NEW DELHI, January 11, 2015
Updated: January 11, 2015 07:44 IST
‘They infected governance long before Parliament took a disruptive turn’
When the President promulgated the Citizenship (Amendment) Ordinance on Wednesday, it was the ninth invocation of Article 123 by the Modi government in a little over seven months, but it was also the 646th ordinance since 1952.
In fact, says Shubhankar Dam, Assistant Professor of Law at the Singapore Management University, and author of Presidential Legislation in India: The Law and Practice of Ordinances, the past 15 years or so have actually seen a “rather significant decline” in the number of ordinances.
Contrary to public perception — fuelled by successive governments citing disruptions in Parliament to justify the ordinance route — Professor Dam points out that “ordinances infected governance in India long before Parliament took a disruptive turn; the Nehru-Gandhi years were especially damaging.”
Though Jawaharlal Nehru, the freedom fighter, had called ordinances — in play since 1861 — a “charter of slavery”, he along with B.R. Ambedkar batted for its inclusion during the Constituent Assembly debates, and 66 ordinances were promulgated under Prime Minister Nehru’s watch between 1952 and 1964. If he paved the way for repeated use of Article 123 by governments that followed, he also made a U-turn on ordinances as an acceptable norm within the political class.
Once out of government, every political party bills ordinances as “authoritarian’’ and a subversion of parliamentary democracy, but a cursory look at the ordinances promulgated over the years shows how Article 123 becomes a handy tool of governance once in power.
The Janata Party years (1977-1980) saw 28 ordinances, the National Front years (1989-1991) 16, the United Front years (1996-1998) 77, and the first incarnate of the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (1998-1999 and 1999-2004) saw 58 ordinances.
In all, the last decade of the United Progressive Alliance saw 61 ordinances being promulgated, inviting the charge of “ordinance raj” from the BJP, among others, with current Finance Minister Arun Jaitley then calling the use of Article 123 “an abuse of the legislative power to issue ordinances”.
Now, Mr. Jaitley is fighting criticism over the slew of ordinances in the fortnight after the close of the Winter Session of Parliament as a demonstration of the “firm commitment and determination of the government to reforms” and an announcement to the world including investors that India “can no longer wait even if one of the Houses (of Parliament) waits indefinitely to take up its own agenda.”
This has translated into some ordinances, like the potentially divisive Land Acquisition Ordinance being promulgated without an attempt to take the Bill first to Parliament, even though the Lok Sabha has functioned largely disruption-free. This is something the UPA did too; in fact, only six of the 36 ordinances promulgated in the 14th Lok Sabha and only three of the 25 in the 15th Lok Sabha involved Bills stuck in Parliament.
Governments are particularly prone to introducing ordinances without prior attempt at tabling Bills before Parliament. UPA-1 introduced eight ordinances in its first six months in power, none of them first taken to Parliament, including ordinances repealing the stringent anti-terror legislation.
NEW DELHI, January 11, 2015
Updated: January 11, 2015 08:36 IST
EXCLUSIVE
President conveys sharp reminder on ordinance limits
Amit Baruah
Govt. must ensure extension of tenure after Parliament reconvenes
President Pranab Mukherjee reminded senior Ministers of the Narendra Modi government that the validity of an ordinance was for just six weeks after Parliament reassembled.
Mr. Mukherjee’s comments to the Ministers when they called on him to explain the urgency for promulgating three ordinances imply that the government will have to get these turned into Acts of Parliament. In order to do this, the government must get the contentious legislation passed either through the Rajya Sabha, where it doesn’t have the majority, or call a joint sitting of the two Houses.
The President told Ministers Arun Jaitley, D.V. Sadananda Gowda and Nitin Gadkari at a recent meeting that it was up to the government to ensure that the validity of the legislation extended beyond the mandated six weeks after Parliament resumed, The Hindu has learnt.
Under Article 123 of the Constitution, the President has to satisfy himself that “circumstances exist” that require him to “take immediate action” when both Houses of Parliament are not in session. Also, an ordinance has the “same force and effect” as an Act of Parliament.
“They [the government] could call a joint session of Parliament, where they have a majority. But it would be better if the consensus route was adopted,” the former Attorney-General, Soli Sorabjee, told this newspaper.
In the absence of Rural Development Minister Birender Singh, the President is reported to have sought detailed clarifications from Finance Minister Arun Jaitley on the urgency of on the ordinance amending the Land Acquisition Act, 2013. While seeking reasons to justify the urgency of issuing this and two other ordinances amending the Motor Vehicles Act and the Citizenship Act, Mr. Mukherjee is said to have pointed out that the impact of the ordinances would be permanent.
NEW DELHI, January 11, 2015
Updated: January 11, 2015 00:36 IST
Impact of ordinances permanent: President
Amit Baruah
President Pranab Mukherjee asked three senior Union Ministers to give reasons to justify the urgency of issuing ordinances amending the Land Acquisition Act, the Motor Vehicles Act and the Citizenship Act, while reminding them that the validity of an ordinance was for just six weeks after Parliament reassembled.
On the ordinance on the Motor Vehicles Act, Road Transport Minister Nitin Gadkari reportedly told the President that tens of thousands of families plying e-rickshaws were in grave danger of losing their livelihoods.
The President was informed that the ordinance to amend the Citizenship Act, putting a Person of Indian Origin (PIO) on a par with an Overseas Citizen of India (OCI), was to honour a commitment given by Prime Minister Narendra Modi last September. The ordinance was signed by the President ahead of Pravasi Bharatiya Divas.
In the absence of Rural Development Minister Birender Singh, the President is reported to have sought detailed clarifications from Finance Minister Arun Jaitley on the urgency of the ordinance amending the Land Acquisition Act.
On the issue of convening a joint sitting of Parliament, the former Lok Sabha Secretary-General, Subhash Kashyap, said such a session could be convened if only there was a “final disagreement” between the two Houses on a Bill.
First, a Bill would have to be introduced and discussed in each House and only if there was a disagreement, could a joint sitting be convened, Mr. Kashyap said.
NEW DELHI, January 11, 2015
Updated: January 11, 2015 00:06 IST
RSS offshoot questions exemptions
Anumeha Yadav
Leaders of the Bharatiya Kisan Sangh (BKS), affiliated to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, has questioned the exemption granted to industrial corridors from the requirements of the Land Acquisition Act through a recent ordinance.
As per the ordinance, the exempt projects will not have to go through the SIA.
“There is no justification for the government acquiring land for commercial purposes for industrial corridors,” BKS national general secretary Prabhakar Kelkar said here.
He said the BKS planned to hold village- and district-level meetings on the details of the ordinance.
In the consultations with the government before the ordinance was issued, BKS functionaries demanded keeping the minimum requirement of consent of at least 51 per cent of affected families and consider providing jobs to more than one member of such a family in compensation.
“Finance Minister Arun Jaitley met us before the ordinance was announced. He said the ordinance was necessary as otherwise Section 105 of the Act which provides for excluding 13 central laws would no longer apply,” said BKS national secretary Mohini Mohan Mishra.
