Employment Non-Discrimination Act (Enda), a bill banning workplace discrimination against gay and transgender people has passed the US Senate with significant cross-party support.
The Senate voted 64-32 to pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, with 10 Republicans voting in favour. President Barack Obama called the bill an "important step" to "help end injustice". The future of the bill in the Republican-led House still remains unclear, as Speaker John Boehner has voiced his opposition. He opposed the bill arguing it could lead to lawsuits and hinder job creation. The legislation bars employers with 15 or more workers from making employment decisions - hiring, firing or compensation - based on sexual orientation or gender identity. The bill's passage in the Senate comes three years after Congress lifted the ban on gays serving openly in the US military, and months after the US Supreme Court struck down a federal law banning federal recognition of same-sex marriage. This week, the Illinois legislature passed a bill recognising same-sex marriage. Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA):
|
| What: 'Enda' gay rights bill passed in US Senate When: November 7, 2013 Who: The Senate voted 64-32 to pass ‘Enda’ bill, with 10 Republicans voting in favour. |
Showing posts with label bills. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bills. Show all posts
Sunday, November 10, 2013
'Enda' gay rights bill passed in US Senate
Thursday, September 12, 2013
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (Amendment) Bill, 2013 Passed by Rajya Sabha
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (Amendment) Bill, 2013 was passed by the Rajya Sabha on 5 September 2013. The Bill will widen the area for eligible candidates for the post of presiding officer at the Securities Appellate Tribunal. The Bill was already approved by the Lok Sabha on 27 August 2013.
Primary Features of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Amendment) Bill, 2013
• The Securities and Exchange Board of India (Amendment) Bill, 2013 was introduced at first in the Lok Sabha on 14 August 2013.
• The Bill seeks to amend the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992.
• It is important to note that the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), established by the Act, is the regulator for the securities markets in India. The Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT), established by the Act, adjudicates on appeals against decisions made by SEBI. SAT is headed by the Presiding Officer, who should be the sitting or retired Supreme Court Judge or a sitting or retired Chief Justice of a High Court.
• The Bill extends eligibility criteria for SAT Presiding Officer’s role and includes sitting or retired Judges of a High Court with a minimum service of seven years.
• The Bill was initially introduced as the ordinance on 21 January 2013. It then lapsed and another ordinance was promulgated on 29 May 2013 with same provisions.
Primary Features of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Amendment) Bill, 2013
• The Securities and Exchange Board of India (Amendment) Bill, 2013 was introduced at first in the Lok Sabha on 14 August 2013.
• The Bill seeks to amend the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992.
• It is important to note that the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), established by the Act, is the regulator for the securities markets in India. The Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT), established by the Act, adjudicates on appeals against decisions made by SEBI. SAT is headed by the Presiding Officer, who should be the sitting or retired Supreme Court Judge or a sitting or retired Chief Justice of a High Court.
• The Bill extends eligibility criteria for SAT Presiding Officer’s role and includes sitting or retired Judges of a High Court with a minimum service of seven years.
• The Bill was initially introduced as the ordinance on 21 January 2013. It then lapsed and another ordinance was promulgated on 29 May 2013 with same provisions.
The Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order (Second Amendment) Bill, 2013 Passed By Rajya Sabha
The Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order (Second Amendment) Bill, 2013 was passed by the Rajya Sabha on 6 September 2013. The Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order (Second Amendment) Bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha on 14 December 2012 by the Minister of Tribal Affairs, V. Kishore Chandra Deo. The Bill was passed by the Lok Sabha on 24 August 2013.
Objective of the Bill
The Bill seeks to amend the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 to modify the list of Scheduled Tribes in the states of Kerala and Chhattisgarh.
Major highlights of the Bill
• Article 342 of the Constitution of India states that the President may notify the Scheduled Tribes in a state after consultation with the Governor of the state. The President issued the 1950 Order, in accordance with this Article.
• According to the Article 342 of the Constitution of India, Scheduled Tribes means such tribes or tribal communities or parts of or groups within such tribes or tribal communities as are deemed under Article 342 to be Scheduled Tribes for the purposes of India Constitution.
• The Bill amended the Schedule of the 1950 Order to include certain groups as Scheduled Tribes. The Marati community is being re-included in the list of Scheduled Tribes in Kerala.
• Scheduled Tribe status is being granted to the Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups namely Abujh Maria and Hill Korwa in the list of Scheduled Tribes in Chhattisgarh.
Objective of the Bill
The Bill seeks to amend the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950 to modify the list of Scheduled Tribes in the states of Kerala and Chhattisgarh.
