MINUTES OF
MEETINGS OF THE COMMISSION
(1)
The
first meeting of the Commission was held at 10.00 A.M. on 23rd
March, 2000 in the Committee Room No.1 of India International Centre to discuss
agenda items as circulated to the members.
The meeting was chaired by Hon’ble Justice Shri M.N. Venkatachaliah and
was attended by all the members. The
list of the participants is at annex.
2. The
Chairperson, at the outset, extended his warm welcome to all the members. In his opening remarks he emphasised the
significance and importance of the work of the Commission and the procedural
aspects which need to be kept in mind.
After the opening remarks of the Chairperson, agenda items were taken up
for discussion.
Agenda Item No.(VI): Procedure for
the meetings etc.
3. The
meeting started with the discussion on the Agenda Item No.(VI) which was taken
up first inasmuch as it related to the procedure for meetings of the
Commission. After some discussion the
members were of the view that for the present a verbatim records/tape recording
of the entire proceedings of each meeting may not be necessary but
comprehensive minutes of the meeting should be prepared and circulated to the
members. It was also decided that,
generally, a notice of two weeks should precede the date of future meetings of
the Commission.
Agenda Items
No. (II):Scope and amplitude of
the terms of reference of the
Commission and agenda
Item No. (III): Identification of the areas and topics to be considered
by the Commission
4. The
meeting thereafter discussed items II and III of the agenda. Taking note of the terms of the reference of
the Commission, it was observed that its terms of reference do not require it
to “re-write” the Constitution as, indeed, the name of the Commission itself
indicated the function is to “review the working of the Constitution” and not
to re-write the Constitution and that the recommendation of the Commission were
essentially advisory in nature.
5. In
regard to the areas where the working of the constitution over the past 50
years needed to be reviewed, it was unanimously felt that the constitutional
aspirations for raising the living conditions of the poor and the deprived and
ensuring them an adequate means of livelihood was one such important area. It
was unanimously emphasised that protection of the constitutional rights of
Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes and the
minorities required to be effectively ensured and improved.
6. It
was decided to examine the working of the present provisions of the
Constitution and the applicable laws and practice to consider how the
constitutional objectives in the aforesaid areas could be better achieved.
7. The
meeting identified certain areas of immediate contemporary concern and proposed
to look into those areas in the first instance. The areas identified were:
I. Strengthening
the institutions of Parliamentary democracy and their accountability; the grave
and persisting menace of un-principled defections.
II. Constitution
and pace of socio-economic change and development: promoting literacy;
generating employment; ensuring social security and removal of poverty.
III. Union-State relations:
Working of
Article 356; appointment and removal of Governors.
IV. Decentralisation
and devolution of powers; strengthening of Panchayati Raj Institutions.
V. Fundamental Rights:
Enlargement of
the Fundamental Rights
in Part-III of the Constitution by specific incorporation of the Freedom
of the Media, Right to
Compulsory
Elementary
Education, Right to Privacy and Right to Information.
VI. Effective enforcement of the Directive
Principles of State Policy in Part IV of the Constitution in order to achieve
the goals enshrined in the Preamble and for good governance.
VII. Fundamental Duties
under Part-IVA of the Constitution.
VIII. Fiscal and Monetary Policies; size of
government and of government expenditure.
Efficacy of public audit mechanisms.
8. Further, as aforesaid and subject to the terms of the
reference, the meeting decided to invite public suggestions regarding other
areas, if any, that the Commission may be required to examine in the course of
its work of reviewing the working of the Constitution.
9. It was decided to associate reputed
experts and research institutions in each of the above areas to function as
advisory panels. For the purposes of
identifying such experts, resource institutions/persons, the meeting decided to
constitute a sub-committee consisting of the following members:
(i) Hon’ble Justice Shri Jeevan Reddy.
(ii)
Shri Soli J. Sorabjee.
(iii) Shri K.
Prasaran.
(iv) Shri Abid Hussain.
(v) Shri Subash Kashyap.
10. In regard to the procedure and
methodology in evaluating the working of
the Constitution in the areas
identified, it was also decided that a ‘consultation paper’ on each of the aforesaid areas along
with a
Questionnaire formulated in an appropriate format, shall be circulated
to all the political parties; Constitution and Statutory Commissions such as,
National Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes; National
Commission for other Backward Classes; National Commission for Minorities;
National Human Rights Commission; National Commission for Women and other
similar bodies; Trade Unions; Representative Bodies of Trade and Industry; Bar
Associations; Universities and Colleges; Academicians; research institutes;
Media and NGOs. It was also decided to
place the consultation paper and Questionnaire on the Commission’s Website on
the Internet for access to the general public. The Commission also decided that
recommendations or proposals to make shall be put to public debate before
finalising them.
Agenda
Item No.(I): Notification relating to constitution of the Commission.
11. It was noted that the notification
constituting the Commission has been amended to provide that
in case of
the Chairperson, his condition of service shall be the same as
applicable to a serving Chief Justice of India. It was also noted that the said notification has also been
amended to provide that a member of the Commission, who is a Member of
Parliament, shall not be entitled to any remuneration or allowance other than
the allowance as defined in clause (a) of section 2 of the Parliament
(Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1959.
The meeting was informed that
the Chairperson has
decided to accept
a notional honorarium of Re. 1 per month. Most of the members also responded by saying
that they would also not claim allowance
of Rs. 1,000/- for attending
the meetings of the Commission.
Agenda
Item No. (V): Accommodation for the office of the Commission
12. In respect of agenda item No.(V), the
meeting was informed that accommodation for the Commission is likely to become
available very soon in Vigyan Bhavan Annexe.
13. The meeting of the Commission requested Hon’ble Justice
Shri B.P. Jeevan Reddy to act as spokesperson of the Commission in relation to
the Press. Justice Shri Jeevan Reddy
graciously accepted.
14. It was decided that the next meeting
of the Commission shall be held on 22nd April, 2000 at 10.00
A.M. The meeting would be extended to
the next day, if necessary.
(iii) Commencement of the term of the Commission.
15. In the meeting it was
observed that as certain formalities relating to amendment of the Resolution
constituting the Commission could only be completed with the publication of
Government of India Notification No.A-45012(2)/98-Admn.III (LA) dated the 17th
March, 2000, the Commission could hold its first meeting today only, that is,
23rd March, 2000. In view
of this, the members felt that the term of the Commission may be deemed to have
commenced with effect from the date of its first meeting. It was also decided to apprise the
Government accordingly.
16.
The meeting ended with a vote of thanks to the Chair.
(Dr.
Raghbir Singh)
Secretary
LIST
OF PARTICIPANTS OF THE FIRST MEETING
1.
Hon’ble Justice Shri M.N. Venkatachaliah (In Chair)
2.
Justice Shri B.P. Jeevan Reddy
7.
Shri K. Parasaran
8.
Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap
9.
Shri C.R. Irani, Editor in Ch. & MD., Statesman
10.
Dr. Abid Hussain
11.
Smt. Sumitra G. Kulkarni
12.
Dr. Raghbir Singh, Secretary
(2)
The
second meeting of the Commission was held at 10.00 A.M. on 22nd
April, 2000 in the Committee Room ‘C’
of Vigyan Bhawan Annexe. The meeting
was chaired by Hon’ble Justice Shri M.N.Venkatachaliah and was attended by all
the members. The list of the
participants is at Annex-I.
2. The
Chairperson welcomed the members and briefly explained the issues to be
discussed in various agenda items. The meeting thereafter took up agenda items
for discussion.
