Opposition ups ante on SIR, government says will be forced to push bills
The Speaker cited the precedent of former speaker Balram Jakhar, who turned down a demand for a discussion in the House on the Election Commission's functioning, given that the poll panel is conceived as an independent entity.
Despite the opposition suggesting that if the government is unwilling to discuss SIR, discussions can be had on electoral reforms, voter deletion etc, the government refused to concede to the demand.
Later, speaking to reporters, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju insisted that the government wants a thorough discussion in Parliament over its bills but will be compelled to push for their passage from Tuesday in 'national interest' as the proposed legislations are important for governance.
Hitting out at the opposition parties, he said that they had agreed to a two-day discussion over the National Sports Governance Bill and National Anti-Doping (Amendment) Bill, both of which were scheduled to be taken up together for consideration and passage in the Lok Sabha on Monday, but they disrupted proceedings.
The minister, however, made it clear that a debate on SIR cannot take place in Parliament as the exercise is part of the Election Commission's administrative action and functioning. Parliament can discuss electoral reforms but not the EC's functioning, he said, adding that the poll watchdog has carried out SIR earlier as well.
Speaking to this paper, Congress chief whip Manickam Tagore said that the government has shut doors for the opposition on the issue.
He asserted that the Law Minister and Parliamentary Affairs Minister must answer why the government is blocking discussion on SIR, an issue directly linked to millions of Indian citizens' right to vote.He pointed out that Parliament has always exercised oversight on Constitutional Bodies.
He said that Parliament has debated issues such as electoral bonds, voter ID–Aadhaar Linking, appointment of Election Commissioners, Model Code of Conduct, role of CAG after the 2G report, Conduct of UPSC exams and Reports of NHRC, but no Speaker stopped that.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
8 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Centre blocks debate on Bihar electoral roll revision, cites EC autonomy; Opposition cries foul
NEW DELHI: The Union government has signaled its unwillingness to allow a debate on the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar, with Rajya Sabha Deputy Chairman Harivansh invoking a 1988 ruling by former Lok Sabha Speaker Balram Jakhar to reject the Opposition's demand. On Tuesday, Harivansh cited Jakhar's December 1988 decision, which barred parliamentary discussion on the functioning or decisions of the Election Commission (EC), stating that the autonomous body's actions cannot be scrutinized in the House. 'You know that I cannot comment upon the actions and decisions of the EC, which is an autonomous body. Never before have I done it, nor will I do it now. Unless you amend the Constitution and bring the EC under parliamentary purview, we cannot discuss its decisions,' Harivansh said, quoting Jakhar's ruling. The Deputy Chairman's remarks came as he dismissed 34 notices submitted by Opposition MPs, most seeking the suspension of business under Rule 267 to urgently debate the SIR in Bihar and other states. Harivansh cited procedural flaws, including incorrect formatting, the sub judice nature of some matters, and the absence of precedent for such discussions. He expressed concern over the frequent misuse of Rule 267, meant for 'rarest of rare' cases, noting that most notices lacked proper citations or pertained to issues outside Parliament's jurisdiction. 'Despite clear rules, some members are using Rule 267 casually, disrupting proceedings when their notices are disallowed,' he said. Highlighting historical data, Harivansh pointed out that very few such notices had been accepted—none between 2000–2004, only four from 2004–2009, one out of 491 during 2009–2014, and just six out of 3,152 between 2014 and the 2025 Budget Session.
