Government structures in US, UK and India

Answer 1
1. Government Structure of India:
India follows a parliamentary form of government, established by the Constitution of India,
1950, which lays out the framework for a federal system with a distinct separation of powers
among the Legislature, Executive, and Judiciary.
Separation of Powers:
Legislature: Bicameral Parliament (Lok Sabha - House of the People, Rajya Sabha - Council
of States).
Makes laws and scrutinizes the executive.
Both houses play key roles in passing legislation.
Executive: The President (nominal head), the Prime Minister, and the Council of Ministers
(real executive).
The Executive is responsible to the Legislature (especially the Lok Sabha).
The President is the ceremonial head, while real executive powers are exercised by the Prime
Minister and the Council of Ministers.
Judiciary: Independent judiciary with a three-tier structure (Supreme Court, High Courts, and
Subordinate Courts).
The judiciary can review laws and executive actions through Judicial Review to ensure
compliance with the Constitution.
Judicial Review:
The Supreme Court of India holds the power of judicial review, enabling it to invalidate laws
and executive actions that violate the Constitution (Articles 13, 32, 226).
It also performs the role of a protector of Fundamental Rights and interprets constitutional
provisions.
Checks and Balances:
The Indian system integrates checks and balances where the judiciary ensures that the
legislature and executive do not act beyond their constitutional authority.
The Parliament can amend the Constitution (Article 368), but the judiciary can strike down
unconstitutional amendments (as seen in the Kesavananda Bharati case which established the
Basic Structure Doctrine).
2. Government Structure of the United States:
The United States has a presidential form of government established by the U.S. Constitution
(1787). It is based on a federal system with a strict separation of powers.

Separation of Powers:
Legislature: Bicameral Congress (House of Representatives and the Senate).
Makes laws, levies taxes, regulates commerce, and controls the budget.
The Senate has special powers such as approving treaties and presidential appointments.
Executive: The President, the Vice President, and the federal executive departments.
The President is both the Head of State and the Head of Government, responsible for
implementing laws, conducting foreign policy, and serving as commander-in-chief of the
armed forces.
The President can veto legislation, which can only be overridden by a two-thirds majority in
both Houses of Congress.
Judiciary: The Federal Judiciary, headed by the Supreme Court, along with lower federal
courts.
Interprets laws, and has the power to declare laws or executive actions unconstitutional.
Judicial Review:
Judicial Review was established through the landmark case Marbury v. Madison (1803), where
the Supreme Court asserted its authority to review acts of Congress and the Executive, ensuring
they conform to the Constitution.
The U.S. Constitution doesn’t explicitly mention judicial review, but it has evolved as a key
feature of the judicial system.
Checks and Balances:
The U.S. Constitution incorporates a rigorous system of checks and balances.
The Legislature can override a presidential veto and has impeachment powers.
The Executive can veto legislation and appoint judges (subject to Senate approval).
The Judiciary can invalidate unconstitutional laws or executive actions.
3. Government Structure of the United Kingdom:
The UK has a parliamentary system and operates as a constitutional monarchy, meaning the
powers of the monarch are largely ceremonial, and the government is run by elected officials.
The UK does not have a single written constitution, but its system is governed by statutes,
conventions, judicial decisions, and historical documents like the Magna Carta and Bill of
Rights (1689).

Separation of Powers:
Legislature: The UK Parliament is bicameral, consisting of the House of Commons and the
House of Lords.
Parliament is the supreme law-making body.
The House of Commons holds more power than the House of Lords, which serves more of a
revising and scrutinizing role.
Executive: The Prime Minister and the Cabinet.
The Prime Minister is the head of government and exercises executive powers on behalf of the
Crown, who is the formal head of state.
The executive is drawn from the Legislature (House of Commons) and is accountable to it.
Judiciary: An independent judiciary with the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom being the
highest court of appeal since 2009.
The judiciary is independent, though it traditionally did not have a strong role in judicial review
due to parliamentary sovereignty.
Judicial Review:
Judicial review in the UK is more limited than in the U.S. and India. Historically, Parliamentary
Sovereignty meant that no court could question the validity of laws passed by Parliament.
However, with the Human Rights Act (1998) and the European Communities Act (1972), the
judiciary gained powers to review the compatibility of UK laws with the European Convention
on Human Rights and EU law (before Brexit).
While UK courts cannot strike down laws, they can issue declarations of incompatibility,
signaling that legislation conflicts with higher law (e.g., human rights law), urging Parliament
to reconsider.
Checks and Balances:
The UK has a more flexible separation of powers. The executive is part of the legislature and
is directly accountable to it. The judiciary acts independently but has less power compared to
the U.S. and India in terms of invalidating laws.
Parliamentary sovereignty remains a core feature of the UK system, although judicial influence
has grown with the advent of human rights law and constitutional reforms like the
Constitutional Reform Act of 2005, which separated the judiciary from the House of Lords.
Comparative Summary:
Separation of Powers: The U.S. has a rigid separation between branches, while India has a
more integrated parliamentary system. The UK has a less formal separation, with executive
powers flowing directly from the Legislature.
Judicial Review: The U.S. and India empower courts to strike down unconstitutional laws,
while the UK traditionally upholds parliamentary sovereignty, allowing only limited review
under certain conditions.
Checks and Balances: The U.S. system has explicit checks and balances in its design. In India,
the Parliament, Judiciary, and Executive check each other, though the executive is drawn from
the Legislature. The UK relies on conventions, parliamentary oversight, and judicial scrutiny,
though Parliament retains the final authority.
These frameworks reflect the different historical, cultural, and legal contexts of each country.
Answer 2- specific on how they differ with each other
The governmental structures of India, the United States, and the United Kingdom differ
significantly, especially regarding the separation of powers, the judiciary, executive functions,
and judicial review. Here's a detailed comparison of these three systems:
1. Separation of Powers
• India: While the Indian Constitution divides government functions between the
Legislature, Executive, and Judiciary, the doctrine of separation of powers is not rigidly
followed. There is functional overlap; for instance, the President, who is part of the
executive, can legislate through ordinances, and the judiciary can invalidate legislative
and executive actions if they violate constitutional provisions
BURNISHED LAW JOURNAL – ISSN-2582-5534

LawBhoomi
.
• United States: The U.S. Constitution strictly adheres to the separation of powers, with
clear demarcations in Articles I (Legislature), II (Executive), and III (Judiciary). The
U.S. follows a presidential system, where the executive (President) is independent of
the legislature. This is a more rigid system compared to India's
LawBhoomi

The Law Brigade Publishers (India)

.
• United Kingdom: The UK does not follow a formal separation of powers. Instead, it
operates with a "fusion of powers" between the legislature (Parliament) and executive
(Prime Minister and Cabinet), as members of the executive are also part of the
legislature. This structure is more flexible, with significant overlap between these
branches
The Law Brigade Publishers (India)
.
2. Executive
• India: The President of India is the nominal executive head, acting on the advice of the
Prime Minister and the Council of Ministers. Executive power is vested in the President
(Article 53) but is exercised primarily by elected representatives
BURNISHED LAW JOURNAL – ISSN-2582-5534
.
• United States: The U.S. follows a strict presidential system, where the President is both
the head of state and the head of government. The President holds significant
independent executive powers and is not a member of the legislature. Cabinet members
are accountable to the President, not the legislature
LawBhoomi
.
 • United Kingdom: In the UK, the executive is drawn from the legislature. The Prime
Minister, head of government, is a member of the House of Commons, and most
ministers are also members of Parliament. This system leads to a closer relationship
between the executive and legislative functions, with less formal separation than in the
U.S. or India
The Law Brigade Publishers (India)
.
3. Judiciary and Judicial Review
• India: The judiciary in India is independent, with the Supreme Court at the apex.
Judicial review is an essential function of the courts, allowing them to invalidate any
law or executive action that violates the Constitution. This ensures checks on both the
legislature and executive
BURNISHED LAW JOURNAL – ISSN-2582-5534
.
• United States: The judiciary is highly independent, and judicial review, established in
Marbury v. Madison (1803), allows courts to strike down unconstitutional laws and
executive actions. This power is central to maintaining the balance between branches
The Law Brigade Publishers (India)
.
• United Kingdom: Unlike India and the U.S., the UK does not have a codified
constitution, and judicial review is limited. Courts cannot overturn parliamentary laws
due to the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty. However, courts can review executive
actions for legality
The Law Brigade Publishers (India)
.
4. Checks and Balances
• India: While separation of powers is practiced, there is significant overlap. For
instance, the President can issue ordinances, the legislature can impeach judges, and the
judiciary can invalidate laws
BURNISHED LAW JOURNAL – ISSN-2582-5534