Agenda Item No. 1: Confirmation
of the minutes of the first meeting
3. The
minutes of the First meeting of the Commission held on 23rd March,
2000 were read and confirmed.
4. The meeting decided to take up Agenda
items 2 and 3 together. With regard to
the report of the Sub-committee, in view of certain procedural formalities, the
meeting decided that the Sub-committee may kindly meet afresh after lunch and
finalise its recommendations. It was
also decided that the terms of reference of the Sub-committee be expanded so as
to include the consideration as to which of the members, having regard to their
expertise in specific areas, are to be associated with the work of Advisory
Panels in an appropriate manner. It was
further decided that the Sub-committee may also make selection of experts or
institutions for the preparation of consultation papers along with
Questionnaires in an appropriate computer-friendly format which will enable the
ledgerising and classification of the data collected in the responses to the
questionnaires. It was also decided to request Shri C.R. Irani to be a member
of the Sub-committee. Agenda Item No.
2 was thereafter deferred and taken up later in the day after the Sub-committee
finalised its recommendations.
4.1.
The report (copy at Annex II) finalized by the Sub-committee
was placed before the Commission for its consideration. The Sub-committee has proposed that the
contents and subject matter of the eight topics be spread over into ten areas
and for each area a Member of the Commission may function as “Member in
charge”. The Sub-committee has also
suggested expert/Advisory Panels in respect of each of the ten areas. The Sub-Committee has also recommended that
the “Member in charge” may, in consultation with the Chairperson, nominate
additional members to his panel. The “Member in charge” will, in consultation with
the Chairperson, also identify research/resource institutions or persons to
prepare the Consultation Paper.
4.2. In respect of item No. 3, the Chairperson emphasized the
importance and significance of Consultation Papers and Questionnaires and the need
for extensive and authentic research back-up for their preparation. The issue was discussed. The Commission
reiterates the decision taken in the first meeting to tap the talent in the
reputed research Institutions/experts for the preparation of Consultation
Papers and Questionnaires. It was noted that the Institute of Social and
Economic Change, Bangalore and some other institutions were doing impressive
research work in their respective areas of specialization and that it would be
useful to utilise the services of such institutions. The Chairperson mentioned
that he had a wide-ranging discussions with the Institute of Social and
Economic Change at Bangalore and had also addressed its faculty as to the scope
and significance of the Commission’s work.
The Commission also proposed to have widest possible participation of
various sections of Indian society in the work of the Commission.
5. Chairperson
informed the Members regarding the progress made so far in setting up of the
Commission’s office. The Members were
informed that vacant possession of the accommodation allotted to the Commission
was obtained and expressed the hope that Commission’s office would be ready in
a couple of weeks.
suggestions from public.
6.
The Commission discussed the mode of inviting suggestions
from public. The earlier decision of the Commission to invite suggestions from
the public though mentioned in the Press Note dated on 23rd March,
2000, had not received sufficient publicity.
It was, therefore, decided that an appropriate advertisement through
electronic and print media be issued to invite public suggestions. Dr. Subhash
C. Kashyap and Shri C.R. Irani were requested to prepare a draft of the
proposed advertisement. The
advertisement, it was felt, should make it clear that the Commission does not
propose to entertain any suggestion affecting the basic structure of the
Constitution, parliamentary system of democracy and Rights of the minorities,
Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes under the
Constitution.
7.
Some further areas for consideration of the Commission were
suggested by some members, but no decision was taken in this regard.
Agenda
Item No.7: Other subjects:
(i) CD Rom
on Constitution and Amendments
8. The meeting was informed that
Legislative Department of the Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs has
brought out a CD Rom, which contains all constitutional amendments carried, so
far, along with Statement of Objects and Reasons pertaining to the
amendments. This software was also
capable of tracing any phrase or word used in the Constitution. It was decided that every Member might be
provided with a CD Rom.
(ii) Next
meeting of the Commission.
9. It was decided that the next meeting of
the Commission shall be held on 16th May, 2000.
10. The meeting ended with a vote of thanks
to the Chair.
(Dr.
Raghbir Singh)
Secretary
to the Commission
To
All Members of the Commission
LIST
OF PARTICIPANTS OF THE SECOND MEETING
1. Hon’ble
Justice Shri M.N. Venkatachaliah (In
Chair)
2. Justice
Shri B.P. Jeevan Reddy
(3)
The
third meeting of the Commission was held in the Conference Room of the office
of the Commission in Vigyan Bhavan Annexe at 10.00 AM on 8th and 9th
July, 2000. The meeting was chaired by
Hon’ble Justice Shri M.N. Venkatachaliah.
The list of the participants is at Annex-I.
2. The Chairperson welcomed the Members
and the meeting thereafter took up the agenda items for consideration.
Agenda Item No. 1: Confirmation of the minutes of the second meeting
3. The meeting took note of the
advertisement of the Commission published in various newspapers and in view
thereof, it felt that the last sentence in para 6 (Item No.5) of the minutes of
the last meeting beginning from “The advertisement……” and ending with “under
the Constitution” be omitted. It
further decided that at the end of para 7 (Agenda Item No. 6), the following
sentence be added.
“The
Commission would take into account the areas suggested by the Members while
considering further areas, if any, that are required to be examined and
considered by it.”
4. Subject as aforesaid, the minutes of
the second meeting of the Commission held on 22.4.2000 were taken as read and
confirmed.
5. In regard to the decision taken at the
Commission’s second meeting for supply to each member of a CD Rom containing
Constitutional amendments (para 8, Agenda Item No.7) the Secretary pointed out
that, CD Rom presently available contained amendments enacted only upto the
Constitution (Seventy ninth Amendment) Act and it was likely to take a few
months for NIC to update it by including two subsequent amendments and that if
Hon’ble Members so desired, the available CD Rom could be made available to them. It was, decided that the available CD Rom
with hard copies of subsequent amendments be made available to the each Member.
Agenda Item No. 2: Constitution of the ‘Projects And Finance Committee’;
And
Agenda
Item No. 6: Scale and limit of expenditure and guidelines for incurring
expenditure on TA/DA to the Chairperson and Members of the Advisory Panels and
on holding their meetings and payment of professional fees to Research
Institutions/Experts
6. The
meeting took up
Agenda Items 2
and 6 together. They were discussed. It was decided that a Committee called “Projects and
Finance Committee” be constituted.
The Committee was requested, to consider the following :
(i)
Monitoring the quality assurance of the “Consultation
Papers” and “Questionnaires” so as to ensure uniformity and eliminate
possibilities of duplication or repetition resulting from the overlapping areas
in the subjects or topics to which they relate.
(ii)
Making suitable recommendations for the apportionment and
allocation of consolidated funds
earmarked for the following :
(a)
Consultation or professional fees for the preparation of the
‘Consultation Papers’ and ‘Questionnaires’;
(b)
the expenses for the meetings of the Advisory Panels and on
TA/DA of the Chairperson and Members of these panels;
(c)
holding of seminars; and
(d)
other related purposes; and to
(iii) lay down broad
guidelines and procedures for the passage of the ‘Consultation Papers’ and
‘Questionnaires’ through the various stages.
7. The meeting left it to the Chairperson
to decide on the Members of the CommitteeY. The
committee would evolve its own procedure in respect of holding its meetings and
conduct of its business.
Agenda Item No. 3 : Consideration
of the requests for participation in or association with the work of the
Commission
8. The meeting noted that the requests
received for participation in or association with the work of the Commission
broadly fell into two categories – (i) the requests from the individuals;
and (ii) requests from the institutions.
