General Studies 2024 GS Paper IV 20 marks 150 words Compulsory Suggest

Q5

(a) "The 'Code of Conduct' and 'Code of Ethics' are the sources of guidance in public administration. There is code of conduct already in operation, whereas code of ethics is not yet put in place. Suggest a suitable model for code of ethics to maintain integrity, probity and transparency in governance. (Answer in 150 words) 10 (b) The soul of the new law, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) is Justice, Equality and Impartiality based on Indian culture and ethos. Discuss this in the light of major shift from a doctrine of punishment to justice in the present judicial system. (Answer in 150 words) 10

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

(a) 'आचार संहिता' और 'नैतिक संहिता' लोक प्रशासन में मार्गदर्शन के स्रोत हैं। आचार संहिता पहले से ही क्रियान्वित है जबकि नैतिक संहिता अभी तक लागू होना बाकी है। शासन में सत्यनिष्ठा, ईमानदारी और पारदर्शिता बनाए रखने के लिए एक उपयुक्त आदर्श नैतिक संहिता का सुझाव दीजिए। (उत्तर 150 शब्दों में दीजिए) (b) नए कानून भारतीय न्याय संहिता (बीएनएस) की आत्मा भारतीय संस्कृति और लोकाचार पर आधारित न्याय, समानता और निष्पक्षता है। वर्तमान न्यायिक प्रणाली में दंड के सिद्धांत से न्याय की ओर बड़े बदलाव के आलोक में इस पर चर्चा कीजिए। (उत्तर 150 शब्दों में दीजिए)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2024 General Studies questions

Directive word: Suggest

This question asks you to suggest. The directive word signals the depth of analysis expected, the structure of your answer, and the weight of evidence you must bring.

See our UPSC directive words guide for a full breakdown of how to respond to each command word.

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

The directive 'suggest' in part (a) demands a prescriptive, model-building response, while 'discuss' in part (b) requires analytical examination of the BNS philosophy. Allocate ~75 words to (a): briefly distinguish Code of Conduct from Code of Ethics, then propose a 3-tier model (legislative framework + institutional mechanisms + citizen engagement). For (b), use ~75 words: open with the shift from colonial punitive justice to restorative justice, cite specific BNS provisions (community service, decriminalization of petty offences), and conclude with how Indian ethos (dharma, nyaya) informs this transformation. Maintain parallel structure across both parts.

Key points expected

  • Part (a): Clear distinction between Code of Conduct (rule-based, compliance-focused) and Code of Ethics (value-based, aspirational) in public administration
  • Part (a): Proposed model for Code of Ethics covering at least two of: legislative backing, independent ethics commission, disclosure requirements, whistleblower protection, or citizen charters
  • Part (b): Identification of the paradigm shift from IPC's colonial punitive framework to BNS's restorative and reformative justice approach
  • Part (b): Specific BNS provisions illustrating the shift: community service as punishment (Section 4), decriminalization of attempt to suicide, removal of sedition (replaced with treason), or gender-neutral offenses
  • Part (b): Connection to Indian cultural ethos: concepts of dharma, nyaya, restorative justice in traditional systems, or Gandhian trusteeship

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Demand-directive understanding20%4For (a), treats 'suggest' prescriptively by offering a concrete, implementable model rather than generic principles; for (b), treats 'discuss' analytically by examining multiple dimensions of the BNS shift rather than merely describing provisionsAddresses both directives but conflates 'suggest' with 'explain' in (a) offering only principles without model structure, or treats 'discuss' descriptively in (b) without analytical depthMisreads directives entirely—treats (a) as 'define' or (b) as 'list', or applies same approach to both distinct directives
Content depth & accuracy20%4For (a), accurately distinguishes conduct/ethics and proposes model with institutional specifics (e.g., Lokpal integration, RTI linkage); for (b), precisely cites BNS sections and correctly identifies the philosophical shift without conflating BNS with BNSS or BSABasic distinction in (a) and general awareness of BNS changes in (b), but with minor inaccuracies (e.g., vague on community service provisions) or missing specific institutional mechanismsConfuses Code of Conduct with Code of Ethics; misidentifies BNS provisions (e.g., claiming death penalty abolition) or conflates all three new criminal laws
Structure & flow20%4Clear demarcation between (a) and (b) with internal structure: (a) has 'distinction→gap→model' flow; (b) has 'thesis→evidence→synthesis' progression; smooth transitions despite 150-word constraint per partBoth parts addressed but with uneven development—one part significantly longer, or both parts present as undifferentiated paragraphs without internal signpostingNo visible structure; parts not clearly separated; ideas presented as fragmented points without logical progression; severe imbalance (e.g., 120 words on one part, 30 on other)
Examples / case-law / data20%4For (a), references existing ethics frameworks (Singapore's Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau, UK's Nolan Principles, or India's proposed Public Service Bill); for (b), cites specific BNS sections (4, 69, 103) or compares with landmark cases (Navtej Singh Johar, Puttaswamy) showing punitive-to-restorative shiftGeneric references to 'Western models' or 'ancient Indian texts' without specificity; mentions BNS changes without section numbers or conflates with IPC provisionsNo concrete examples; relies entirely on assertion; factual errors in citing laws or precedents
Conclusion & analytical edge20%4Synthesizes both parts: connects ethics infrastructure in (a) with justice delivery in (b), noting how procedural integrity (ethics) enables substantive justice (BNS); or offers critical insight on implementation challenges (political will, capacity) for both proposed model and new lawSeparate conclusions for each part without synthesis; or generic concluding statements ('thus ethics and justice are important') without analytical integrationNo conclusion; ends abruptly with last example; or introduces entirely new arguments in final lines

Practice this exact question

Write your answer, then get a detailed evaluation from our AI trained on UPSC's answer-writing standards. Free first evaluation — no signup needed to start.

Evaluate my answer →

More from General Studies 2024 GS Paper IV