Prevention of Torture Bill 2008, and transparent law-making

Several readers have enquired about the draft Prevention of Torture Bill 2008, mentioned in my article on impunity provisions. This blog discussed the possibility of bipartisan consensus on outlawing torture in the aftermath of the Pragya Thakur case here, and the connection between torture and confessions here. I still think that the Bill, if enacted, will join other platitudes unless we repeal impunity provisions.

My apologies for the bad quality of the text of the Torture Bill. It is the best my scanner could do, with unclear text to begin with. (Thanks to Maneesh Chhibber for sharing the document and to Venkatesan for sending me a hard copy by post.) One should not need to go through such trouble merely to get access to an important piece of draft legislation. This guest post on our blog dealt with problems in accessing legal material, and the possibilities under the Right to Information Act. This recent article also bemoans the secrecy surrounding law-making. Perhaps newspapers, which sometimes have privileged access to primary documents, should upload them on their websites. Of course, the long term solution must lie with the government living up to its obligations under s. 4 of the RTI Act.

Mysteries of law making

There is an interesting article in The Hindu by the CPI National Secretary, and MP, D.Raja (A design to block opportunities)revealing not just how hastily the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation in Posts and Services) Bill, 2008 was passed by the Rajya Sabha in December 2008, but how key changes were introduced in the Bill stealthily. The Bill, everyone avers, was required because till now reservations for SCs, and STs (and for OBCs)have been provided through executive orders. Raja's main objection is against S.4(1) of the Bill which removes 47 government institutions from the purview of quota. (The list can be enlarged by the government).

The Bill has a long trajectory. The Bill had originally included the OBCs in its ambit, and was introduced in the Lok Sabha in 2004. The Parliamentary Standing committee report on the bill was submitted in June 2005. Raja says the Govt. rejected the report and inserted S.4(1) which was not there in the Bill, and which the committee did not recommend. More important, the Govt. did not consult the relevant Ministries. Sure enough, there will be lot of heat in the Lok Sabha and amendments will be suggested to this Bill, which then may have to get the clearance afresh in Rajya Sabha. The summary of the Bill, provided by the PRS Legislative Research,is here.

My interest in this post is on the procedural issue: Just who had managed to insert S.4(1) in the Bill, when it is likely to ignite a huge political controversy? It will remain a mystery, unless one goes into the various stages of the evolution of this Bill and the various hands it passed through till it was passed by the Rajya Sabha.

The original Bill referred to the Standing Committee is here.
The Standing Committee report can also be read here, courtesy PRS. The summary of the 2004 Bill is also available here.