts and laws.

When there is a dispute between the citizens, the matter is brought before ordinary courts and the courts decide such disputes according to ordinary laws.

Secondly, if there is a dispute between a citizen and a government official, the matter is brought in the Administrative courts and not in ordinary courts, and the judges decide the case according to Administrative law. The reason for this is that in France and in some other European countries the basis of the law is the Roman Law.

In the eyes of the Roman Law, the state was an end and the individual was a means to achieve that end. Therefore, according to that law the government servants had a special position as compared to ordinary citizens and they had special privileges. Thus, when they committed a crime in their official capacity, they were not tried in ordinary courts.

Real Nature of Administrative Law:

There is a great controversy among the students of Political Science regarding the real nature of administrative law. The main reason for this is that the definition of the administrative law given by Dicey is quite confusing.

Dicey considered the administrative law as a body of rules for the protection of officials who have committed abuse of power against the citizen. Good-now defines administrative law as that part of the public law which fixes the organization and determines the competence of the administrative authorities, and indicates to the individual the remedies for the violation of his rights.

Strong writes, “Administrative law is the body of rules which regulate the relations, of the administrative authority towards private citizens and determine the position of State officials, the rights and liabilities of private citizens in their dealings with these officials as representatives of the state and the procedure by which these rights and liabilities are enforced.”

W.B. Munro defines administrative law, as a system of jurisprudence which on the one hand relieves public officials from amenability to the ordinary courts for acts, performed in their official capacity and on the other hand, sets up a special jurisdiction to hold them accountable.”

Munro further says, “The Administrative law deals not only with the liability of the state and its subordinate division for injuries done to private individuals or their property, but with the rules relating to the validity of administrative decrees. It also deals with the methods of granting redress when public officials exceed their legal authority, the awarding of damages to private individuals for injuries which result from acts of omission or commission of the public servants, the distinction between the official and the personal acts on the part of public officers and many kindred matters.”

The definitions relating to the administrative law given above make it clear that through this law the government servants are made free of the responsibility towards ordinary courts and action can be taken against them for lapses in administrative courts.

In the administrative law, distinction is made between the functions performed by the government servants in their individual capacity and in their official capacity. Through this law the relations between the government servants and the private individuals are defined and the rights and duties of the government officials are settled. Through this law the private citizens get an opportunity for getting redress against the excesses of the government officials.

Upload and Share Your Article:

Meaning of Confederation:

Confederation is an organisation of some sovereign states which join together for Common Defence and for other common purposes. They establish a common executive and legislature but the powers of these executives and legislatures are limited.

Hall says, “A confederation is a union strictly of independent states which consent to forgo permanently a part of their liberty of action for certain specific objects, and they are so combined under a common government that the latter appears to their exclusion as the international unity”.

According to Oppenheim, a confederation consists of a number of full sovereign states linked together for the maintenance of their external and internal independence by a recognised international treaty into a union with organs of its own, which are vested with a certain power over the member ‘states’, but not over the citizens of these states”.

It is clear from the definitions given above that some sovereign states establish a joint centre for common purposes and transfer some powers to it willingly. They can leave that union at will. The sovereignty of the states forming a federation is not in any way hampered.

This union can neither impose any tax on the citizens of the states, nor can it make any law for them. The states joining the union can contribute funds at will at the time of need. They also implement its decisions. There is an executive and legislature of this union, where the representatives of the state vote according to the instructions from their states.

Examples of Confederations:

In history, many examples of confederations are available. The reasons for this is that for Common Defence and for other common purposes the neighbouring countries join together. Many examples of confederations are available in ancient Greece which include Boeotian, Delian, Lycian, Achaean and Actolian League-many references are also available regarding confederations of ancient cities of Italy, but they were not as complete as the Greek Confederations were.

References of confederations in ancient India are also available. Thirty-six republics of the Eastern India established a confederation in 493 to 462 B.C. in order to protect themselves against the attack of Ajat Satru, the ruler of Magadha.

During the middle Ages many confederations were established in Europe among which Rhenish confederation, 1254-1350 and Hanseatic League, 1367-1669 are quite well-known. The Holy Roman Empire of 1526 to 1806 A. D. was one of the most important confederations before the nineteenth century.

The confederation comprised of several hundred states, free cities and Church-controlled states. Confederations flourished in Switzerland from 1291 to 1798 and 1803 to 1818 A. D. in U.S.A. from 1781 to 1787 A.D. There was a confederation in United Netherlands from 1576 to 1789 A.D.

During 1907, five Central American States, Guatemala, Costa Rica, Honduras, Nicaragua and Salvador established a confederation. The League of Nations (1919-1944) is one of the best examples of a confederation. Now the U.N. has been formed for establishing world peace.

This is also an organisation of sovereign states. In the U.N. the member-states vote according to the instructions received from their respective governments. It has a General Assembly and a Security Council whose decisions and resolutions are not binding on the member states.

Merits of Confederation:

One of the most important merits of a confederation is that it guards the weak states against a powerful enemy. It also lessens expenditure on foreign relations and the mutual political and commercial conflicts of the states are resolved. A confederation creates the spirit of unity just as it was created in the American and German confederations and ultimately paved way for the federation.

Demerits of Confederation:

The main defect in a confederation is the lack of sovereignty. Its member-states are sovereign and it depends upon their will be to implement its resolutions and decisions to any extent. It has no military force of its own and it also does not have the power to impose taxes. Sometimes powerful states indulge in conspiracy in a confederation. This is not in the interest of smaller states as it results in its early destruction.

Upload and Share Your Article: