Q1.
Why do you think the above group of people is not involved in electing the President of India? Why are the common people not involved in the election of the president?
Answer
The chapter answers the first part itself: “It is because this ensures that only directly elected representatives vote to elect the President. This maintains democratic legitimacy, as the President is meant to represent the will of the people, indirectly but meaningfully.” Let us unpack why that single rule explains the whole exclusion list, and then take the second question.
Who is in the electoral college (page 136):
- Members of Parliament from both Houses — the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha.
- Members of the Legislative Assemblies of every state, and of the union territories of Delhi and Puducherry.
Who is excluded, and why the exclusion follows one rule:
| Excluded group | Why they are out |
|---|---|
| Nominated members of the Rajya Sabha (12) | They were appointed by the President, not elected by anyone. Letting them help choose the next President would let one office influence its own succession |
| Nominated members of State Legislative Assemblies | Same reason — no voter chose them, so no chain of votes links them back to the people |
| Members of Legislative Councils in bicameral legislatures — both elected and nominated | A Legislative Council is the upper house of a state. Even its ‘elected’ members are not elected by the general electorate — they are chosen by special constituencies such as teachers, graduates and local bodies. So they are not directly elected by the people |
| Nominated members of the assemblies of Delhi and Puducherry | Again, nominated rather than elected |
Read down that column and the rule is visible: only those whom the voters themselves put in office may cast a vote for the President. Every excluded group failed that single test.
Why the common people are not involved directly. Several reasons work together:
- The President is not a policy-making executive chosen to run a programme. The prime minister, who leads the government, comes from the majority in the Lok Sabha — which the people do elect directly. A separate nationwide popular election for the President could create a rival claim to popular authority alongside the prime minister, in a parliamentary system that is not built for two such claims.
- The President represents the whole country — the Union and the states. That is why the electoral college contains MLAs as well as MPs. As the chapter says, “Since the president represents the whole country, this method ensures the support of both the central and state governments.”
- The single transferable vote system with weighted values. The rules for voting and counting are very elaborate, and the more populous states have a greater say. This careful balancing between states, and between Parliament and the states, is possible with a defined electoral college and would be impossible in a simple nationwide poll.
- The chain of legitimacy is not broken, only lengthened. The people elect the MPs and MLAs; those MPs and MLAs elect the President. So the President still holds office by the will of the people — indirectly, but meaningfully.
Compare with the Vice President: that electoral college consists of the elected and nominated members of both Houses of Parliament — nominated members are included, and MLAs are not. That fits the office: the Vice President is the chairperson of the Rajya Sabha, so the electorate is Parliament itself rather than Parliament plus the states.