Asymmetry in Indian Federalism: A Case for Flexibility

Asymmetrical federalism, with its inherent flexibility and recognition of diverse needs, presents a promising approach to governance in a postmodern context. By embracing both de facto and de jure asymmetries, it has demonstrated its ability to address the challenges of regional diversity and maintain national unity. In the case of India, asymmetrical federalism has effectively countered concerns of secessionism, demonstrating its normative value in upholding national cohesion. The system's adaptability and responsiveness to the unique circumstances of different federative units make it a compelling model for managing diverse societies in a globalized world.

Indian federalism is characterized by a flexible approach that recognizes the unique needs and circumstances of different federative units. This flexibility is manifested in both de facto and de jure asymmetries in the construction of the federation.

De facto asymmetries arise from the practical application of federalism, while de jure asymmetries are enshrined in the Constitution. Some of these asymmetries have been beneficial in maintaining national unity, despite concerns about their potential to lead to secessionism.

Examples of de facto asymmetries include the healthcare deal signed between the federal government, provincial governments, and territorial governments in Canada. This deal allows for a separate bilateral Canada-Quebec side deal, recognizing the distinct status of Quebec within the Canadian federation.

Examples of de jure asymmetries in India include the special status granted to certain border states, such as Jammu and Kashmir, Nagaland, and Mizoram. These states have their own constitutions, flags, and emblems, and they enjoy greater autonomy in matters of language, education, and culture.

The Indian approach to asymmetrical federalism is pragmatic and reflects the country's commitment to accommodating diversity while maintaining national unity.

The author , Rekha Saxena, argues that India's experience with asymmetrical federalism provides evidence that it can be a successful model for governance in a diverse country. She points to the fact that India has been able to maintain national unity despite granting special status to several states, including Jammu and Kashmir, Nagaland, and Mizoram.

She also notes that asymmetrical federalism has been used successfully in other countries, such as Belgium and Canada. These examples suggest that the system is not inherently unstable or illiberal, and that it can be an effective way to accommodate the diverse needs of a multinational state.

Examples:

India: The Indian Constitution grants special status to several states, including Jammu and Kashmir,Nagaland, and Mizoram. These states have their own constitutions and flags, and they enjoy greater autonomy in matters of language, education, and culture.

Belgium: Belgium is a multilingual country with three official languages: Dutch, French, and German. The country is divided into three regions: Flanders, Wallonia, and Brussels-Capital Region. Each region has its own government and parliament, and they have different powers and responsibilities.

Canada: Canada has a long history of asymmetrical federalism. The country's constitution grants special status to the provinces of Quebec and Newfoundland and Labrador. These provinces have their own governments and parliaments, and they have different powers and responsibilities from the other provinces.

The author concludes that asymmetrical federalism is a promising approach to governance in a postmodern context. The system's flexibility and recognition of diverse needs make it well-suited for managing the challenges of regional diversity and maintaining national unity. India's experience with asymmetrical federalism demonstrates its normative value in upholding national cohesion.

Ronald Watts distinguishes between political asymmetry and constitutional asymmetry.

Political asymmetry is a natural feature of any federation, arising from the fact that federative units will vary in size and population. This asymmetry is reflected in the representation of states in the federal legislature. For example, in India, the state of Uttar Pradesh has 31 seats in the Rajya Sabha, while the state of Mizoram has only one seat.

Constitutional asymmetry, on the other hand, is a deliberate policy of granting different powers and responsibilities to different federative units. This asymmetry is typically enshrined in the constitution. For example, in India, the state of Jammu and Kashmir has its own constitution, while other states do not.

Watts argues that constitutional asymmetry can be a useful tool for managing diversity and maintaining national unity in a multinational federation. However, he also cautions that it is important to carefully design and implement constitutional asymmetries in order to avoid unintended consequences, such as secessionism.

Here are some of the key points of Watts' theory:

Political asymmetry is a natural feature of federations, while constitutional asymmetry is a deliberate policy choice.

Constitutional asymmetry can be a useful tool for managing diversity and maintaining national unity.

It is important to carefully design and implement constitutional asymmetries in order to avoid unintended consequences.

The Indian Constitution contains several specific asymmetries that grant special powers and status to certain states and regions. These asymmetries are designed to accommodate the diversity of India's population and to address the unique challenges of different regions.

Examples of Specific Asymmetries:

Administration of tribal areas: The Fifth and Sixth Schedules of the Constitution provide special protections for tribal communities, including the right to self-governance and the right to control their own resources.

Intra-state regional disparities: Some states in India have significant regional disparities in terms of development and infrastructure. The Constitution provides for special measures to be taken to address these disparities.

Law and order situation: Some states in India have a more difficult law and order situation than others.The Constitution allows the central government to deploy additional security forces to these states if necessary.

Fixation of number of seats in legislative assemblies: The number of seats in the legislative assemblies of different states is not fixed. This allows for some states to have more representation than others,depending on their population.

The Indian Constitution's specific asymmetries are a reflection of the country's diversity and its commitment to accommodating the needs of different regions and communities. While these asymmetries have been criticized by some for creating two classes of citizens, they have also been praised for helping to maintain national unity and for addressing the unique challenges of different regions.

Examples:

The Fifth and Sixth Schedules of the Constitution have been successful in protecting the rights of tribal communities.

The special measures that have been taken to address intra-state regional disparities have been successful in reducing poverty and improving infrastructure in some of India's poorest regions.

The deployment of additional security forces to states with a difficult law and order situation has helped to improve security in these states.

The flexible approach to fixing the number of seats in the legislative assemblies of different states has allowed for some states to have more representation than others, which is fair given their larger populations.

The author discusses the concept of asymmetrical federalism in the context of India, particularly with regard to the special status granted to certain states and regions. They argue that India's reluctance to apply asymmetrical solutions in some cases, such as Assam, has led to problems. They also point out that the north-eastern states are the only genuine political region in India with a regional council, and that this may be a trend that catches on in other parts of the country.

Explanation of Key Points:

Article 370 of the Indian Constitution: This article grants special status to the state of Jammu and Kashmir. The author argues that this article may be the basis for a final settlement with the state, and that it could take "the Indian federation into new constitutional waters."

Asymmetrical arrangements in the north-east: The author argues that the north-east is the only genuine political region in India with a regional council. They also argue that the asymmetrical arrangements in the north-east may be a trend that catches on in other parts of the country.

Tribal communities: The author discusses the various autonomous institutional arrangements that exist for tribal communities in India. They argue that these arrangements are a form of asymmetrical federalism.

Ethnic federalism: The author argues that India could be interpreted as a case of ethnic federalism, at least in parts. They point to the various territorial and ethnic autonomies that exist in the country.

Assam: The author argues that India's reluctance to apply asymmetrical solutions to Assam has led to problems in the state. They cite Sanjib Baruah as saying that this reluctance has constrained Assam's ability to constructively negotiate with ethnic Bengalis and tribals.

North-eastern asymmetrical deals: The author dismisses the north-eastern asymmetrical deals as marginal features out of the mainstream. They argue that these deals have not been effective in addressing the problems of the region.

The author's use of the term "postmodern potential" is interesting. They argue that India's asymmetrical arrangements are not postmodern features in the traditional sense, as they are not based on post-industrial structures or post-material values. However, they argue that these arrangements do reflect a move away from the traditional model of a uniform federation.

The author's conclusion is that India's asymmetrical arrangements are a strength rather than a weakness. They argue that these arrangements are necessary to accommodate the diversity of India's population and to address the unique challenges of different regions.