Major highlights of the Bill
• Article 342 of the Constitution of India states that the President may notify the Scheduled Tribes in a state after consultation with the Governor of the state. The President issued the 1950 Order, in accordance with this Article.
• According to the Article 342 of the Constitution of India, Scheduled Tribes means such tribes or tribal communities or parts of or groups within such tribes or tribal communities as are deemed under Article 342 to be Scheduled Tribes for the purposes of India Constitution.
• The Bill amended the Schedule of the 1950 Order to include certain groups as Scheduled Tribes. The Marati community is being re-included in the list of Scheduled Tribes in Kerala.
• Scheduled Tribe status is being granted to the Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups namely Abujh Maria and Hill Korwa in the list of Scheduled Tribes in Chhattisgarh.
Saturday, September 07, 2013
Anti-Rape law
The Criminal Law Amendment Bill, 2013, passed by the Lok Sabha on March 19 and by the Rajya Sabha on March 21, to amend rape-related laws comes across as a half-hearted exercise by the political class to address the issue of violence against women. The plea by women’s organisations that the recommendations in the Justice J.S. Verma Committee report find a place in it has been ignored.
The Bill includes stalking, voyeurism and acid attacks as offences and prescribes punishment for aggravated forms of rape and gang rape, but it fails to consider the Verma report recommendations pertaining to anti-women provisions such as Sections 354 and 509 of the Indian Penal Code, which only punish assaults and gestures that “outrage the modesty of women”.
The All India Democratic Women’s Association expressed its disappointment with the Bill and is hopeful of the neglected provisions included at some stage.
Lok Sabha Passed the Street Vendors Bill, 2012 for Protection of the Vendors
The Lok Sabha on 6 September 2013 passed the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Bill, 2012 in order to protect the rights of the street vendors in the urban areas. The Bill also includes protection of the vendors from police harassment as well as municipal authorities’ harassment.
Primary features of the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Bill, 2012
• The aim of the Bill is protection of livelihood rights of street vendors. The purpose of the Bill is also to regulation the street vendors through the demarcation of vending zones.
• As per the proposed law, any person intending to take street vending should register with the Town Vending Committee (TVC). Thereafter, a person should apply for the vending certificate which will be issued on the basis of a few criterions.
• TVC shall comprise of representatives of the street vendors, municipal commissioner, local police, planning authority, local authority, resident welfare association as well as other traders associations.
• A scheme for the street vendors shall be framed by the State Government.
• It will be the responsibility of the local authority along with the planning authority, for framing the street vending plan once in every five years time period.
• The Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Bill, 2012 shall not be applicable on the railways premises, land and trains.
Primary features of the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Bill, 2012
• The aim of the Bill is protection of livelihood rights of street vendors. The purpose of the Bill is also to regulation the street vendors through the demarcation of vending zones.
• As per the proposed law, any person intending to take street vending should register with the Town Vending Committee (TVC). Thereafter, a person should apply for the vending certificate which will be issued on the basis of a few criterions.
• TVC shall comprise of representatives of the street vendors, municipal commissioner, local police, planning authority, local authority, resident welfare association as well as other traders associations.
• A scheme for the street vendors shall be framed by the State Government.
• It will be the responsibility of the local authority along with the planning authority, for framing the street vending plan once in every five years time period.
• The Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Bill, 2012 shall not be applicable on the railways premises, land and trains.
It is important to note that the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Bill, 2012 was introduced in the Lok Sabha on 6 September 2012 by Kumari Selja, Minister of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation.
Lok Sabha Passed the Bill to Ban Manual Scavenging
Lok Sabha, the Lower House of the Parliament, on 6 September 2013, passed the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Bill, 2012. The Bill was moved by the Minister for Social Justice and Empowerment Kumari Selja. The Bill seeks to prohibit employment of individuals as the manual scavengers, while at the same time providing for the rehabilitation of people involved in this kind of work.
Need for the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Bill, 2012
The need for the new law is there because the existing laws do not prove adequate in elimination of the evils of manual scavenging and insanitary latrines.
Need for the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Bill, 2012
The need for the new law is there because the existing laws do not prove adequate in elimination of the evils of manual scavenging and insanitary latrines.
What is Manual Scavenging?
Manual Scavenging refers to the process of removal of human waste or excreta from the unsanitary dry toilets that do not have a connection to the sewer system. This practice is primarily archetypical to South Asia.
In the year 1933, legislation was passed in India for banning manual scavenging. However, the legislation was not implemented widely. In February 2013, Delhi became the first state in India to ban manual scavenging.
