Tags:
Journalism of Courage
With the Office of Profit Bill being debated all over again after President APJ Abdul Kalam returned the Bill last week, there’s a growing feeling in Rashtrapati Bhavan that the President’s observation on uniform applicability in Centre and states has been largely misunderstood in important sections.
According to highly placed sources, at no time did the President mean to suggest that Parliament should look at legislating for states. This would be “legislative incompetence”, a fact Kalam was aware of when he penned down his questions while asking Parliament to reconsider the Prevention of Disqualification (Amendment) Bill, 2006.
What Kalam meant was uniform applicability on MPs, regardless of the states they come from. Elaborating, sources said there are many posts in the proposed amendment that fall under the state government. While a post is exempted in one state, it is not so in the other. It is here that the President seeks uniformity.
Law Minister H R Bhardwaj got it mixed up when he said, the very next day after the Bill was returned for reconsideration, that the President’s query meant legislating for the states. “How can there be one law? The Vidhan Sabhas have their own place in the Constitution and it’s the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha that come under us and in the purview of the President,” Bhardwaj said.
For instance, the post of the Wakf Board head in West Bengal is being proposed in the exempted category. Sources said the President wants to know why can’t Wakf boards in all states be covered? This way any MP, regardless of the state, can head a Wakf board and be exempted from holding an Office of Profit. Sources pointed out the same can be said about state film corporations. Since most cases relate to posts that fall under the state government, the President feels a more even-handed approach should be adopted.
There are a dozen Left MPs against whom complaints are pending with the Election Commission. Now, the proposed amendment seeks exemption for 17 posts in West Bengal and one in Tripura held by these MPs. Kalam questions this logic, wanting to know why can’t similar posts be exempted in other states.
The applicability, however, will be on MPs and it’s learnt that Kalam never meant the legislation must seek to cover state legislatures, as this would not be possible.
Having done his bit for the moment, Kalam will be off to Hyderabad later this week to stay for the first time in the Rashtrapati Nilayam there. He will be turning his attention back to issues like bio-diesel and jatropha plantation, letting the government and Parliament grapple with what has become a tricky situation.
