English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest Politics News

Law Commission says simultaneous polls better, but idea needs to be debated further

Published

on

Law Commission says simultaneous polls better, but idea needs to be debated further

Putting out a draft report on feasibility of holding simultaneous polls to Lok Sabha and state assemblies a day before the end of his term as chairman of the Law Commission, Justice (Retd) BS Chauhan called for “wider consultation with the public and Constitutional experts” on the “serious issue”.

“Our term is getting over on Friday. There was no time to finalise it. This is a serious issue, and needs wider consultation with the public and Constitutional experts. But we did not want our work and research on it wasted. We are leaving it for a future Law Commission to ponder upon,” said Justice Chauhan.

The panel’s draft report on the contentious issue – a priority agenda of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his party, the BJP – practically endorses their view, but also leaves the issue open for further debate, and possibly another round of consultation by the next Law Commission.

While Justice Chauhan told a leading newspaper that he was submitting the report endorsing simultaneous polls with a public appeal to “have further discussions and examination on the matter, involving all the stakeholders” before making final recommendations to the government, his report recommends, as a first option, that elections to 12 state assemblies and one Union Territory can be synchronised with the 2019 Lok Sabha elections.

These 12 assemblies are of the states of Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh, Mizoram (elections are due in these states in December), Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Odisha, Sikkim, Telangana (where polls anyway coincide with Lok Sabha elections), Haryana, Jharkhand, Maharashtra and the NCT of Delhi (due for polls in the months following the general election).

Earlier this month, Shah had, in an 8-page submission to the Law Commission, lobbied for synchronising the assembly polls in these 12 States with the 2019 Lok Sabha election.

However, the law panel has also said that the intention of its report is to “intention to initiate a healthy and sustainable debate on the issue” of simultaneous polls, which it underscores are “not possible within the existing framework of the Constitution”.

Though endorsing “holding of simultaneous polls”, the law panel has also underlined that for doing so “certain inevitable Constitutional amendments” are needed. Its report states: “The Commission has ensured that the amendments to the Constitution and other statutes are kept to the barest minimum,” but also raises a critical question – whether conducting simultaneous elections would “tinker with democracy, basic structure of the Constitution or the federal polity of the country”

“Most of the participants in the consultations raised the issue that holding simultaneous elections will adversely affect the above three concepts. However, none could explain as to how and in what manner these principles would be violated…,” the panel said.

The report raises several questions that need to be resolved before a final decision on simultaneous polls.

These include questions on the appointment of the Prime Minister or Chief Minister in the event of a hung Parliament or assembly and whether in such an event the appointment can be done in a manner in which a Speaker is chosen. The report goes on to ask if that would violate the anti-defection law. The panel then asks if the anti-defection law will need to be amended if this appointment process were to be adopted.

The report echoes the Prime Minister’s views on conducting simultaneous assembly and Lok Sabha polls, stating that the exercise will save public money, help reduce the burden on the administrative set-up and security forces, ensure better implementation of government policies, and the administrative machinery will be continuously engaged in developmental activities rather than in electioneering.

It recommends amendments to Article 172 of the Constitution (term of state assemblies).

While advising synchronizing assembly polls for 12 states with the Lok Sabha election as a pilot for the exercise, the panel also states that in the remaining 16 States and one union territory, holding simultaneous elections is “impracticable”.

It says elections to these states could be synchronized for 2021, “which will be approximately midway of the term of the House of the People, assuming that the term of the 17th Lok Sabha begins in mid of 2019. In such a scenario, the maximum period by which any State Assembly is to be extended will be by thirteen months (in the case of Bihar) and the maximum period of curtailment is seventeen months (in the case of Karnataka).”

