Question

How indian constitution is different from others countries

Answer 1

As we set out to celebrate Constitution Day on November 26 for the first time in more than six and a half decades let us have a look at how the Indian constitution fares when compared with other major constitutions across the world.  This is usually a difficult task as constitutions vary substantially in their origin, age and their basic features. So much so that it can even be said that no two constitutions are alike.

However, despite such wide diversity attempts have been made to compare the constitutions of different countries in terms of their basic features. One of the most recent and extensive efforts that has attempted towards this end so far is the Comparative Constitutions Project (CCP) in collaboration with Google Ideas. The project makes a comparison of more than 190 constitutions against eight indicators.

The indicators used for comparison of constitutions are year of enactment, scope of the constitution in terms of its coverage of 92 major topics which are generally covered by the existing constitutions, the length of the constitution in words, the power that constitutions provide in seven important aspects of executive law making, the formal power assigned to the legislation by the constitution, the constitutional features which enhance or reduce judicial independence and finally in terms of the number of rights bestowed by the constitution.

Unfortunately that makes the Indian constitution stand out among its peers is its size. A comparison of the world’s major constitutions show that the length of the Indian constitution was the longest with 146,385 words which pushes it far ahead of other lengthy constitutions of Malaysia (64,080 words), Brazil (64,488) and Nigeria (66,263). However in many countries, including in some of the wealthiest nations, the length of the constitution was less than 10,000 words. These included that of countries like United States (7762), Thailand (7683), South Korea (9059), Saudi Arabia (6335), Jordan (2270), Japan (4998) and Indonesia (5915).

A study of the scope of the world major constitutions in terms of the 92 major areas that are generally covered by constitutions show that the Indian constitution had a coverage of just 0.60 which is similar to that of countries like Finland, Liberia, Malaysia, Myanmar, and Panama.  Countries whose constitutions were much larger in scope with a larger scope of 0.75 and above include Angola, Ecuador, Kenya, Mexico, Portugal and Zimbabwe.

However, the scope of the constitution seems to be in no way related to the rights enjoyed. Thus we find that Pakistan and Russia whose constitutions have a slightly higher coverage than India can in no way claim greater liberty for its citizens than India.  Similarly in the United States and United Kingdom, where the respective constitutions have a coverage of 0.49 and 0.43, the people enjoy substantially much higher civil liberties than most countries.

In terms of law making powers conferred by the constitution on the executive for initiating legislation, issuing decrees or constitutional amendments, declaring emergency, dissolving legislature etc the Indian constitution India scores 4 out of a maximum of seven points. But then it is not that countries like Angola, Algeria, Bahrain, Mozambique and Romania which scores a perfect 7 out of 7 and provides maximum law making power on to the executive are examples of good governance in any way.

Similarly in the case of judicial independence which is measured in terms of six basic features that enhance or limits the power of the judiciary India has a much better score of 4 out of 6. Only a few of countries like Argentina and Bulgaria have a perfect score of six out of six in case of judicial independence. What is surprising is that countries like Bangladesh, Bhutan, Brazil, Kenya, Kosovo and Swaziland, whose constitutions are of a more recent vintage seems to have a greater degree of judicial freedom with their scores touching a high five. However, it must be said that constitutions of most other countries fare much worse than India when it comes to judicial independence.

Finally when it comes to the number of rights, which the comparative constitutions project estimates to number at a high 117, also India scores just about 44 which is well below the halfway mark. However, it is not to say that countries whose constitutions fare right at the top in terms of the number of rights which include Ecuador (99), Bolivia (88), Angola (80) and Armenia (82) are example of most empowered populations in terms of rights. In fact people in countries like United States and United Kingdom with the rights level similar or lower to India are better examples of an empowered population than the much higher ranked nations.

DISCLAIMER : Views expressed above are the author's own.

Government policies affect us all in very different ways and this blog will look at what they mean for us as individuals,investors and consumers.

Answer 2

In the following ways, the Indian Constitution is different from the constitution of other countries.

Explanation:

In the following ways, the Indian Constitution is different from the constitution of other countries:

• The Indian Constitution is the largest constitution in the world. It is the most detailed of all the constitutions written in the world.
• The Indian Constitution set up a parliamentary form of government in India at both the state and the central level. The constitutional head of the State is the President, however, the real power vested in the council of ministers under the leadership of the Prime Minister.
• The Indian Constitution is a mixture of flexibility and rigidity. While the constitution of other countries are either rigid or flexible.

Learn More:

What is the Indian constitution?

brainly.in/question/4521887