Manual Scavenging refers to the process of removal of human waste or excreta from the unsanitary dry toilets that do not have a connection to the sewer system. This practice is primarily archetypical to South Asia.
In the year 1933, legislation was passed in India for banning manual scavenging. However, the legislation was not implemented widely. In February 2013, Delhi became the first state in India to ban manual scavenging.
Lok Sabha Passed the Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Amendment Bill, 2013
The Lok Sabha on 6 September 2013 passed the Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Amendment Bill, 2013 for keeping the chairpersons of National Commissions for the SC and ST out of purview of office of profit. The Bill has already been passed by the Rajya Sabha. The Bill seeks to include National Commissions for the SC and ST in list of those offices which have no affect by the office of profit clause.
The Bill is meant to amend the Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1959. It is important to note that Union Cabinet of India on 9 May 2013 gave its approval to Amendments in the Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1959 by introducing a Bill in the Parliament named Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Amendment Bill, 2013.
The Section 3 of the Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1959, has been amended time to time. It lists certain offices of profit under the Government of India or the Government of any State, which do not disqualify the holders thereof for being chosen as, or for being, a Member of Parliament. The Chairperson of the National Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes is exempted from such disqualification under Sub-clause (ii) of clause (ba) of section 3 of the Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1959.
By the 89th Amendment Act of 2003 of the Constitution of India, the National Commission for Scheduled Castes and Tribes was bifurcated into two independent Commissions namely the National Commission for the Scheduled Castes and the National Commission for the Scheduled Tribes. With the 89th amendment Act Article 338 of the Constitution was amended and a new article, namely, Article 338A was inserted in the Constitution.
The Bill is meant to amend the Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1959. It is important to note that Union Cabinet of India on 9 May 2013 gave its approval to Amendments in the Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1959 by introducing a Bill in the Parliament named Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Amendment Bill, 2013.
The Section 3 of the Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1959, has been amended time to time. It lists certain offices of profit under the Government of India or the Government of any State, which do not disqualify the holders thereof for being chosen as, or for being, a Member of Parliament. The Chairperson of the National Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes is exempted from such disqualification under Sub-clause (ii) of clause (ba) of section 3 of the Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1959.
By the 89th Amendment Act of 2003 of the Constitution of India, the National Commission for Scheduled Castes and Tribes was bifurcated into two independent Commissions namely the National Commission for the Scheduled Castes and the National Commission for the Scheduled Tribes. With the 89th amendment Act Article 338 of the Constitution was amended and a new article, namely, Article 338A was inserted in the Constitution.
Lok Sabha Passed the Representation of the People (Amendment and Validation) Bill, 2013
Lok Sabha on 6 September 2013 passed the Representation of the People (Amendment and Validation) Bill, 2013. Rajya Sabha already passed the bill on 27 August 2013. The Bill was passed in Lok Sabha without any discussion.
The aim of the Representation of the People (Amendment and Validation) Bill, 2013 is to add a proviso to sub-section (2) of section 62 of the RP Act.
It is important to note that on 10 July 2013, the Supreme Court of India upheld the decision of Patna High Court that people in police custody cannot contest the polls.
What is the Representation of People Act, 1951?
The Representation of People Act, 1951 is the Act of Parliament of India, which explains about the conduct of the elections of both the Houses of the Parliament. The Act also explains about the qualifications and disqualifications for the membership of these houses, offences or the corrupt practices.
The Act came into force by the provisional parliament under Article 379 of Indian Constitution. The Representation of People Act, 1951 was amended various times. The most notable amendment was the one which abolished election tribunals. The election petitions were thus transferred to the High Courts of India, the orders of which could be appealed to the Supreme Court of India.
The aim of the Representation of the People (Amendment and Validation) Bill, 2013 is to add a proviso to sub-section (2) of section 62 of the RP Act.
It is important to note that on 10 July 2013, the Supreme Court of India upheld the decision of Patna High Court that people in police custody cannot contest the polls.
What is the Representation of People Act, 1951?
The Representation of People Act, 1951 is the Act of Parliament of India, which explains about the conduct of the elections of both the Houses of the Parliament. The Act also explains about the qualifications and disqualifications for the membership of these houses, offences or the corrupt practices.
The Act came into force by the provisional parliament under Article 379 of Indian Constitution. The Representation of People Act, 1951 was amended various times. The most notable amendment was the one which abolished election tribunals. The election petitions were thus transferred to the High Courts of India, the orders of which could be appealed to the Supreme Court of India.
Bill passed, jailed can contest poll
Negating a Supreme Court order, Parliament passed a Bill that maintains the right of those in jail to contest polls, with the government saying that the court verdict was wrong and the Legislature has Constitutional duty to correct it.
