Author: Editorial
Publication: The Free Press Journal
Date: June 1, 2006
URL: http://www.samachar.com/features/010606-editorial.html
All said and done, the return of the Office
of Profit Bill (Prevention of Disqualification) to Parliament by the President
pinpoints the infirmities of the Bill. That a Bill with such weaknesses was
passed and sent for the President's assent marks a low point in the efficiency
of the UPA government, if not loss of face for it. It is not every Bill that
the President sends back for reconsideration.
The President, after consulting some of the
best judicial and legal brains in the country, has come to the conclusion
that the Bill is not comprehensive, transparent and applicable to all states
and Union territories. The Bill exempts dozens of positions occupied by Congress
and Left leaders in trusts, committees and advisory councils.
The whole question arose with the disqualification
of Jaya Bachchan from the Rajya Sabha, since she was holding the chairperson's
position in the UP Film Devleopment Corporation. Then Sonia Gandhi resigned
suo motu from Parliament, as she was occupying the position of the chairperson
of the National Advisory Council (NAC). This made the UPA government to think
about a plan to regularise and put such positions beyond the pale of disqualification.
A new Bill was moved and passed in both Houses
of Parliament with undue haste. The President's main objection is that the
Bill is not based on settled and equitous interpretation of the Constitutional
provisions relating to the subject.
Another question that the President has raised
is the relevance of making the Bill effective retrospectively. To this particular
question, the Congress response will be weak and selfserving. That is why
the President has referred to the need for drafting a comprehensive list of
criteria which will be fair and reasonable and applicable to all states and
Union territories.
In other words, the President has told the
UPA government that there cannot be any ad hoc approach in such important
matters which affect all parties and all parts of the country. The haste with
which the Bill was rushed through Parliament shows a particular interest in
saving a number of individuals in Parliament and New Delhi.
That Sonia Gandhi's position as chairperson
of the National Advisory Council is now put beyond the reach of the old Office
of Profit Act is worth noting, though she has expressed no keenness to return
to that position. The BJP opposition in Parliament had opposed the Bill on
various grounds.
In passing such important Bills, the tradition
of seeking consensus was not observed. Sushma Swaraj of the BJP had cracked
during the debate that the Office of Profit Bill will be a loss of face bill
for the Congress-led UPA government. If the Congress thinks that it can pass
the same Bill in both the Houses and send it back to the President, it would
be a great disservice to the Constitution and democracy. Such thoughts would
be nipped in the bud.
And that may be the surest way of challenging
the President. The Congress should apply its mind and recast the Bill, incorporating
the suggestions made by the President.
