This piece argues that India’s central challenge is not managing a single flashpoint but resolving the underlying tension between expansion and institutional coherency of the BRICS grouping.
Vrinda Sahai
{
"authors": [
"Anirudh Burman",
"K.P. Krishnan"
],
"type": "other",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie India"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie India",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [
"Political Economy"
],
"regions": [
"India"
],
"topics": [
"Domestic Politics",
"Economy"
]
}Source: Getty
Statutory regulatory authorities are bound by the same principles of administrative law as other government agencies, as defined by the judiciary from time to time.
Source: Hart Publishing
A number of statutory regulatory authorities have emerged in India since the 1990s. Statutes that have established regulators focus broadly on: (a) the design of the apex decision-making body (board or authority); (b) the substantive powers of the regulator, and; (c) accountability mechanisms such as audits, accounting and reporting. Such statutes are usually ‘thin’ on guidance to regulators on how to conduct their administrative functions. Consequently, statutory regulatory authorities are bound by the same principles of administrative law as other government agencies, as defined by the judiciary from time to time. However, independent regulators perform their functions in ways that are distinct from government departments.
First, statutory regulatory authorities concentrate legislative (regulation-making), executive (monitoring and supervision) and judicial (issuing orders) powers in contrast to the normal structure of government departments.1 This structure potentially violates the principle of separation of powers and affects the design of statutory regulatory authorities. Second, the frequency and volume of regulation-making is significantly higher due to the responsibility of regulators to react to dynamic market requirements. Third, there is an independent and specialised appellate mechanism against the regulatory actions of most regulators.
This book chapter was originally published by Hart Publishing.
1 See generally Financial Sector Legislative Reforms Commission, ‘Report of the Financial Sector Legislative Reforms Commission’, 2013, https://dea.gov.in/sites/default/files/fslrc_report_vol1_1.pdf.
Former Associate Research Director and Fellow, Carnegie India
Anirudh Burman was an associate research director and fellow at Carnegie India. He works on key issues relating to public institutions, public administration, the administrative and regulatory state, and state capacity.
K.P. Krishnan
K.P. Krishnan is the secretary of the Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship of the Government of India.
Carnegie India does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
This piece argues that India’s central challenge is not managing a single flashpoint but resolving the underlying tension between expansion and institutional coherency of the BRICS grouping.
Vrinda Sahai
The ASML MoU with Tata Electronics is an indicator of how far the Indian semiconductor ecosystem has come. This ecosystem has been years in the making and represents real commercial logic.
Konark Bhandari
This paper examines the relationship between India’s evolving space policy and the corresponding growth in private space ventures. It analyzes both the enabling factors created by recent regulatory changes and the persistent challenges facing entrepreneurs in this capital-intensive, highly regulated industry.
Harshan Vazhakunnam
A partnership between India, a country of subcontinental size, and Africa, a continent of fifty-four countries, may seem asymmetric until one notes that both are home to nearly the same number of people—1.4 billion. This essay spells out the existing challenges to the partnership, its optimal potential, and the possible pathways to realize it over the next quarter-century.
Rajiv Bhatia
The U.S.–India semiconductor cooperation story is well-stocked with top-level strategic intent. What remains unresolved, however, are some underlying challenges that will determine whether the cooperation actually functions. Three such friction points stand out.
Shruti Mittal