The Representation of the People (Amendment and Validation) Bill, 2013 was rushed through in the Lok Sabha on 6.9.2013 within 15 minutes after a brief discussion.
Some members wanted an elaborate debate on the Bill but the overwhelming majority of the House, including Leader of Opposition Sushma Swaraj, pushed for its passage even without discussion.
Rajya Sabha had already passed the Bill on August 27.
Big relief for jailed politicos contest poll
Big relief for jailed politicos contest poll
The Representation of the People (Amendment and Validation) Bill, 2013, which negates the Supreme Court order barring jailed politicians, was rushed through in the Lok Sabha and passed within about 15 minutes after a brief discussion.
The Bill negates the July 10 order of the Supreme Court which held that those in jail cannot vote as per RP Act and hence cannot qualify for contesting elections to Parliament or state legislatures.The Bill was passed by Rajya Sabha on August 27.
Moving the bill for consideration and passage, law minister Kapil Sibal said, “The Supreme Court is right because it is final, it is not right because it is right.”
Meanwhile, a Bill seeking to prohibit employment of individuals as manual scavengers and providing for rehabilitation of those involved in this work and their families through jobs and other provisions was also passed by the Lok Sabha after a brief discussion. It was introduced by minister for social justice and empowerment Kumari Selja.
Friday, September 06, 2013
Lok Sabha passes bill to set up first national aviation university
A bill to set up the first-ever national aviation university in the country named after Rajiv Gandhi to train pilots, cabin crew and aircraft engineers was passed in the Lok Sabha on 6.9.2013.
The proposed university would come up at Sonia Gandhi's constituency of Rae Bareli in Uttar Pradesh.
Civil Aviation Minister Ajit Singh moved the Rajiv Gandhi National Aviation University Bill, 2013 which provides for creation of this central university on a 26 acre plot at the Indira Gandhi Rashtriya Udaan Academy at Fursatganj in Rae Bareli. It was passed after a short discussion.
Speaking before the Bill was put to vote, Singh allayed fears of members on privatisation of airports. "I want to say that all these airports in the country will continue to be owned by the Airports Authority of India," he said, adding that any construction or development of the existing airports will be done on Public-Private Partnership (PPP) basis.
He also said his ministry is working on opening more domestic airports in the country and may expand the airports of the Air Force for this purpose in some districts.
Initiating the debate on the bill, Ananth Kumar (BJP) questioned the logic behind setting up the proposed university in Rae Bareli. "Rae Bareli is an aviation desert. It should be set up in Bangalore, where all the required infrastructure is present," he said.
Kumar also questioned why the proposed institution is being named after late Rajiv Gandhi. He said while he had nothing against the former Prime Minister, the university could have been named in the memory of M Vishveshwariah who was behind the creation of Hindustan Aeronautics Limited.
Parliament passes key Pension Bill after about 10-year delay
After a delay of nearly a decade, Parliament on 6.9.2013 passed a key economic reforms legislation, the Pension Bill, that aims to create a regulator for the sector and allows at least 26 per cent FDI.
Thursday, September 05, 2013
Amended Land Acquisition Bill passed by Parliament
The path-breaking Land Acquisition Bill was on 5.9.2013 one step short of becoming a law with Parliament giving its approval to it.
Lok Sabha passed the amended version of the legislation, which seeks to provide fair and just compensation to farmers and to those who lose livelihood on account of acquisition.
The bill, which was earlier passed by Lok Sabha last week, went through some amendments during its passage in the Rajya Sabha on Wednesday.
The historic legislation will now be sent to the President for his assent.
Bill to keep political parties out of RTI sent to parliamentary panel
The bill which seeks to keep political parties out of the ambit of the transparency law will be sent to a standing committee for wider consultations, government informed the Lok Sabha on 5.9.2013.
Minister of state for personnel V Narayanasamy, who piloted the RTI (Amendment) Bill in the House last month, said in a bid to hold wider consultations, the government is recommending that the bill to be referred to the standing committee on law and personnel.
Several members from opposition supported the decision. The bill is also aimed at negating a Central Information Commission (CIC) order which said political parties were public authorities and should come under RTI Act ambit.
The Right to Information (Amendment) Bill, 2013 seeks to insert an explanation in Section 2 of the Act which states that any association or body of individuals registered or recognised as political party under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 will not be considered a public authority.
The CIC order had termed Congress, BJP, BSP, NCP, CPI and CPM as political authorities.
Since the CIC order on six major political parties came on 3 June, the amended Act will come into force with retrospective effect from June.
