One of the consequences of a government that has a paralysingly slow reaction time to major developments is that some issues of importance to the public are not discussed in Parliament through regular debates on government-sponsored legislation, or as part of Question Hour. Towards the end of last week, much attention focused on one such case in the Rajya Sabha, where a Private Member’s Bill seeking amendment to the controversial Information Technology Act was debated. Section 66A of the IT Act has been much discussed outside Parliament because of its draconian measures and vague wording, which critics contend gives police too much discretion to arrest those who they feel are “sending” troublesome communication over the internet. This has, of course, blown up following the arrest of two young girls in Mumbai recently; before that, the provisions have been allegedly misused by the West Bengal and Tamil Nadu governments to make arrests that were viewed as political in nature. The amendment, moved by P Rajeeve of Kerala, was commented on by several MPs, nearly all of whom urged that the controversial Section be changed.
Sadly, whatever the sense of the House on this matter, and although the MP’s well-researched speeches reflected the current of public opinion, it is unlikely that Mr Rajeeve’s Bill will be passed. This is not because of the merits of the Bill; it is because Private Member’s Bills have a history of being ignored, even if they are lucky enough to be discussed at all. This is unfortunate, as the discussion on this amendment contrasts sharply with how the IT Act itself was passed — without any debate, as part of a package of several laws that were passed in minutes in December 2008. Unfortunately, as the research centre PRS Legislative points out, no Private Member’s Bill has been passed since 1970. Of the 328 such Bills introduced in the 14th Lok Sabha prior to this session, just 14 were discussed.
Of course, not all Private Member’s Bills are as sensible as Mr Rajeeve’s. Some are rank bad ideas. Recently, much concern was expressed at a Bill introduced by Meenakshi Natarajan, a Congress MP in the Lok Sabha, that appeared to step up media regulation and control by the government. Others, however, express the sort of opinion that is common among MPs but is frowned on by party leaders. One such is a Bill to water down the most stringent provisions of the anti-defection law, so as to empower individual members of Parliament. This was introduced by Manish Tewari of the Congress, then a regular MP but now a member of the Union Council of Ministers. Mr Tewari has, in fact, introduced several Bills.
The standard approach is to hope that a Private Member’s Bill, if it meets with the government’s approval, can be withdrawn and be converted into an officially-sponsored Bill. This is what happened with one famous case, in 1956, when Congress MP Feroze Gandhi argued persuasively for a Bill protecting the publication of legislative proceedings. The time has come, perhaps, for this convention to be ended, and for government to allow some of these bills to be considered on their own merits. As matters stand, only the last sitting on Friday afternoon is set aside to consider these bills. Given that a major priority for India should be getting more work and innovation out of its legislators, stepping up the respect with which their suggested bills are treated is an obvious first step.