It was decided that all such persons and institutions be requested to
send their considered views and suggestions to the Commission, informing them
that their suggestions would be duly considered by the Commission at the
appropriate time.
9. The meeting, however, took note of the
request of Indian Law Institute, New Delhi in this regard and decided to
suitably associate it with the work of the Commission. It left it to the Chairperson to decide on
the area in which the services of the Institute could be so utilised.
Agenda Item No.4 : Holding
a meeting of the leading Journalists and NGOs to explore possibilities of their
association with the work of the promotion of awareness of the Commission’s
remit
10. It was felt that there was a need to
dispel misconceptions and apprehensions in certain sections of the society with
regard to the nature of exercise being done by the Commission. On the issue of associating leading
journalists and NGOs etc. for promoting awareness of the Commission’s remit,
the meeting, however, after taking note of the views of Shri C.R. Irani as
expressed in his letter dated July 6, 2000 addressed to the Hon’ble Chairperson
and of Shri Sangma who were of the view that the
Commission may take note of possibility of counter productivity of such a step
and after deliberating on its possible implications, came to a view that it
would not be beneficial at this stage, to associate journalists or NGOs with
any awareness campaign.
11. The meeting noted with satisfaction and
appreciation that some of the members particularly Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap and
Shri P.A. Sangma were already contributing towards creating public awareness
about the true nature of the work of the Commission. It felt that the Members of the Commission should themselves, by
making use of the material already made public by the Commission through press
notes etc., endeavour to dispel any misgivings or doubts in the public mind
in regard to the work of the Commission, whenever they had an opportunity to do so. The Press notes and the advertisement of the
Commission have, it was noted, already helped in dispelling some of the doubts
and apprehensions in the minds of certain sections of the public. It was felt that ultimately the work of the
Commission should be allowed to speak for itself. It was felt that the advertisement issued by the Commission
inviting suggestions might also be published through the electronic media at
the prime time in order to achieve greater public participation.
Agenda Item No. 5$: Evolving a broad time frame for the
various stages of the work of the Commission
12. The meeting agreed with the suggestion
of the Hon’ble Chairperson that there was a need to evolve a broad time frame
for completion of the various stages of the work of the Commission and to make
every endeavour to adhere to it. Dr.
Subhash C. Kashyap was requested in the meeting to evolve a time frame. #The
time frame evolved by Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap was considered and it was
unanimously accepted. The time-frame, as accepted, is at
Annex-III. It was clarified that if any
stage in respect of any topic/area was completed earlier to the last date
specified for its completion, action for the next stage for that topic/area
might be initiated immediately on completion of that stage itself. The Hon’ble Chairperson also emphasised on
the need of identifying at this stage itself the persons/bodies/institutions to
whom ‘Consultation Papers’ and ‘Questionnaires’ would have to be sent; the
agencies that would print them; the number of copies that would be required
etc. as it would result in saving of
time.
Agenda Item No.7: Review
of the progress in the preparation of
‘Consultation Papers’ and ‘Questionnaires’
13. The meeting considered the ‘status note’
indicating progress made so far in preparation of ‘Consultation Papers’ and
‘Questionnaires’ in the areas initially identified by the Commission. . It was noted that Institutes/Experts had
already been identified for preparation of the ‘Consultation Papers’ and
‘Questionnaires’ (in all but one area) and the work was in different stages of
completion. Initial drafts on topics
for ‘Pace of Social and Economic Change in India’: ‘The Question of Poverty’,
‘Literacy, Employment and Social Security’ and ‘Enlargement of Fundamental
Rights’ had already been received. The
initial drafts of the papers on other subjects were also expected to be
received shortly. It was decided in the meeting that initial draft of the
consultation paper would be scrutinised by the Member-in-Charge and the Advisory
Panel on the
subject and after modifications and changes as may be considered
necessary were incorporated and draft approved by the Advisory Panels, it would
be placed before “The Projects and Finance Committee” of the Commission which
would ensure uniformity in the quality of the papers and a holistic view of the
issues dealt with in the papers.
Thereafter, it would be considered by the Commission. However, after the ‘Projects and Finance
Committee’ finalises the procedure, that procedure shall be followed.
Agenda Item No. 8$: Holding of regional seminars for
discussing the ‘Consultation Papers’ and ‘Questionnaires’ and public responses
thereto and identification of the Institutions and Agencies to conduct
seminars.
14. It was decided that after the
‘Consultation Papers’ and ‘Questionnaires’ had been prepared and circulated and
the responses thereto obtained, the various issues raised in those papers
should be discussed in a series of five regional seminars and finally at a
national seminar at Delhi. It was
further decided to ensure participation of representatives of a wide
cross-section of the society, viz. people’s representatives, Jurists,
Journalists, Academicians, NGOs, Trade Union leaders, Panchayati Raj
Institutions, Administrators, Industrialists, Leaders of Cooperative Movements
etc. in these seminars. #The Commission also decided to
identify the NGOs/Institutions which would be entrusted with holding of
seminars at this stage itself so that the organisers have sufficient time for
ensuring meaningful and wide participation of different sections of the
society. Shri P.A. Sangma, Dr. Subhash
C. Kashyap and Shri C.R. Irani were requested in the meeting to identify the
nodal agency/institution or agencies/institution for conduct of these
seminars.
Agenda Item No. 9: Consideration of a programme for interaction
and consultation with the Political Parties, the National Commission for the
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes, the National Human Rights
Commission, the National Commission for Minorities, the National Commission for
Women.
15. The Commission decided to interact at an
appropriate time with the political parties, the National Commission for the
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes, the National Human Rights Commission,
the National Commission for Minorities, the National Commission for Women etc.
Agenda# Item
No.10: Consideration of responses
received so far, in response to recent advertisement of the Commission.
16. The meeting noted the procedure that was
being adopted by the Secretariat of the Commission in acknowledging the
suggestions that were being received in response to the advertisement of the
Commission. It noted that till date
over 1100 responses had been received and most of them had already been acknowledged.
It was felt in the meeting that the work of summarising/ ledgerising of the
responses, should also be simultaneously undertaken and completed early.
Agenda Item No. 11: Any other item
Next meeting of the Commission
17. It was decided that the next meeting of
the Commission might tentatively be fixed on 26th and 27th August, 2000.
18. The meeting thereafter ended with a vote
of thanks to the Chair.
(Dr.
Raghbir Singh)
Secretary
to the Commission
To
All the Members of
the Commission.