The CIC order is still "operational", meaning people can seek information on political parties through RTI application.
Government had already made it clear that it will not challenge the CIC order in high court - the appellate court - but bring a bill instead to negate the verdict.
Minister of state for personnel V Narayanasamy, who piloted the RTI (Amendment) Bill in the House last month, said in a bid to hold wider consultations, the government is recommending that the bill to be referred to the standing committee on law and personnel.
Several members from opposition supported the decision. The bill is also aimed at negating a Central Information Commission (CIC) order which said political parties were public authorities and should come under RTI Act ambit.
The Right to Information (Amendment) Bill, 2013 seeks to insert an explanation in Section 2 of the Act which states that any association or body of individuals registered or recognised as political party under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 will not be considered a public authority.
The CIC order had termed Congress, BJP, BSP, NCP, CPI and CPM as political authorities.
Since the CIC order on six major political parties came on 3 June, the amended Act will come into force with retrospective effect from June.
The CIC order is still "operational", meaning people can seek information on political parties through RTI application.
Government had already made it clear that it will not challenge the CIC order in high court - the appellate court - but bring a bill instead to negate the verdict.
Rajya Sabha passes bill to appoint judges under new system
Government and opposition in Rajya Sabha on 5.9.2013 presented a joint front in cornering judiciary on all fronts - ranging from corruption, favouritism and nepotism to compromises due to lust of post-retirement jobs\benefits - while discussing a bill which seeks to scrap the collegium system of appointing judges.
The bill, giving executive a crucial role in judges' appointment, was, however, finally passed without BJP members' presence as they walked out protesting the government's refusal to send the proposed legislation to a parliamentary standing committee for wider consultations.
As the Upper House took up the bill to amend the Constitution to set up a Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) replacing the collegium system, law minister Kapil Sibal, leader of opposition Arun Jaitley and several other members were of the view that the present system of appointing judges to Supreme Court and high courts lacked transparency and accountability.
BJP members said though their party was fully in support of the bill, it wanted a wider consultations before passing of the bill. Jaitley said, "We don't like the present system. So, we are agreed to change it. We are making a monumental change. Monumental changes are never brought with a knee-jerk reaction".
The bill, which was passed without BJP members participating in voting, seeks to set up a JAC to recommend appointment and transfer of Supreme Court and high court judges. It states that the JAC will make the participants in the selection accountable and introduce "transparency" in the selection process.
With the creation of the proposed body, the executive seeks to have a say in appointment of members to the higher judiciary. The bill seeks to set up a panel headed by the Chief Justice of India (CJI) to appoint and transfer senior judges. The other members of the proposed commission would be two senior-most judges of the Supreme Court, the law minister, two eminent persons as members and secretary (justice) in the law ministry as Convener.
Moving the bill, Sibal earlier said the Supreme Court in 1993 had sought to change the procedure of appointment of judges in higher judiciary by bringing in a collegium system. The judiciary has taken over executive power by rewriting Article 124 (of the Constitution). That balance must be restored. Executive must have a say in appointment."
Sibal said, "It has disturbed the delicate balance of separation of powers. There is very clear division of powers among the executive, legislature and judiciary in our Constitution. Judiciary cannot take over the function of the executive".
Sibal also chose the occasion to flag his concerns over "nepotism" in the judiciary. "We are really worried over the manner in which relatives of judges are practising in high courts. It is very disturbing. It is a matter of sadness that somebody's maternal uncle, uncle and others practice in court. How long this nepotism will continue," he asked.
Jaitley echoed Sibal's views as he pressed for re-establishment of the "separation of powers". He said when other establishments of the democracy do not infringe upon functioning of the judiciary, then why would it ask the government to do this or do that and direct even on the economic policy of the government.
"Courts cannot review a policy and say that my policy is better that your policy. It cannot say how to be tough on the Naxalites," he said.
Citing the ban on iron ore exports, Jaitley sought to link judicial orders partially to the present state of Current Account Deficit and depreciation of rupee as a result of that.
Attacking judiciary, he said no government, irrespective of its complexions, has ever said that since court has three crore cases pending, somebody else would do it for courts. Stating that the present system of appointing judges lacks transparency, Jaitley said the three-member collegium often left out the best of the lot for a promotion and go ahead with their choices.
"A collegium is as good as the members of the collegium," he said as he observed, "Judges appoint themselves and judges are accountable to judges."
Stating that in the existing collegium mechanism the members of the panel of judges go by their own preferences, he said when the collegium meets for appointment of judges, they "have to accommodate the preferences of each other, and those who don't come in their list of preferences lose out".