As a second option, the Law Commission suggests holding elections twice, i.e., in two batches, in a 5-year period: “The elections to twelve State Legislative Assemblies and one Union Territory (with Legislature), are synchronised along with the elections to the House of the People in 2019 and the remaining sixteen State Legislative Assemblies and one Union Territory (with Legislature) by the end of 2021, the elections will stand synchronised in such a manner that they are held only twice in five years, repeating the cycle of the elections to the House of the People and thirteen States (including one Union Territory with Legislature) in mid-2024 and elections to seventeen States (including one Union Territory with Legislature) by the end of 2026. This will result in elections only twice in a period of five years.”

India News

Renaming MGNREGA removes core spirit of rural employment law, says Shashi Tharoor

Published

on

Shashi Tharoor

Congress MP Shashi Tharoor has strongly criticised the renaming of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), saying the move strips the rural employment programme of its core essence. His remarks came after Parliament cleared the Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Bill, also referred to as the VB-G RAM G Bill.

Speaking to media, Tharoor said the decision to remove Mahatma Gandhi’s name from the scheme “takes out the heart” of the rural employment programme that has been in place for years. He noted that the identity and philosophy associated with Mahatma Gandhi were central to the original law.

Tharoor also objected to the way the new name was framed, arguing that it unnecessarily combined multiple languages. He pointed out that the Constitution envisages the use of one language in legislation, while the Bill’s title mixes English and Hindi terms such as “Guarantee”, “Rozgar” and “Ajeevika”, along with the conjunction “and”.

‘Disrespect to both names’

The Congress leader said that inserting the word “Ram” while dropping Mahatma Gandhi’s name amounted to disrespecting both. Referring to Mahatma Gandhi’s ideas, Tharoor said that for Gandhi, the concepts of Gram Swaraj and Ram Rajya were inseparable, and removing his name from a rural employment law went against that vision.

He added that the name of Lord Ram could be used in many contexts, but questioned the rationale behind excluding Mahatma Gandhi from a programme closely linked to his philosophy of village self-rule.

Protests over passage of the Bill

The VB-G RAM G Bill was passed by the Lok Sabha on December 18 and cleared by the Rajya Sabha in the early hours of December 19 amid protests from Opposition members. Several MPs opposed the manner in which the legislation was pushed through, with scenes of sloganeering and tearing of papers in the House.

Outside Parliament, members of the Trinamool Congress staged a sit-in protest near Samvidhan Sadan against the passage of the Bill. Congress also announced nationwide protests earlier this week, accusing the government of weakening rights-based welfare schemes.

Despite opposition criticism, the government has maintained that the new law will strengthen rural employment and livelihood security. The Bill raises the guaranteed employment from 100 days to 125 days per rural household and outlines a 60:40 cost-sharing formula between the Centre and states, with a higher central share for northeastern, Himalayan states and certain Union Territories.

Continue Reading

India News

Rahul Gandhi attacks G RAM G bill, says move against villages and states

Rahul Gandhi has criticised the G RAM G bill cleared by Parliament, alleging it dilutes the rights-based structure of MGNREGA and centralises control over rural employment.

Published

on

Rahul Gandhi

Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi has launched a sharp attack on the Modi government after Parliament cleared the Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Employment and Livelihood Mission (Rural) Bill, commonly referred to as the ‘G RAM G’ bill. He described the proposed law as “anti-state” and “anti-village”, arguing that it weakens the core spirit of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA).

The new legislation, which is positioned as an updated version of MGNREGA, was passed amid protests by opposition parties and is expected to replace the existing scheme once it receives presidential assent.

‘Bulldozed without scrutiny’, says Rahul Gandhi

Rahul Gandhi criticised the manner in which the bill was cleared, saying it was pushed through Parliament without adequate debate or examination. He pointed out that the opposition’s demand to refer the bill to a standing committee was rejected.

According to him, any law that fundamentally alters the rural employment framework and affects crores of workers should undergo detailed scrutiny, expert consultation and public hearings before approval.

Claim of dilution of rights-based guarantee

Targeting the central government, the Congress leader said the proposed law dismantles the rights-based and demand-driven nature of MGNREGA and replaces it with a rationed system controlled from Delhi. He argued that this shift undermines the autonomy of states and villages.