LIST OF
PARTICIPANTS OF THE THIRD MEETING
1. Shri Soli
J. Sorabjee - Convenor
2. Justice
Shri B.P. Jeevan Reddy
3. Shri P. A.
Sangma
4. Dr. Abid
Hussain
5. Dr.
Subhash C. Kashyap
[Constituted
by the Hon’ble Chairperson in pursuance of the authority conferred on him by
the Commission in its meeting held on 8th and 9th July,
2000]
ANNEX III
|
SL. NO. |
PROGRAMME |
TIME-FRAME |
REMARKS |
|
1. |
Preliminary Meetings; setting-up
of Expert Panels on ten subject areas; nomination of Chairpersons and Members
of the Panels |
23-4.2000 to 15.7.2000 |
|
|
2. |
Identifying Resource
Institutions/Persons for preparation of Consultation Papers and
Questionnaires; setting the outlines of work and terms of
remuneration/fees etc. |
23.4.2000 to 20.7.2000 |
|
|
3. |
Convening the Expert Panels for
Consideration of the Consultation Papers and Questionnaires etc; |
1.8.2000 to 1.9.2000 |
|
|
4. |
Consultation Papers and
Questionnaires to be ready. |
15.9.2000 to 15.10.2000 |
|
|
5. |
Processing of responses in
regard to identifying additional areas, if any, for review and commission’s
decision thereon and laying down schedule for preparing consultation papers,
etc. |
1.6.2000 to 30.8.2000 |
|
|
6. |
Scrutiny and approval of the
Consultation Papers and Questionnaires by the Commission |
15.9.2000 to 1.11.2000 |
|
|
7. |
Consultation Papers and
Questionnaires to be distributed and released to the public. |
By 15.11.2000 |
These are to be sent to all MPs,
MLAs, Political Parties,Universities All India Service Officers’
Associa-tion, Trade Unions, Industrial and Commerce Associ-ations and Groups
like FICCI, ASSOCHAM etc; Students’ Organi-sations, Bar Assoc-iations,
Leading Lawyers, import-ant NGOs, Chair-persons and Mem-bers of all National
Commissions, Judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts, Speakers and
for-mer Speakers of the Lok Sabha, Deputy Chairper-son of the Rajya Sabha,
Speakers and former Speak-ers of State Assem-blies, Chief Minist-ers and
former Chief Ministers, Governors and former Governors, former Prime
Ministers, Chief Editors of major News-Papers, prominent Journal-ists,
Educationa-lists and Academicians etc;. |
|
8. |
Responses to be received |
By 31.12.2000 |
|
(4)
MINUTES OF THE FOURTH MEETING OF THE COMMISSION HELD
ON 26TH AUGUST, 2000
The fourth
meeting of the Commission was held in the Conference Room of the office of the
Commission in Vigyan Bhavan Annexe at 10.00 AM on the 26th August,
2000. The meeting was chaired by
Hon’ble Justice Shri M.N. Venkatachaliah.
The list of the participants is at Annex – I.
2. The Chairperson welcomed the Members and the meeting
thereafter took up the agenda items for consideration.
Agenda
Item No. 1: Confirmation of the minutes of the third meeting.
3. The minutes of the third meeting of the Commission held on
8th and 9th July, 2000 were read and confirmed.
Agenda
Item No. 2: Consideration of the recommendations of the Projects and Finance
Committee.
4. The Secretary read out his report on the recommendations
made by the Projects and Finance Committee, a copy of which is at Annex – II.
There was a brief discussion on the report and thereafter the recommendations
of the Committee contained in the Report were accepted.
Agenda
Item No. 3: Review of the progress made in the preparation of ‘Consultation Papers’ and
‘Questionnaires’.
5. The Chairperson explained the reasons why
the preparation of ‘Consultation Papers’ and ‘Questionnaires’ has been
entrusted to the various Research Institutions of repute in the country and not
to the Research Wing of the Commission.
It was felt that the copyright of the ‘Consultation Papers’ and
‘Questionnaires’ prepared by the Institutes should vest in the Commission so
that the Commission can make necessary modifications in the same before
releasing it to the public. The meeting decided that the Member-in- Charge of
the Advisory Panel may write to the Institute concerned and get a confirmation
from it in writing about the copyright being vested in the Commission. Members
explained the present status of the preparation of ‘Consultation Papers’ and
‘Questionnaires’ relating to the subject under their charge.
Agenda
Item No. 4: Requests for grant of extension of time for sending suggestions.
6. The meeting was informed that requests had been received from
certain State Governments, political parties, associations and individuals
seeking extension of time for sending suggestions in response to the
advertisement of the Commission inviting suggestions from public. The Commission agreed that the suggestions
received after 31st July, 2000, which was stipulated as the last
date in the advertisement, may also be considered.
Agenda
Item No. 5: Paper ‘Public Audit and the Comptroller and Auditor General of
India – Reforming the Institution’ by Dr. B.P.Mathur.
7. The
meeting was informed that this paper had been prepared by Dr. B.P. Mathur,
Director of the National Institute of Financial Management, Faridabad who is a
retired Deputy Comptroller and Auditor General of India. Brief comments were
made on the Paper by the Chairperson and certain Members. Dr. Abid Hussain, who is the
Member-in-Charge of the Advisory Panel to which the subject of the paper
relates, suggested that it would be appropriate that this Paper is considered
by the Advisory Panel so that its content and form could be looked into and
suitably modified to make it more understandable by public. The meeting agreed with the suggestion of
Dr. Abid Hussain.
Agenda
Item No. 6: Uniformity in the design of ‘Consultation Papers’ and
‘Questionnaires’.
8. The
Chairperson emphasized the need to have a uniformity in the design of
‘Consultation Papers’ and ‘Questionnaires’, which are being drafted by
different Institutes. The meeting agreed that there has to be certain amount of
uniformity in ‘Consultation Papers’ and ‘Questionnaires’ and the same have to be
of a very high quality and presentable. It was decided that help of experts in
the field may be taken for the purpose and the experts may be identified by the
Projects and Finance Committee. The meeting agreed that that the format of the
Questionnaires has to be computer friendly so that the responses to the same
could be machine readable. It was also decided that the ‘Questionnaires’ may
have to be accompanied with self addressed envelopes when these are sent to the
individuals for response.
Agenda
Item No. 7: Any other item.
9. Dr.
Abid Hussain suggested that copies of important articles/news items published
in the reputed magazines and newspapers relating to the subject matter
concerning a member may be supplied to him by the Commission’s Secretariat. The meeting agreed to this suggestion.
10. There was some discussion on the issue ‘whether the
Commission may hold discussions with senior political leaders, leading
journalists and NGOs on certain important issues of national interest’.
However, there was no final decision in this regard.
11. The meeting thereafter ended with a vote of thanks to the
Chair.
(Dr. Raghbir Singh)
Secretary to the Commission
To
All the
Members of the Commission
ANNEX-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS OF THE FOURTH MEETING
1.
Hon’ble Justice Shri M.N. Venkatachaliah (In Chair)
2.
Justice Shri B.P. Jeevan Reddy
7.
Shri K. Parasaran
8.
Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap
9.
Shri C.R. Irani
10.
Dr. Abid Hussain
11.
Dr. Raghbir Singh, Secretary
ANNEX II
REPORT OF
THE SECRETARY ON RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE PROJECTS AND FINANCE COMMITTEE AND ACTION PROPOSED THEREON
The
‘Projects and Finance Committee’ of the Commission held its first meeting on 27.07.2000. The Committee, inter-alia, has made
the following recommendations:-
(i)
Earmarking of the amounts specified below towards meeting
expenses on finalization of consultation papers etc.:
(a)
Rs.20 lakh to meet
the expenses on preparation of consultation papers and questionnaires in all
the ten areas identified by the Commission;
(b)
Rs.13 lakh for meeting expenses on travel, etc. of the
Chairperson and Members of all the ten Advisory Panels.
(ii)
The ceiling on fee for final preparation of a paper and
questionnaire on a topic be kept at Rs.1 lakh.
Cases involving payment of higher amounts would be considered by the
Committee on merit.
(iii)
The fee payable is to be released to research institutions
in three instalments as under:
(a)
The first instalment of 25% of the total fee payable to be
released when the institution was identified and asked to commence the work;
(b)
The second instalment of 25% of the total fee payable to be
released when the initial draft of the consultation paper and questionnaire
were received from it;
(c)
Balance 50% of the total fee payable to be released after
the consultation paper and the questionnaire were finally approved.
2. With
regard to payments to be made to individual institutions for preparation of
consultation papers and questionnaires, the following recommendations have been
made by the Committee:
(i)
Payment of Rs.1 lakh to the Centre for Policy Research for
final preparation of each of the four consultation paper along with
questionnaire, which that Centre had been asked to prepare.