Jaitley also spoke against the trend of higher judiciary members seeking post-retirement jobs. He said, "I think this whole temptation of continuing to occupy a Lutyens Bungalow (government accommodation in heart of the Capital) is a very serious temptation....The desire of a post-retirement job influences pre-retirement judgments. It is a threat to the independence of the judiciary. Once it influences pre-retirement judgments, it adversely impacts the functioning of our judiciary itself".
The leader of opposition proposed that a judicial commission should not only have powers for appointment of judges but also ensure their accountability. He said in cases of judicial misconduct, falling short of acts that call for impeachment, the judges were accountable only to judges and "this needs to be changed".
Sibal, while moving the bill, said the proposal to set up JAC was also the part of BJP's national agenda of governance in 1998. "I compliment the leader of opposition who then as the minister introduced the bill to set up the Judicial Commission in 2003. All we have done is that we have increased the number of eminent members from one to two who will be appointed in the National Judicial Commission which will appoint the Judges. We are grateful to the leader of opposition that we are only adopting what he had suggested," he said.
Sibal said the Law Commission had said in 2008 that the Supreme Court interpretation of Article 124 (2) is contrary to the letter and spirit of the very article. He recalled that Justice M N Venkatachaliah and Justice J S Verma, who had favoured the collegium system, had later said they regretted their decision and that the system was not working.
The minister also recalled that as a counsel, he had in past supported the idea of the judiciary appointing judges. "I also regret...Wise men are always proved right. When we were young, we wanted to change the system and sorry we disregarded your wisdom," Sibal said as nominated member and former Attorney General of India K Parasaran reminded him that Sibal was opposed to any outside role in judicial appointments.
"I am not saying that you should go back to 1993. There should be a judicial commission so that a collaborative exercise is there for their appointments. We do not want to impose our decisions in judicial appointments.
"That is why we have made provisions for inclusion of two eminent persons in the judicial commission whose names will be decided by the Prime Minister, leader of opposition in the Lok Sabha and Chief Justice of India jointly," the minister said.
The bill, giving executive a crucial role in judges' appointment, was, however, finally passed without BJP members' presence as they walked out protesting the government's refusal to send the proposed legislation to a parliamentary standing committee for wider consultations.
As the Upper House took up the bill to amend the Constitution to set up a Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) replacing the collegium system, law minister Kapil Sibal, leader of opposition Arun Jaitley and several other members were of the view that the present system of appointing judges to Supreme Court and high courts lacked transparency and accountability.
BJP members said though their party was fully in support of the bill, it wanted a wider consultations before passing of the bill. Jaitley said, "We don't like the present system. So, we are agreed to change it. We are making a monumental change. Monumental changes are never brought with a knee-jerk reaction".
The bill, which was passed without BJP members participating in voting, seeks to set up a JAC to recommend appointment and transfer of Supreme Court and high court judges. It states that the JAC will make the participants in the selection accountable and introduce "transparency" in the selection process.
With the creation of the proposed body, the executive seeks to have a say in appointment of members to the higher judiciary. The bill seeks to set up a panel headed by the Chief Justice of India (CJI) to appoint and transfer senior judges. The other members of the proposed commission would be two senior-most judges of the Supreme Court, the law minister, two eminent persons as members and secretary (justice) in the law ministry as Convener.
Moving the bill, Sibal earlier said the Supreme Court in 1993 had sought to change the procedure of appointment of judges in higher judiciary by bringing in a collegium system. The judiciary has taken over executive power by rewriting Article 124 (of the Constitution). That balance must be restored. Executive must have a say in appointment."
Sibal said, "It has disturbed the delicate balance of separation of powers. There is very clear division of powers among the executive, legislature and judiciary in our Constitution. Judiciary cannot take over the function of the executive".
Sibal also chose the occasion to flag his concerns over "nepotism" in the judiciary. "We are really worried over the manner in which relatives of judges are practising in high courts. It is very disturbing. It is a matter of sadness that somebody's maternal uncle, uncle and others practice in court. How long this nepotism will continue," he asked.
Jaitley echoed Sibal's views as he pressed for re-establishment of the "separation of powers". He said when other establishments of the democracy do not infringe upon functioning of the judiciary, then why would it ask the government to do this or do that and direct even on the economic policy of the government.
"Courts cannot review a policy and say that my policy is better that your policy. It cannot say how to be tough on the Naxalites," he said.
Citing the ban on iron ore exports, Jaitley sought to link judicial orders partially to the present state of Current Account Deficit and depreciation of rupee as a result of that.