LawBhoomi
.
• United States: The system of checks and balances is foundational to the U.S.
government. Each branch has distinct powers to check the others—for example, the
President’s veto power, the Senate's role in confirming judicial appointments, and the
judiciary's power of judicial review
LawBhoomi
The Law Brigade Publishers (India)
.
• United Kingdom: In the UK, checks and balances are not as explicit due to the fusion
of powers. However, the system is maintained through political conventions, judicial
oversight of executive actions, and the sovereignty of Parliament
The Law Brigade Publishers (India)
.
Conclusion
In summary, the U.S. adheres most strictly to the doctrine of separation of powers with a rigid
system of checks and balances, while India has a more flexible arrangement, allowing for
functional overlaps. The UK, without a formal constitution, operates a system where the
legislature and executive are deeply interconnected, with fewer formal checks on parliamentary
power.
Each country's approach reflects its unique political and historical context, with varying
degrees of separation and interaction between government branches.

Answer 3- Other government structures

The government structures in India, the US, and the UK have notable differences and
similarities regarding the separation of powers, the role of the executive, judiciary, and
legislative branches, as well as the checks and balances between them. Here's a detailed
comparison:
1. India
• Government System: India follows a parliamentary system within a federal
structure. The President is the head of state, while the Prime Minister leads the
government.
• Separation of Powers: While India's constitution delineates the roles of the legislature,
executive, and judiciary, it does not follow strict separation of powers as in the US.
Instead, there's some overlap, particularly with executive control over appointments in
the judiciary.
• Legislature: The Parliament consists of two houses—the Lok Sabha (House of the
People) and the Rajya Sabha (Council of States). The executive (Prime Minister and
Council of Ministers) is part of the legislature and accountable to it.
• Judiciary: India has a unified judicial system with the Supreme Court at its apex,
which ensures judicial review. Courts can strike down laws and executive actions that
violate the Constitution.
• Judicial Review: The judiciary has the power to review and invalidate laws passed by
the legislature if they infringe the Constitution's fundamental principles (as in the
famous Kesavananda Bharati case).
 • Federalism: India is a cooperative federal state, where powers between the Union
and the states are shared, but the Union has supremacy in conflicts
LawBhoomi

Compass by Rau's IAS

.
2. United States
• Government System: The US operates under a presidential system in a federal
structure. The President is both the head of state and the executive.
• Separation of Powers: The US Constitution adopts a rigid separation of powers
between the legislature, executive, and judiciary. Each branch operates independently
with distinct roles.
• Legislature: Congress, consisting of the Senate and the House of Representatives,
holds legislative power. No member of the executive branch (including the President)
is part of Congress.
• Judiciary: The US has a powerful, independent judiciary headed by the Supreme
Court, which conducts judicial review and can invalidate any federal or state law
found unconstitutional (e.g., in the landmark case Marbury v. Madison).
• Judicial Review: The Supreme Court has extensive power to check both Congress and
the President through judicial review, a hallmark of the US system.
• Federalism: The US follows a dual federalism system, where state governments and
the federal government operate independently within their spheres
Compass by Rau's IAS

iPleaders
.
3. United Kingdom
• Government System: The UK follows a parliamentary system with a unitary state.
The Monarch is the ceremonial head of state, while the Prime Minister is the head of
government.
• Separation of Powers: The UK does not have a strict separation of powers. The
executive is part of the legislature, and judicial powers were historically vested in the
House of Lords (until the Supreme Court was established in 2009).
• Legislature: The Parliament consists of the House of Commons and the House of
Lords. The Prime Minister and the cabinet are members of the House of Commons and
are accountable to it.
 • Judiciary: The UK’s judiciary, led by the Supreme Court, has less power in terms of
judicial review compared to the US and India. Parliament is considered sovereign, and
courts cannot strike down laws passed by Parliament.
• Judicial Review: While the judiciary can interpret laws, it cannot declare Acts of
Parliament unconstitutional due to the principle of parliamentary sovereignty.
• Unitary System: The UK is a unitary state, meaning all powers are centralized, though
some powers have been devolved to Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland
LawBhoomi

iPleaders
.
Key Differences:
• Separation of Powers: The US has the most rigid separation, while India allows more
overlap, and the UK has a largely fused system where the executive and legislature are
intertwined.
• Judicial Review: The US and India both grant courts the power of judicial review, but
in the UK, Parliament remains supreme.
• Government System: The US has a presidential system, while India and the UK
follow parliamentary systems, where the executive is drawn from and accountable to
the legislature.
• Federal vs. Unitary: The US and India are federal states, with the US having more
autonomy for states. In contrast, the UK is a unitary state with some devolved powers
but no true federalism.
These differences reflect each country's unique historical, political, and legal contexts.