(ii)
Payment of Rs.1.5 lakh to the Institute of Constitutional
and Parliamentary Studies for final preparation of the consultation paper and
questionnaire on “Party System in India: An Agenda for Reforms”.
3.
Funds to the Centre for Policy Research and the Institute of
Constitutional and Parliamentary Studies on the lines of the recommendations
made by the Committee are proposed to be released after the Commission has
accepted the recommendations of the Committee.
Funds to other institutions would be released in instalments as
recommended by the Committee as soon as the fee payable to them was settled.
(Dr.
Raghbir Singh)
Secretary
21.08.2000
(5)
The
Fifth meeting of the Commission was held in the Conference Room of the Office
of the Commission in Vigyan Bhawan Annexe, at 10.00 a.m. on 29th
December, 2000. The meeting was chaired
by Hon’ble Justice Shri M.N. Venkatachaliah.
The list of participants is at Annexure.
The Hon’ble
Chairperson extended a warm welcome to the Members and requested the Secretary
to take up the Agenda.
Item 1: Confirmation of the minutes of the fourth meeting
The
minutes of the fourth meeting of the Commission held on 26th August,
2000 were taken as read and confirmed.
Item 2: Consideration
whether the Consultation Papers on “Review of Election Law, Processes and Reform Options” and
“Review of Working of the Political Parties specially in relation to Elections
and Reform Options” which are presently for consideration before the Projects
and Finance Committee could be taken up by the Commission itself as all the
Members of the Projects and Finance Committee are Members of the Commission”.
The meeting discussed the
two Consultation Papers in depth and thereafter authorized the Hon’ble
Chairperson and the Member-in-charge, Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap to finalise the
Papers in the light of the observations made by the members in the meeting.
Item 3: Consideration of the Consultation Paper on “Treaty-making Power
under our Constitution”.
The
discussion on this item began with the Hon’ble Chairperson explaining the
various provisions of the Constitution on the subject and giving a brief
background of the Consultation Paper.
Thereafter, the meeting discussed and approved the Consultation Paper
and it was decided that a questionnaire should be prepared and attached to the
Paper before its release for public debate.
Item 4: Consideration of the Consultation Paper on “Liability of the
State in Tort and Sovereign Immunity”
The Hon’ble Chairperson explained in brief
the background of the Consultation Paper and pointed out that the provisions of
the Paper are relatable to article 300 of the Constitution and may necessitate
a suitable amendment to that Article in view of the developments that had taken
place in the area over 50 years since the commencement of the
Constitution. The Paper was approved
for release for public debate. However,
it was decided that an appropriate questionnaire should be prepared and
appended to the Paper before it is released for public debate.
Item 6: Consideration of the Consultation
Paper on “Immunity of Legislators – What do the words ‘In respect of anything said or any vote given by
him’ in article 105(2) signify?”
The
meeting discussed this Consultation Paper in detail. The members emphasized
that any proposed scheme of change of law should not impinge on the privileges
and rights of the members of legislatures.
The meeting approved the paper subject to certain modifications on these
lines. It was also decided that an
appropriate questionnaire be prepared and appended to the Consultation Paper
before it is released for public debate.
Item 7: Consideration of the Consultation
Paper on “Public Audit and the Comptroller and Auditor General of India – Reforming the Institution”
After
discussing the Consultation Paper in detail, the meeting approved the same and
decided to release it for public debate.
It was,
however, made clear that in respect of all the five Consultation Papers at
items 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, the views expressed or suggestions contained therein
did not reflect the final views of the Commission but the Consultation Papers
were meant for the sole purpose of generating a public debate and discussion.
Item
8: Consideration of the progress
made in regard to the Consultation Paper on “Pace of Socio-Economic Change
under the Constitution”
The
Commission made a comprehensive review of the progress of the work and took
note of the notes on agenda prepared and circulated by the Secretary.
Dr. Abid
Hussain informed the meeting that four Consultation Papers were being prepared
in relation to the Advisory Panel under his charge and these papers would be
finalized by the end of January, 2001.
Shri Soli
J. Sorabjee informed that Consultation Paper on “Enlargement of Fundamental
Rights” was under preparation and would be finalized soon.
The meeting decided that preparation of the
Consultation Paper on “Effectuation of Fundamental Duties” might be entrusted
to the Citizenship Development Society, New Delhi, after consultation with the Member-in-charge, Shri C.R. Irani.
Item 10: Consideration of the Report of the Secretary on the meetings
of various Advisory
Panels and Projects and
Finance Committee
The Commission took note of
and placed on record the Report of the Secretary.
Item 11: Any other item:
The
Hon’ble Chairperson informed the meeting that Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, Principal
Scientific Advisor to the Government of India intends to interact with the
members and the Chairperson of the Commission and was also desirous of making a
presentation. It was decided that the
Chairperson could invite Dr. Abdul Kalam to meet with the members of the Commission at the next
meeting of the Commission.
The
Hon’ble Chairperson also informed the meeting that the members of the
Minorities Commission intend to have a meeting with the Members of the
Commission. It was decided that a
meeting with the Members of the Minorities Commission could be fixed to be held
in the forenoon of 1st February, 2001.
The
meeting was informed by the Hon’ble Chairperson that a number of
representations relating to certain matters like the protection of the
interests of the Sindhi Community; the inclusion of Maithili language in the
Eighth Schedule; demands from the various Sections of Akalis; issues relating
to Coorgis of Karnataka State; problems of the Denotified Tribes, etc. have
been received and needed to be examined.
The Commission was of the view that these
representations may be allocated to Members who, after examining the matter and
after such enquiry as they may consider proper, may formulate what, in their
opinion, should be the view they should commend themselves to the Commission
and place them before the full Commission.
The representations/petitions that need to be taken up are the
following:
(i)
Representation dated 25.8.2000 presented by Justice I.S.
Israni on behalf of Sindhi Rights Committee;
(ii)
Representation dated 20.4.2000 received from Shri K.T. Rohra
on behalf of the International Sindhi Forum;
(iii)
Representation dated 13.7.2000 received from Shri Ram Tolani
on behalf of Sindhu Bhartiya Samata Sangathan;
(iv)
Representation dated 26.5.2000 received from Shri J.T.
Wadhwani on behalf of Bhartiya Sindhu Sabha;
(v)
Representation received from Dr. Nanakram Israni, President,
All India Sindhi Samaj;
(vi)
Representation dated 31.7.2000 received from Ms. Mahashweta
Devi, on behalf of De-Notified and Nomadic Tribals Rights Action Group;
(vii)
Representation dated 4.10.2000 received from Shri Tarakanth
Jha on behalf of Mithilanchal Vikas Manch for inclusion of Maithili in the
Eighth Schedule of the Constitution;
(viii)
Representation dated 25.7.2000 submitted by Shri Teja Singh
on behalf of Sardar Kapur Singh Memorial Trust;
(ix)
Memorandum submitted by Shri Prakash Singh Badal, CM of
Punjab, on behalf of Shiromani Akali Dal;
(x)
Representation dated 25.9.2000 received from Maj. General
Narindar Singh on behalf of the Institute of Sikh Studies;
(xi)
Memorandum dated 31.7.2000 submitted by Shri Gurcharan Singh
Tohra, MP, on behalf of Sarb Hind Shiromani Akali Dal;
(xii)
Memorandum submitted on 21.11.2000 by Shri N.U. Nachhappa on
behalf of the Coorg National Council;
(xiii)
Representation dated 28.12.2000 received from Shri N.S.