Attacking judiciary, he said no government, irrespective of its complexions, has ever said that since court has three crore cases pending, somebody else would do it for courts. Stating that the present system of appointing judges lacks transparency, Jaitley said the three-member collegium often left out the best of the lot for a promotion and go ahead with their choices.
"A collegium is as good as the members of the collegium," he said as he observed, "Judges appoint themselves and judges are accountable to judges."
Stating that in the existing collegium mechanism the members of the panel of judges go by their own preferences, he said when the collegium meets for appointment of judges, they "have to accommodate the preferences of each other, and those who don't come in their list of preferences lose out".
Jaitley also spoke against the trend of higher judiciary members seeking post-retirement jobs. He said, "I think this whole temptation of continuing to occupy a Lutyens Bungalow (government accommodation in heart of the Capital) is a very serious temptation....The desire of a post-retirement job influences pre-retirement judgments. It is a threat to the independence of the judiciary. Once it influences pre-retirement judgments, it adversely impacts the functioning of our judiciary itself".
The leader of opposition proposed that a judicial commission should not only have powers for appointment of judges but also ensure their accountability. He said in cases of judicial misconduct, falling short of acts that call for impeachment, the judges were accountable only to judges and "this needs to be changed".
Sibal, while moving the bill, said the proposal to set up JAC was also the part of BJP's national agenda of governance in 1998. "I compliment the leader of opposition who then as the minister introduced the bill to set up the Judicial Commission in 2003. All we have done is that we have increased the number of eminent members from one to two who will be appointed in the National Judicial Commission which will appoint the Judges. We are grateful to the leader of opposition that we are only adopting what he had suggested," he said.
Sibal said the Law Commission had said in 2008 that the Supreme Court interpretation of Article 124 (2) is contrary to the letter and spirit of the very article. He recalled that Justice M N Venkatachaliah and Justice J S Verma, who had favoured the collegium system, had later said they regretted their decision and that the system was not working.
The minister also recalled that as a counsel, he had in past supported the idea of the judiciary appointing judges. "I also regret...Wise men are always proved right. When we were young, we wanted to change the system and sorry we disregarded your wisdom," Sibal said as nominated member and former Attorney General of India K Parasaran reminded him that Sibal was opposed to any outside role in judicial appointments.
"I am not saying that you should go back to 1993. There should be a judicial commission so that a collaborative exercise is there for their appointments. We do not want to impose our decisions in judicial appointments.
"That is why we have made provisions for inclusion of two eminent persons in the judicial commission whose names will be decided by the Prime Minister, leader of opposition in the Lok Sabha and Chief Justice of India jointly," the minister said.
Wednesday, September 04, 2013
Lok Sabha passes Pension Bill
The Lok Sabha on 4.9.2013 gave its approval to the Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority Bill (PFRDA), 2011, a long-pending but an important economic legislation providing for the establishment of an Authority to promote old age income security.
The bill seeks to establish, develop and regulate pension funds to protect the interests of subscribers to schemes of pension funds and assures minimum returns to subscribers. The government said the bill was based on the principle "you save while you earn".
The PFRDA Bill, 2011, provides for market based returns and wide coverage based on several investment options in the pension sector with an aim to building confidence in the subscribers. It will have provision for withdrawals for limited purposes from Tier-I pension account, an incentive for subscribers to join the National Pension Scheme (NPS).
Replying to the debate, Finance Minister P. Chidambaram said the government has accepted most of the recommendations of the Standing Committee. It was referred to the Standing Committee twice – in 2005 and 2011.
The corpus of the NPS having 52.83 lakh subscribers (including those of 26 state governments) was about Rs 35,000 crore. The bill also seeks to grant statutory status to the Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority. ``Rs 35,000 crore should not be used by unstatutory authority...All this Bill does is make unstatutory authority (into) a statutory authority," he said, adding the authority will have powers to penalise. The bill seeks to empower PFRDA to regulate the NPS.
The bill would also provide subscribers a wide choice to invest their funds for assured returns, like opting for government bonds as well as in other funds depending on their capacity to take risk.
The subscriber seeking minimum assured returns would be allowed to opt for investing funds in such scheme providing minimum assured returns as may be notified by the Authority.
The bill was referred to the Standing Committee twice -- in 2005 and 2011. The bill provides for 26 per cent foreign investment in pension sector or as may be approved for insurance sector, whichever is higher. It also provides that at least one of the pension fund managers shall be from the public sector.
The NPS has been made mandatory for all the central government employees (except armed forces) entering service with effect from January 1, 2004. It has been launched for all citizens of the country including unorganised sector workers, on voluntary basis, from May, 2009.
