Doctrine of Subsidiarity

Articles, Constitutional Law

Doctrine of Subsidiarity

December 26, 2024

MEANING, DEFINITION & EXPLANATION

The Doctrine of Subsidiarity is a principle in governance that advocates for decisions to be made at the most immediate or local level capable of addressing matters effectively. It posits that higher authorities should intervene only when issues cannot be resolved by lower tiers. This approach ensures that governance remains close to the people, promoting efficiency, accountability, and responsiveness. In the Indian context, this doctrine underscores the importance of empowering local self-governments, such as Panchayats and Municipalities, to handle local affairs, thereby enhancing democratic participation and administrative efficiency.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND / EVOLUTION

The concept of subsidiarity has roots in Catholic social teaching, particularly articulated in Pope Pius XI’s 1931 encyclical “Quadragesimo Anno”, which emphasized that higher-order societies should not interfere with the functions of lower-order societies unless necessary.

In India, the principle found resonance with the decentralization efforts post-independence, culminating in the 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments in 1992. These amendments institutionalized Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) and Urban Local Bodies (ULBs), respectively, embedding the essence of subsidiarity by devolving powers and responsibilities to local governments.

LEGAL PROVISIONS / PROCEDURE / SPECIFICATIONS / CRITERIA

The 73rd and 74th Amendments introduced Part IX and IX-A to the Indian Constitution, detailing the structure, powers, and functions of PRIs and ULBs. Key provisions include:

Article 243G: Empowers Panchayats to function as institutions of self-government and authorizes them to prepare and implement plans for economic development and social justice concerning matters listed in the Eleventh Schedule.
Article 243W: Grants similar powers to Municipalities concerning matters in the Twelfth Schedule.
Eleventh Schedule: Enumerates 29 subjects, including agriculture, education, and health, under the purview of Panchayats.
Twelfth Schedule: Lists 18 subjects, such as urban planning and public health, for Municipalities.

These provisions aim to operationalize the subsidiarity principle by assigning specific functions to local bodies, ensuring that matters best handled locally are entrusted to them.

GUIDELINES / RULES / REGULATIONS / NOTIFICATIONS / CIRCULARS

To operationalize the subsidiarity principle, both the central and state governments have issued various guidelines and regulations:

State Panchayati Raj Acts: Each state has enacted legislation detailing the powers, functions, and responsibilities of Panchayats, aligning with the constitutional mandate.
Municipal Acts: Similar statutes exist for Urban Local Bodies, specifying their roles and duties.
Finance Commission Recommendations: Both central and state Finance Commissions provide guidelines on the financial devolution to local bodies, ensuring they have adequate resources to perform their functions effectively.

These instruments collectively facilitate the practical application of the subsidiarity principle in India’s federal structure.

CASE LAWS / PRECEDENTS / OVERRULING JUDGMENTS

Several judicial pronouncements have reinforced the doctrine of subsidiarity in India:

Union of India v. R. Gandhi, President, Madras Bar Association, (2010) 11 SCC 1: The Supreme Court emphasized the importance of decentralization and the role of specialized tribunals, underscoring that matters should be addressed at the most appropriate level of governance.
State of U.P. v. Pradhan Sangh Kshettra Samiti, (1995) Supp (2) SCC 305: The Court highlighted the significance of empowering local bodies, stating that true democracy can only be achieved through decentralization and local self-governance.

These judgments affirm the constitutional mandate of subsidiarity, promoting local governance and participatory democracy.

INTERPRETATIONS / EXPLANATIONS

The subsidiarity principle in India is interpreted as a means to:

Enhance Democratic Participation: By bringing governance closer to the people, it encourages active citizen involvement in decision-making processes.
Improve Administrative Efficiency: Local bodies are better positioned to understand and address local issues promptly and effectively.
Ensure Accountability: Proximity to the electorate makes local authorities more accountable for their actions and decisions.

These interpretations align with the objectives of the 73rd and 74th Amendments, aiming to strengthen grassroots democracy in India.

DOCTRINES / THEORIES

The Doctrine of Subsidiarity complements other constitutional doctrines, such as:

Doctrine of Separation of Powers: While this doctrine separates the functions of the executive, legislature, and judiciary, subsidiarity focuses on the distribution of powers within the executive branch, advocating for decentralization to local authorities.
Doctrine of Federalism: Subsidiarity reinforces federal principles by promoting autonomy and decision-making at sub-national levels, ensuring a balance between centralization and decentralization.

These doctrines collectively contribute to a balanced and efficient governance framework in India.

MAXIMS / PRINCIPLES

The principle of subsidiarity aligns with the Latin maxim “Proximus sum egomet mihi,” meaning “I am closest to myself,” emphasizing that matters should be handled by the smallest, lowest, or least centralized competent authority.

AMENDMENTS / ADDITIONS / REPEALING

The 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments were pivotal in embedding the subsidiarity principle in India’s governance structure. These amendments added Parts IX and IX-A to the Constitution, along with the Eleventh and Twelfth Schedules, detailing the powers and responsibilities of local bodies. These changes marked a significant shift towards decentralized governance, empowering local institutions to function as self-governing entities.

CRITICISM / APPRECIATION

While the subsidiarity principle has been lauded for promoting local governance, certain criticisms have emerged:

Capacity Constraints: Local bodies often face challenges due to limited administrative and financial capacities, hindering effective service delivery.