Deviprasad on behalf of Kodagu Prajavedike (about Coorgis);
(xiv)
Memorandum submitted on 13.10.2000 by the Chairman, UPSC;
(xv)
Note dated 21.12.2000 received from the Registrar on behalf
of the Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi;
(xvi)
Representation dated 4.9.2000 submitted by Shri Ramvao
Longkham on behalf of the Sixth Schedule Demand Committee, Manipur.
(xvii)
Representation dated 17th April, 2000, received
from Dr. Mumtaz Ahmed Khan, Chairman, All India Muslim Educational
Co-ordination Committee;
(xviii)
Representation dated
23.6.2000 received from Dr. M.
Ejaz Ali, National Convenor, All India Backward Muslim Morcha.
The
Hon’ble Chairperson informed that a Delhi based organization known as ‘People
First, instituting good governance’ wants to have interaction with the
Commission. It was decided that a
meeting with them might be fixed according to mutual convenience.
The
meeting decided that the Consultation Papers and Questionnaires on the subjects
mentioned at item numbers 2 to 7 should be released on 8th January,
2001 both in paper print and on the website of the Commission for generating
public debate and discussion.
It was
decided to hold the next meeting of the Commission on 31st January,
2001 at 2.30 p.m., and on the subsequent day/days depending on the exigencies
of work.
The
meeting thereafter ended with a vote of thanks to the Chair.
(Raghbir
Singh)
Secretary
to the Commission
All the Members of the Commission.
ANNEXURE
1.
Hon’ble Justice Shri M.N. Venkatachaliah (In Chair)
2.
Hon’ble Justice R.S. Sarkaria
3.
Hon’ble Justice Shri B.P. Jeevan Reddy
4.
Hon’ble Justice Shri Kottapalli Punnayya
5.
Shri Soli J. Sorabjee
6.
Shri K. Parasaran
7.
Dr. Abid Hussain
8.
Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap
9.
Smt. Sumitra G. Kulkarni
10.
Dr. Raghbir Singh, Secretary
(6)
MINUTES OF THE SIXTH MEETING OF THE COMMISSION HELD
ON WEDNESDAY, THE 31st
JANUARY, 2001
The
sixth meeting of the Commission was held in the Conference Room of the Office
of the Commission in Vigyan Bhawan Annexe, at 2.30 p.m. on 31st
January, 2001. The meeting was chaired
by Hon’ble Justice Shri M.N. Venkatachaliah.
The list of participants is at Annexure.
2. The
Hon’ble Chairperson extended a warm welcome to the Members and requested the
Secretary to take up the Agenda.
3. The
Minutes of the Fifth Meeting were taken as read and confirmed subject to the
modification of the Minutes under item No. 6.
Modified version of the confirmed minutes is as under:
“Item
6: Consideration of the Consultation
Paper on “Immunity of Legislators – What do the words ‘in respect of anything
said or any vote given by him’ in article 105(2) signify?”.
The meeting discussed this
Consultation Paper in detail. The
meeting approved for circulation the paper subject to certain
modifications. It was also decided that
an appropriate questionnaire be prepared and appended to the Consultation Paper
before it is released for public debate.”
Item No.
2: Consideration of the progress
made in finalization of the Consulta-
tion Papers.
4. The Commission made a comprehensive
review of the progress in regard to the finalization of the following
Consultation Papers:
i)
Pace of Socio-economic Change under the Constitution.
ii)
Parliamentary Reforms.
iii)
Article 356 of the Constitution.
iv)
Institution of Governor under the Constitution.
v)
Remedies for Misfeasance in Public Office.
vi)
Constitutional Response to Good Governance and
Macro-economic Management.
vii)
Legal Control of Monetary and Fiscal Policy.
5. It was noted that the Consultation
Paper at Sl. No. (i) was discussed in detail in the meeting of the Advisory
Panel held on 30th January, 2001 under the Chairpersonship of Justice Dr. K. Ramaswamy and that the Advisory Panel is likely to
finalize the Consultation Paper in its next meeting to be held during the third
week of February, 2001.
6. The meeting was informed that the
Consultation Papers at Sl. Nos. (ii) to (v) above were at advanced stages of
scrutiny and would be finalized very soon.
7. The meeting was informed that draft
Consultation Paper in respect of topic at Sl. No. (vi) had been received from Shri N.L. Mitra,
former Director, National Law School of India, Bangalore, and would be placed
before the Advisory Panel.
8. In respect of the Consultation Paper at
Sl. No. (vii), the Commission was informed that the initial draft had been
received and the final draft would be forwarded by the Chairperson of the
Advisory Panel very soon.
Item
3: Review of the progress of preparation
of other Consultation Papers
and Questionnaires.
9. Secretary made a presentation about the
progress in respect of other Consultation Papers and Questionnaires. The meeting was informed that the
Consultation Paper & Questionnaire on ‘Municipalities’ was being prepared
by the All India Institute of Local Self Government (Nagarpalika Network), New
Delhi, and the Institute had informed on 29th January,2001 that the
draft would be submitted to the Advisory Panel within a few days.
10. The Consultation Paper &
Questionnaire on ‘Panchayats’ was being prepared by the Institute of Social
Sciences, New Delhi. The Institute has
informed on 30th January, 2001 that the draft would be sent by 15th
February, 2001.
11. The Commission was also informed that the
Consultation Paper and Questionnaire on “Enlargement of Fundamental Rights”
would be finalized by the Advisory Panel within three weeks. Regarding the Consultation Paper and
Questionnaire on “Effectuation of Fundamental Duties”, the meeting was informed
that a communication had been received on 31.1.2001 from the Citizenship
Development Society, indicating their willingness to undertake the assignment. The question of entrustment of preparation
of the Consultation Paper & Questionnaire to the Society and the
consultation fee to be fixed, etc., would be discussed and finalized very soon.
The meeting was also informed that Shri Shiv Visvanathan of the Centre for the
Study of Developing Societies, Delhi, who has been asked to prepare the
Consultation Paper and Questionnaire on “Effectuation of Directive Principles
and Achievement of Preambular Objectives of the Constitution”, met the
Member-in-charge of the Advisory Panel and the Chairperson of the Commission on
31.1.2001 and has promised to send the draft of the Paper within six
weeks. The Projects and Finance
Committee will be requested to take-up the question of the quantum of the
consultation fee.
Items 4 & 5: Consideration of the request of the
Minorities Council, Aligarh
dated 16th January, 2001 requesting for
interaction with the
Commission
and representation dated 13th January, 2001, from Smt. Bader Sayeed, Advocate, Chennai.
12. The Meeting took up item Nos. 4 and 5
together. It was decided that a list of
all the prominent organizations which had submitted representations for
interaction with the Commission be
compiled and submitted before the Commission so that a decision could be taken
thereon.
Item 6: Any other item
13. With the permission of the Hon’ble
Chairperson the following Papers were circulated during the meeting :
(i)
‘Peoples’ Awareness of the Indian Constitution and the
Review Process’ received from the
Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, New Delhi and
(ii)
‘Working of Parliament and Need for Reforms’ submitted by
Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap .
The
Secretary was requested to forward item (ii) above to Dr. Jayaprakash Narayan
who is finalizing the Consultation Paper on ‘Working of the Legislatures’.
14. The meeting agreed to the suggestion
that Hindi version of the Summary of Consultation Papers may also be made
available for making the public debate/ discussion more meaningful.
15. The Office was asked to tabulate the
responses and suggestions received from the public in response to the
Consultation Papers and Questionnaires and circulate the same amongst Members.