The Hindu
8 minutes ago
- The Hindu
SIR in Bihar an 'invasive reconstruction of electoral roll:' Dipankar Bhattacharya
Describing the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) drive under way in Bihar as 'an invasive reconstruction of the electoral roll,' Dipankar Bhattacharya, general secretary of the Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Liberation, said States including Kerala should be on guard as it could be applied in other parts of the country as well. 'If they get away with it in Bihar, they will apply it everywhere,' he said, delivering the 24th memorial lecture in memory of the journalist N. Narendran on the topic 'Bihar: Trial run for Mass Disenfranchisement.' 'In fact, some people in Kerala and Tamil Nadu may still be believing that, well, this is something only happening in north India. If it is happening in north India, it is only a matter of time it happens here. No part of India is secure. Every State, every community, every political geography, every social equation, is vulnerable,' he said. The concept of citizenship as Indians have known it no longer remains valid as people will now be forced to prove their citizenship. The migrant workers of Bihar have emerged as one of the most vulnerable sections of electors in the SIR in Bihar, given the Election Commission of India's definition of 'ordinary resident.' This could have implications for Kerala as well, which has a large migrant population, he said. The SIR in Bihar, he said, was not just about rewriting the electoral roll, but it was about rewriting the electoral rules, he said. 'By rewriting the electoral rules, you are rewriting the entire grammar of elections in India,' he said. Mr. Dipankar Bhattacharya said that the INDIA Bloc was the need of the hour, observing that the BJP has grown at the expense of all other parties. 'If we cannot identify who the common enemy is, we will be doing so at our own peril,' he said. He underscored the need for a broad-based, sustained and multi-pronged resistance against what he described as the 'fascist offensive' of the BJP-RSS in the country. On the BJP's 'One Nation, One Election' proposal, Mr. Bhattacharya said it holds grave implications for the concepts of democracy and federalism. 'Every election has its own context. A Lok Sabha election has its own context, an Assembly election has its own context, a panchayat election will have its own context. If you bulldoze, flatten everything into one single narrative, and one single context for the whole elections, there will be nothing left of India's federalism and democracy as we have known it all these years,' he said, adding that the current challenges facing the Indian people is unlike any other in the post-Independence era.
NDTV
8 minutes ago
- NDTV
Supreme Court Upholds Environment Ministry Notification, Junks Exemption Clause For Big Projects
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld the January 29 notification of the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, but struck down the contentious clause exempting certain large building and construction projects from prior environmental clearance. A bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran held projects with a built-up area above 20,000 square meter, whether industrial, educational, or otherwise, cannot be exempted from the environment impact assessment (EIA) 2006 regime. The court clarified that the notification would also apply to Kerala. Dictating the order, the CJI said, "It has been consistently held that natural resources are to be held in trust for the next generation. At the same time, courts have always taken note of development activities and the country cannot progress without it." Observing the supreme court had always focused on sustainable development, the CJI said, "The court while ensuring that development is permitted has also required precaution to be taken so that least damage is caused to the environment and has even ordered costs to be paid for such development activities." The order said it would not be possible for the union ministry to consider projects across the country and therefore the issue could be considered on a state-to-state basis. "If any construction activity in any area more than 20,000 sq km is carried out it will have environmental impact even if it's for industrial or educational purposes and discrimination cannot be made with similar such institutes," it said. It also said that no exemption can be granted to the education sector in this regard. "Nowadays education has also become a flourishing industry and thus no reason to exempt such projects from the 2006 notification," the CJI said. The bench upheld the notification except clause 8 of the January 29 notification which grants exemptions to industrial sheds, schools, colleges, and hostels with built-up areas up to 150,000 square meter. The bench said it was impractical for the MoEFCC to appraise every project nationwide, noting the Central Expert Appraisal Committee (CEA) could handle state-wise evaluations. On February 25, the top court stayed the notification on a PIL filed by Mumbai-based NGO Vanashakti, which argued that the exemption diluted the EIA's safeguards and threatened eco-sensitive zones. Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appearing for the NGO, said similar attempts in 2014, 2016, and 2018 had been struck down or stayed by courts, including the Kerala High Court, the National Green Tribunal, and the Delhi High Court. The petition claimed that bypassing EC for projects of such magnitude, exceeding 1.6 million square feet, would cause irreversible damage to land, water, and air quality, violating the precautionary principle entrenched in Indian environmental law. Before the January 29 amendment, EIA 2006 required EC for all construction projects above 20,000 sq m The impugned notification raised the threshold to 150,000 sq m for certain categories and also removed "general conditions" applicable in eco-sensitive and polluted areas. A follow-up office memorandum on January 30 expanded the scope of exemptions to include private universities, warehouses, and industrial sheds housing machinery or raw material.