Rahul Gandhi alleged that the intent behind the move is to centralise power and weaken labour, particularly impacting rural communities such as Dalits, OBCs and Adivasis.

Defence of MGNREGA’s impact

Highlighting the role of MGNREGA, Gandhi said the scheme provided rural workers with bargaining power, reduced distress migration and improved wages and working conditions, while also contributing to rural infrastructure development.

He also recalled the role of MGNREGA during the Covid period, stating that it prevented crores of people from slipping into hunger and debt. According to him, any rationing of a jobs programme first affects women, landless workers and the poorest communities.

Opposition to name change and provisions

The Congress has also objected to the renaming of the scheme, accusing the government of attempting to erase the legacy associated with Mahatma Gandhi. Opposition MPs staged a dharna within the Parliament complex, questioning provisions of the bill that they claim dilute the “soul and spirit” of the original law enacted in 2005.

Under MGNREGA, the government guaranteed 100 days of work in rural areas along with an unemployment allowance if work was not provided. The ‘G RAM G’ bill proposes to raise the guaranteed workdays to 125, while retaining other provisions. However, critics have flagged concerns over employment being linked to pre-approved plans.

The bill was cleared after a midnight voice vote in the Rajya Sabha, following its passage in the Lok Sabha amid protests and walkouts. It will become law once approved by the President.

Continue Reading

India News

AAP dominates Punjab zila parishad polls, leads in most panchayat samiti zones

AAP has won 201 out of 317 declared zila parishad zones in Punjab so far and is leading in a majority of panchayat samiti seats, with counting still underway.

Published

on

Punjab Zila Parishad Polls

The ruling Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) has recorded a strong performance in the Punjab zila parishad elections and is leading in the majority of panchayat samiti zones, as per results declared so far on Thursday. The counting process is still underway and complete results are awaited, officials said.

Polling for the rural local bodies was held on December 14 to elect representatives across 347 zones of 22 zila parishads and 2,838 zones of 153 panchayat samitis in the state.

AAP secures clear edge in zila parishads

According to the available results, outcomes have been declared for 317 zila parishad zones so far. Of these, the AAP has won 201 zones, placing it well ahead of other parties.

The Congress emerged second with victories in 60 zones, followed by the Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) with 39 zones. The BJP won four zones, the BSP secured three, while independents claimed 10 zones.

District-wise data shows that the AAP won 22 zones in Hoshiarpur, 19 each in Amritsar and Patiala, 17 each in Tarn Taran and Gurdaspur, and 15 zones in Sangrur. The Congress registered its best performances in Gurdaspur and Ludhiana with eight zones each, followed by Jalandhar with seven zones. The SAD performed strongly in Bathinda with 13 zones, while the BJP managed to win four zones in Pathankot.

AAP leads in panchayat samiti results

In the panchayat samiti elections, trends declared so far indicate that the AAP is leading in a majority of zones. However, officials clarified that counting is ongoing and the final picture will be clear only after all ballot papers are tallied.

Kejriwal, Mann reject opposition allegations

Reacting to the trends, AAP supremo Arvind Kejriwal said the party’s performance reflected strong rural support for the Bhagwant Mann government’s work. Addressing the media in Mohali along with Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann, Kejriwal dismissed allegations of irregularities raised by opposition parties.

He said the elections were conducted in a fair and free manner and claimed that the results so far showed a clear wave in favour of the AAP in rural Punjab. Kejriwal stated that nearly 70 per cent of the zila parishad and panchayat samiti seats had gone in favour of the party.

Congress, SAD question poll conduct

The Congress and the Shiromani Akali Dal, however, accused the ruling party of misusing official machinery. Punjab Congress chief Amrinder Singh Raja Warring alleged that the AAP had “stolen” the rural mandate and claimed that the results did not reflect genuine public support.

Opposition parties had earlier also accused the AAP government of high-handedness during the polling process, allegations that the ruling party has strongly denied.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com