16. It was decided that the next meeting
shall be held in the last week of February, 2001. The Hon’ble Chairperson was authorized to decide about the exact
date of the meeting of the Commission.
The meeting thereafter ended with a vote of thanks to the
Chair.
(Raghbir Singh)
Secretary
To
All the Members of the Commission
ANNEXURE
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS OF THE SIXTH MEETING
1. Hon’ble
Justice Shri M.N. Venkatachaliah (In Chair)
6.
Shri K. Parasaran
(7)
MINUTES OF THE SEVENTH MEETING OF THE COMMISSION HELD
ON THE 31ST MARCH AND 1ST
APRIL, 2001
The
seventh meeting of the Commission was held in the Conference Room of the
Commission in Vigyan Bhawan Annexe, at 10 a.m. on 31st March and 1st
April, 2001. The meeting was chaired by
Hon’ble Justice Shri M.N. Venkatachaliah.
The list of participants is at Annexure.
2. The
Hon’ble Chairperson extended a warm welcome to the Members and requested the Secretary
to take up the Agenda.
3. The Minutes of the Sixth Meeting were
taken as read and confirmed.
Item 2: Consideration of
the Consultation Paper on “Pace of Socio- Economic Change under the
Constitution”.
4. The Commission was informed that the Advisory Panel had
thoroughly considered the Consultation Paper in the two meetings held on
16.2.2001 and 29.3.2001 and had approved it in principle; however some
editorial modifications and some elaborations were still to be carried out. All
the Members endorsed that it was a good Paper. Some of the Members expressed
their views on the Paper. It was generally felt that the box at the bottom of
the title page of the Paper needed slight modification and the words “are
not the final views of the Commission but” need to be deleted and
thereafter the contents of the said box should read “The views expressed and
suggestions contained in this Paper are intended for the sole purpose of
generating a public debate and eliciting public responses.” The meeting
agreed that the Secretariat of the Commission would carry out the necessary
modifications consequent to the deliberations of the Advisory Panel and then
circulate the Paper to all the Members of the Commission for their
comments/suggestions, who may convey them to the Secretary within a period of
15 days. These suggestions would be
suitably incorporated in the Paper before the Hon’ble Chairperson finally
approved it for being released for public debate and eliciting public
responses. Subject as aforesaid, the Consultation Paper was approved for
release.
Item 3: Consideration of the Consultation Paper on “The Institution of Governor under the
Constitution and Article 356 of the Constitution”;
5. This
Paper was discussed at the meeting and it was generally agreed that it was well
drafted. However, a few Members
informed that they had not been able to study the Paper in detail. The meeting, therefore, agreed that the
Members may submit their comments/suggestions, if any, on the Paper to the
Secretary within a period of 15 days. These would be incorporated in the paper.
Subject to this procedure, the Consultation Paper was approved for release.
Item 4: Consideration of the Consultation Paper
on “Enlargement of Fundamental Rights”
6. The meeting was informed that this
Paper had been approved by the Advisory Panel in its meeting held on 16.2.2001.
The salient features of the Paper were explained and it was pointed out that
the majority of the rights contained in the Paper were deducible from or merely
emanations of the judgments of the Supreme Court of India and some of them had
already been found in the international covenants, to which India was a
signatory. The meeting discussed the
Paper in detail. A note containing some
comments on this Paper was circulated at the meeting. The meeting agreed that any Member desirous of submitting his comments/suggestions on the Paper might send
the same to the Secretary within a period of 15 days so that it could be
suitably incorporated in the Paper before the Hon’ble Chairperson finally
approved it for being released for public debate and eliciting public
responses. Subject as aforesaid, the Consultation Paper was approved.
Item 5: Consideration of the progress made in
regard to finalization of the Consultation Papers on (i) Parliamentary Reforms
and (ii) Local Self-Government: Municipalities
7. Parliamentary
Reforms: The meeting was informed
that two drafts – one prepared by Centre for Policy Research (Shri A. Surya
Prakash) and second prepared by Dr. Jayaprakash Narayan, of Lok Satta, who is
also a Member of the Advisory Panel have been received. The Hon’ble Chairperson
felt that both the drafts fell short of the requirements as Consultation Papers
which touched certain imperatives that made the parliamentary system in India
meaningful. It was also felt that the
Papers overlapped the Consultation Papers on Electoral Reforms. The meeting decided to request the Secretary
of the Commission to have the fresh Consultation Paper drafted by 22nd
April, 2001 and place the same before the Commission.
8. Decentralisation And Devolution : Consultation Paper on
“Local Self-Government: Municipalities”:
The meeting was informed that the draft Paper prepared by the
Nagarpalika Network of the “All India Institute of Local Self Government” was
discussed in the meeting of the concerned Advisory Panel held on 22.3.2001,
when in addition to the Members of the Advisory Panel, Shri George Mathew,
Director of the Institute of Social
Sciences which was entrusted with the work of preparation of the Consultation
Paper on ‘Panchayats’, was also present as a special invitee. The
Advisory Panel proposed to merge the
papers on ‘Local Self-Government: Municipalities’ and ‘Panchayats’ and trifurcate the same into three papers, namely,
first relating to the election aspects, the second relating to functional
domain and the third relating to
the planning aspects of Panchayats and Municipalities. However, the Secretary explained that at the instance of the Advisory Panel, all
State Governments have been requested to intimate the present status of
implementation of the 73rd and 74th Amendments of the
Constitution, for the purpose of preparation of the Consultation Papers. The Chief Secretaries of the States in the
North-East have also been addressed separately asking for the information about
the working of the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution and the Panchayats
(Extension to the Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996.
In both the above said communications, the States have been requested to
furnish the information by 30th April, 2001. It was also explained
that unless replies were received from the State Governments, the Advisory
Panel may not be able to finalise the draft of the Consultation Paper. The
meeting agreed that it may not be possible to wait for the responses from all
the State Governments beyond a period of time and the Advisory Panel should
finalise the Consultation Paper at the earliest so that the same was available
to the Commission by 15th May, 2001. It was decided that the Commission endorsed the idea of three
papers instead of two as originally planned, provided that it had no additional
financial implications and the drafts of all the papers were available to the
Commission by 15th May, 2001.
Item 6: Review of the progress of preparation of other Consultation
Papers and Questionnaires; total number of Consultation Papers to be finalized
and approved:
9. The
Secretary submitted a statement indicating the present status of all the Consultation Papers. The meeting took on record the statement and
discussed in detail the progress regarding drafting of each of the Consultation
Papers.
10. Regarding the Consultation Paper on ‘Literacy; Employment and
Social Security’, the meeting was informed that the draft from the Institute
for Social and Economic Change fell short of the requirements. Later Dr. N. C. Saxena, Secretary, Planning
Commission, and member of the concerned Advisory Panel gave some inputs. The meeting emphasized that immediate steps
need to be taken by the Member-in-Charge to ensure that the Consultation Paper
was finally ready by 15th May, 2001.
11. The meeting considered the six proposed Consultation Papers
under the subject ‘Union-State Relations’. The topic was redesignated “Union-
State Relations under the Constitution : Working of the Federal Text”. After a brief discussion, it was agreed that
there was no need to have a separate Consultation Paper on the topic ‘Sarkaria
Commission: 15 Years on’. The meeting noted that it had already considered the
Consultation Paper on the ‘Institution of Governor Under the Constitution and
Article 356 of the Constitution’. The
meeting agreed that there was need to finalise the other Consultation Papers
latest by 15th May, 2001.