Tuesday, September 03, 2013
Rajya Sabha passes food security Bill
The Bill had been cleared by the Lok Sabha last week. To cover 75 per cent of the rural and 50 per cent of the urban population by providing them with subsidised foodgrains, the Bill now needs presidential assent to translate into law.
Though Opposition and parties like the Trinamool Congress found faults with the Bill on several counts, including seeing it as an assault on federalism, it was passed in favour of the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA).
In his reply to the debate, Food Minister K V Thomas assured members all suggestions of political parties would be incorporated while drawing up the amendments. As for concerns that state specific food schemes should not be overridden by the Centre’s food scheme, Thomas said the federal system would be protected. “The prime minister has taken a bold decision of protecting existing quantity and price in states.”
As for the nutritional aspect, as providing universal coverage was not possible, Thomas said special care would be taken of pregnant women and lactating mothers.
The government, he said, had incorporated suggestions such as “hot cooked food” for certain sections rather than the earlier “ready-made food” provision. The food minister acknowledged that the Food Corporation of India had its shortcomings. “It is a white elephant” but steps were being taken to remedy it.
Bahujan Samaj Party chief Mayawati said her party supported the government’s bid to provide food for all, but wanted the amendments moved by parties to be taken note of and included by the government.
Leader of the Opposition in the Rajya Sabha Arun Jaitley, who spoke on the “misuse” of the ordinance powers through which the government had brought in the food security ordinance despite the fact that Parliament was to be convened in less than a month, said that that was only “political intent” as the Congress-led UPA wanted some states to unfurl the scheme at the earliest.
Criticising the government, he said the Bill should be renamed “repackaging of existing schemes” like the public distribution system, mid-day meal and ICDS.
He cited the food scheme of the BJP-ruled Chhattisgarh government which had even been praised by the Supreme Court and urged the government to increase the entitlements from 25 kg per family to 35 kg per family.
Friday, August 30, 2013
GOVT INTRODUCES JUDGES BILL IN RS
The government on Thursday introduced a key bill in the Rajya Sabha to amend the constitution for replacing the existing judges appointment system with a broad based panel in which non-judges will be in a majority.
Law minister Kapil Sibal introduced the 120th constitution amendment bill for setting up the Judicial Appointments Commission in place of the existing system in which the five senior most judges of the Supreme Court (collegium) recommend names to the government for appointment of judges to the SC and High Courts.
Thursday, August 29, 2013
Govt moves Land Acquisition Bill in Lok Sabha with 216 ‘ayes’
The much-touted Land Acquisition Bill was taken up in the Lok Sabha on 29.8.2013, with UPA ally Samajwadi Party expressing criticism, along with opposition parties, over various provisions of the legislation.
The Bill, which was passed by the Lower House of Parliament yesterday, will replace the British era's Act of 1894.
Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill, 2011, also called the Land Acquisition Bill
Companies who want to acquire land for industrial use will be required to pay up to four times the prevailing market value in rural areas and twice the market price in urban areas.
The Bill also stipulates mandatory consent of at least 70 per cent of people for acquiring land for PPP projects and 80 per cent for private companies.
The Bill is only setting a bottom line for fair compensation, rehabilitation and resettlement in the case of land acquisition and State governments were free to further improve upon it, the Minister said during a nearly five-hour long discussion on the Bill. Given the reservations expressed by some States over the earlier proposal to ban acquisition of multi-crop irrigated land, he said flexibility was factored into the legislation. The Bill will now be taken up in the Rajya Sabha.
Voting on the Bill went on for nearly three-hours. There was a last-minute hiccup when the Trinamool Congress demanded that the clause mandating private projects to take the consent of 80 per cent of landowners be changed to 100 per cent, as is prevalent in West Bengal. The State, Mr. Ramesh said, could change this provision, but added that it could not be changed in the Bill, which was adopted with 216 of the 239 members present voting for it. |
Thursday, August 15, 2013
Rajya Sabha passed the Registration of Births and Deaths (Amendment) Bill, 2012
The Rajya Sabha passed Registration of Births and Deaths (Amendment) Bill, 2012, under which marriages solemnized in India irrespective of the religion of the persons getting married will have to be compulsorily registered on 13th August.
Sunday, August 11, 2013
Parliament passes Companies Bill
New Delhi, August 8: The Rajya Sabha passed the much-awaited Companies Bill on 8th August, replacing the decades old Companies Act, 1956. The Bill had been passed by the Lok Sabha in December last year.
|
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)