Constitution

Position of president before and after

1. Essay on position of president before 42nd amendment !

The 42nd Amendment to the Indian Constitution, passed in 1976, was a significant
milestone in the history of Indian constitutional reforms. It introduced several changes,
including alterations to the position and powers of the President of India. This
amendment, which was a product of the political climate of the time, aimed to strengthen
the executive authority of the Prime Minister and the ruling government. This essay
explores the key aspects and implications of the 42nd Amendment regarding the position
of the President.

Before delving into the specifics of the 42nd Amendment, it is essential to understand the
original constitutional framework concerning the President of India. The Constitution of
India, adopted in 1950, established a parliamentary system of government in which the
President was the ceremonial head of state. The real executive authority was vested in the
Prime Minister and the Council of Ministers, who were responsible to the directly elected
Lok Sabha (House of the People).

The 42nd Amendment brought about several notable changes with respect to the
President’s role:

1. Duties of the President: The amendment sought to clarify that the President
would act in accordance with the advice of the Council of Ministers. This reinforced the
notion that the President’s role was essentially ceremonial and symbolic. The President
could no longer exercise their discretion in certain matters, effectively limiting their
independent decision-making powers.
2. Immunity of the President: The amendment provided immunity to the
President from any criminal proceedings during their term in office, further safeguarding
their position and ensuring that they were not embroiled in political controversies.
3. Term of the President: The amendment extended the term of the President
from five to six years. This change aimed to ensure that presidential elections did not
coincide with state assembly elections, thereby reducing the chances of political
polarization during presidential contests.
4. Removal of President: The amendment made it more difficult to impeach
the President by raising the threshold for initiating impeachment proceedings. This was
seen as a measure to protect the President from arbitrary removal.
 5. Discretionary Powers: While the amendment curtailed many of the
President’s discretionary powers, it did preserve some residual powers that could be
exercised in exceptional circumstances, such as when no party had a clear majority in the
Lok Sabha.

The 42nd Amendment was a subject of significant debate and controversy. Critics argued
that it tilted the balance of power further towards the Prime Minister and the ruling party,
potentially undermining the principles of parliamentary democracy. It was perceived by
some as an attempt to concentrate power in the hands of the government in office.

In conclusion, the 42nd Amendment to the Indian Constitution brought about important
changes in the position of the President, emphasizing the ceremonial nature of the role
and reinforcing the President’s dependence on the advice of the Council of Ministers.
While it aimed to streamline the functioning of the government, it also raised concerns
about the potential for excessive concentration of power in the executive branch. This
amendment reflects the evolving nature of Indian democracy and the ongoing dialogue
surrounding the roles and responsibilities of its constitutional institutions.

2. Essay on How did 42nd amendment changed the position of president in

India 

The 42nd Amendment to the Indian Constitution, enacted in 1976, brought about
significant changes in the position and powers of the President of India. These changes
were primarily aimed at redefining the role of the President as a largely ceremonial
figurehead and strengthening the executive authority of the Prime Minister and the
Council of Ministers. This essay explores in detail how the 42nd Amendment altered the
position of the President in India.

Before the 42nd Amendment, the President of India held a unique position as the
ceremonial head of state in a parliamentary system of government. However, the
President also had some discretionary powers and played a role in the functioning of the
government. The 42nd Amendment marked a shift in this paradigm:

1. Advisory Role: The most significant change introduced by the 42nd

Amendment was the explicit stipulation that the President must act on the advice of the
Council of Ministers. This advisory role became paramount, and the President’s
discretion in most matters was effectively curtailed. The President was transformed into a
symbol of continuity and unity in the country, carrying out constitutional duties without
interfering in the day-to-day affairs of the government.
2. Immunity from Legal Proceedings: The amendment granted the President
immunity from any criminal proceedings during their term in office. This was done to
shield the President from political vendettas or legal battles that could compromise the
dignity of the office.

2
 3. Term Extension: Another significant change was the extension of the
President’s term from five to six years. This was designed to ensure that presidential
elections did not coincide with state assembly elections, preventing the potential
politicization of the presidential race.
4. Removal Procedure: The 42nd Amendment made it more challenging to
impeach the President by raising the threshold for initiating impeachment proceedings.
This safeguard was intended to protect the President from arbitrary removal and maintain
stability in the highest office.
5. Residual Powers: While the amendment restricted the President’s
discretionary powers in most cases, it did preserve some residual powers. The President
could still exercise discretion in exceptional situations, such as when no political party
had a clear majority in the Lok Sabha or when it was unclear who should be invited to
form the government.

These changes aimed to redefine the President’s role as a constitutional figurehead,

devoid of substantial executive authority. The Prime Minister and the Council of
Ministers, who are responsible to the Lok Sabha, became the actual wielders of executive
power in the Indian parliamentary system.

The 42nd Amendment was not without controversy. Critics argued that it could lead to an
imbalance of power and undermine the principles of checks and balances in a democracy.
It also raised questions about the extent to which the President could act independently in
exceptional situations.

In conclusion, the 42nd Amendment to the Indian Constitution reshaped the position of
the President, emphasizing a more ceremonial and advisory role while reducing the scope
for independent decision-making. This amendment aimed to streamline the functioning of
the government and ensure political stability while sparking debates about the evolving
dynamics of democracy in India.

 The 42nd Amendment to the Indian Constitution, enacted in 1976, was a

significant and controversial set of changes to India’s constitutional
framework. It introduced several modifications aimed at strengthening
the power of the central government and the ruling party. Some key
provisions of the 42nd Amendment include

 1. Advisory Role of the President: It clarified that the President

must act on the advice of the Council of Ministers, effectively limiting the
President’s discretionary powers.

3
 2. Extension of the President’s Term: The President’s term was
extended from five to six years, preventing presidential elections from
coinciding with state assembly elections.
 3. Impeachment Procedure: It made it more difficult to impeach
the President by raising the threshold for initiating impeachment
proceedings.
 4. Immunity for the President: The President was granted
immunity from criminal proceedings during their term in office.
 5. Restrictions on Fundamental Rights: The amendment imposed
certain restrictions on fundamental rights, including the right to
property, which could be curtailed by legislation.
 6. Emergency Provisions: It expanded the powers of the central
government during a state of emergency, granting the Prime Minister
and the Cabinet extraordinary authority.

The 42nd Amendment was highly controversial and criticized by many for its
perceived authoritarian tendencies. It concentrated more power in the
central government and raised concerns about democracy and individual
freedoms. Subsequent amendments and legal interpretations have
sought to strike a balance between the need for strong governance and
the protection of democratic principles.