Skip to main content

Is the Civil Society interfering with Parliamentary Process?

A lot is being said in the Media about the recent crusade by Anna Hazare and team trying to subvert parliamentary process by becoming an extra-parliamentary body and "forcing" the government to agree to a "law" made by itself. The words in quotes in the previous sentence are of note as they are being used by the anti-Hazare brigade to bring what they call as extra-parliamentary processes to light. 

The real question is - was the formation of a drafting committee comprising of the Group of Ministers and civil society activists an 'extra-parliamentary' step meant to side-step the parliament? Let's analyse the answer to this question by understanding how a normal law gets passed by the parliament.

Typically, a the process to form a law usually starts with the government ministry planning to form a law - the trigger may be a new requirement, directive by the courts or suo motto recognition by the ministry (minister). The ministry in question then forms a committee study similar bills from other countries / states, bring together thoughts from other ministries or departments within the ministry itself. 

Such committees are formed mostly of bureaucrats from the ministry itself but also of experts in the field of the law - the government often solicits services of professors from academic institutions, representatives of the industry bodies (such as CII, FICCI, NASSCOM etc)  and other eminent persons to become members such committees.

Now, take a brief look at the Lokpal process - the government has been dilly-dallying on the "proposed" Lokpal bill for the past 40 years. Anna Hazare's team decided that as citizens they had waited enough for a national ombudsman and not only started a fast unto death to force the government to take the bill to parliament, they also in parallel drafted a form of the bill which was legally airtight (thanks to being drafted by the likes of Shanti Bhushan).

But assume for a minute that if the law ministry had ever planned to take the Lokpal bill to the parliament - it would have had formed a committee of bureaucrats and eminent personalities like Anna Hazare, Arvind Kejriwal, Kiran bedi etc to refine the previous drafts of the bill before it went to parliament. How can then the constitution of a drafting committee be tainted as any attempt to bypass the parliament? 

The parliament does NOT draft laws - it only debates and then passes bills presented to it which have already been drafted by the drafting committee. And not just laws - even our constitution was drafted by a 'Drafting Committee' chaired by Dr. Ambedkar and was only debated and then passed by the Constituent Assembly.

Its high time that the media stops playing at the hands of politicians and misleading the public and bring the right picture to the people.
.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How will travel industry transform post-Covid

Unlike philosophers, journalists and teenagers, the world of entrepreneurship does not permit the luxury of gazing into a crystal ball to predict the future. An entrepreneur’s world is instead made of MVPs (Minimum Viable Product), A/B Tests, launching products, features or services and gauging / measuring their reception in the market to arrive at verifiable truths which can drive the business forward. Which is why I have never written about my musings or hypothesis about travel industry – we usually either seek customer feedback or launch an MVPised version and gather market feedback. However, with Covid-19 travel bans across the globe, the industry is currently stuck – while a lot of industry reports and journalistic conjectures are out, there’s no definitive answer to the way forward. Besides there is no way to test your hypothesis since even the traveller does not know what they will do when skies open. So, I decided to don my blogger hat and take the luxury of crystal gazing...

A Guide to Privacy on Social Media [apps]

The recent announcement by WhatsApp to update its privacy terms - and 'accept or leave the app' stance - led to an exodus of users from Whastapp to competing, privacy-conscious apps such as Telegram or Signal. A week after the exodus began, Whatsapp clarified its stance - and WhatsApp's CEO went about providing a long Twitter clarification . And then, many returned, many who considered moving stayed put on Whatsapp. This post is meant for those who are still sitting on the fence - it clarifies questions like: What is this all about? What do I do? Is Whatsapp safe? I've heard Telegram is Russian - so how is it safer than Whatsapp? I can't move because my business contacts are on Whastapp - how do I secure myself? PS: I've modeled this post based on several conversations I've had with friends and family on this subject, dealing with the chain of questions they ask, then objections they raise, then clarifications they seek - and finally the change resistance ...

Learning from 11 years in KPMG

It is only when we give up what we have is when we can embrace the new! I quit my job at KPMG one year ago - 22 January 2016 was my last day with the firm. As I reflect back on that day, it felt more like a graduation day! The eerie mix of nostalgia, excitement, anxiety and blues of missing your friends. KPMG was not just my first job but also a place where I learnt everything that I represent professionally. KPMG is one of the institutions I deeply respect and love – and relationships I have built here will stay with me for my lifetime. In my entrepreneurial career as well, I am often reminded more of all the great things I have learnt over my 11 years in KPMG. An year gone by, I realize these learnings have stayed with me and apply equally to the world outside KPMG. Almost all would apply to those working in role of (internal or external) consultants but several are generic and can be applied across professions. I have tried to change the text so that the learnings sound ...