12. The meeting was informed that the Citizenship Development
Society, New Delhi, had entrusted the work of drafting the Consultation Paper
on ‘Effectuation of Fundamental Duties’ to a team headed by Shri P.P. Rao and
Justice Shri Shiv Dayal. The draft, it
was mentioned, was likely to be finalized within about a week. The Advisory Panel would be able to meet
thereafter and finalise the Consultation Paper by the end of April, 2001.
13. Regarding the Consultation Paper on ‘Effectuation of
Directive Principles’, the meeting was informed that Shri Shiv Visvanathan of
the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies had promised to send the draft
by 31.3.2001. The meeting agreed that
Shri Visvanathan might be requested to finalise the draft soon so that the
Advisory Panel could meet and discuss it.
14. The progress in the preparation of other Consultation Papers
and Questionnaires was also considered by the Commission.
Item 7: Consideration of
the pattern of release of the report of the Commission - whether it may be
released in instalments – topic wise:
15. There was a detailed discussion on the
subject and different views were expressed.
The meeting came to the
conclusion that even though the report
had to be in several parts and finalized topic-wise in stages, these might all
be released together at the final stage.
Item 8: Consideration
of the requests of prominent organizations for interaction with the Commission:
16. A list of all the prominent
organizations, who have made requests for interaction with the Commission was
circulated to all the Members. The
Hon’ble Chairperson referred to his proceedings dated 3.1.2001 whereby he had
allocated some petitions/representations to the Members/groups of Members for
their consideration and suggesting a course of action to be taken by the
Commission thereon. He suggested that
the representations from the various organizations could similarly be assigned
by the Chairperson to the Members/group of Members for considering the requests
and recommending the course of action thereon.
The meeting endorsed the suggestion.
Item 9: Consideration of
the request from Justice Shri M.C. Jain, Lokayukta, Rajasthan, for conferment
of constitutional status on the Institution of Lokayuktas and Upa-Lokayuktas.
1. The meeting agreed that the issue of
conferment of constitutional status on the Institution of Lokayuktas and
Upa-Lokayuktas was a larger issue and
the Commission would take it up at the appropriate time. It was decided that the papers received in
this regard may be forwarded to the Member-in-charge of the Advisory Panel I.
Item10: Presentation
by Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, Principal Scientific Advisor to the
Government of
India:
18. Dr. A.P. J. Abdul Kalam made a
presentation on the India Millennium Missions 2020 at 11.30 hours on
31.3.2001. After the presentation, Dr.
Kalam also had a brief discussion on the points raised by the Members.
Item 11: General discussion
on the broad objectives and purposes of the review of the working of the
Constitution so as to integrate the exercise with the vision of new India of
future:
19. There was a general discussion. The Members expressed their views indicating the vision,
objectives and purposes of the Constitution which the founding fathers had
envisaged and how far these aims and objectives had been achieved in the
working of the Constitution during the last 50 years. The meeting also discussed the reasons which were responsible for
non-achievement of the aims of the founding fathers – whether these were
institutional inadequacies or the persons manning the institutions had not come
up to the expectations. The Members
were requested to send in writing, their views as this important aspect of the
vision and objectives of the review of the Constitution’s working so that they
could be had in mind while drafting the report.
Item 12: Report of
Secretary about the responses to the Consultation Papers and Questionnaires,
received so far from the State Governments/Political Parties, etc.
20. The Report submitted by Secretary on the item was taken on
record. The meeting desired that all
the responses received in the Commission may be ledgerised and summarized for circulation amongst the Members by the 15th April,
2001.
Item 13: Any
other item, with the permission of the Chair.
(i)
With the permission of the Chair, the Secretary raised the
issue of payment of professional fee for preparation of the Consultation Paper
on ‘Decentralization in the Tribal Context’.
The meeting was informed that, with the approval of the Projects and
Finance Committee, it was decided to pay a fee of Rs. 50,000/- to the
North-East Hill University (NEHU) for this Paper. Prof. Apurva K. Baruah, Deptt. Of Political Science, NEHU was to
prepare the Paper and a sanction order was accordingly issued by the Commission
in favour of NEHU. The meeting was
informed that the Chairperson of the Advisory Panel had recommended that the
sanction order may be modified and made in favour of “North-East Indian Social
Science Congress (NEISSCONG)” which is presided over by Prof. Mrinal Miri, Vice
Chancellor, NEHU, Prof. Baruah being
its General Secretary. The meeting
approved the proposal as the Member-in-charge of the Advisory Panel had
endorsed it.
(ii)
With the permission of the Chair, the meeting
discussed the question of prescribing time limit for all the Advisory
Panels/institutions/experts to finalise the Consultation Papers so that the
Commission was able to consider the same and complete its task within
time. The Meeting decided that
letters of request may be sent to the Members-in-charge, Chairpersons of the
Advisory Panels, resource-institutions/experts to the effect that the
Consultation Papers should be made available to the Commission latest by the 15th
May, 2001 as else it might not be possible for the Commission to keep-up its
time-schedule.
(iii)
The meeting nominated the Secretary as the
Member-Secretary of all the Advisory Panels, in order to facilitate quick finalisation
of the Consultation Papers.
(iv)
The meeting also considered the question of drafting
of the topic wise draft paragraphs of the Report on the Consultation Papers
based on the responses received so far thereon. It was emphasized that this work had to be commenced in right
earnest so that the draft Report was available by 15th September,
2001 for the detailed scrutiny of the Commission. The Secretary was requested to work out a frame work as regards
the classification of topics to be covered by the parts of the final report.
The
meeting thereafter ended with vote of thanks to the Chair.
(RAGHBIR SINGH)
Secretary
To
All
Members of the Commission
ANNEXURE
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS OF THE SEVENTH MEETING
1. Hon’ble
Justice Shri M.N. Venkatachaliah (In Chair)
(8)
MINUTES OF THE EIGHTH MEETING OF THE COMMISSION HELD
ON THE 8TH AND 9TH
JUNE 2001
The
Eighth meeting of the Commission was held in the Conference Room of the
Commission in Vigyan Bhawan Annexe, at 10.00 a.m. on 8th and 9th
June, 2001. The meeting was chaired by
Hon’ble Justice Shri M.N. Venkatachaliah.
The list of participants is at Annexure.
2. The
Hon’ble Chairperson extended a warm welcome to the Members and requested the
Secretary to take up the Agenda.
Item: 1. Confirmation of
the minutes of the seventh meeting of
the Commission held on 31st March, 2001 and 1st
April, 2001
3. Dr.
Subhash C. Kashyap pointed out that in the Seventh Meeting, while considering
item No. 5 of the Agenda relating to the progress made in regard to the
finalization of the Consultation Paper on ‘Parliamentary Reforms’, it had been
decided that the Paper submitted by him on the subject in the 6th
meeting on 31.1.2001, should also be taken into consideration while redrafting
the Consultation Paper on ‘Parliamentary Reforms’. This fact had not been brought out in the Minutes.
4. Accordingly,
it was decided that paragraph 7 of the aforesaid Minutes shall be treated as
modified and the following sentence shall be deemed to have been incorporated
in the minutes: -
“While
getting the fresh consultation paper drafted, the Paper submitted by Dr.
Subhash C. Kashyap on the subject, which was circulated during the 6th
meeting of the Commission on 31.1.2001, shall also be taken into account”.
Subject to the above, the Minutes
of the seventh meeting of the Commission were taken as read and confirmed.
Item 2: Consideration of
the Consultation Paper on “Probity in Governance”
5. Before the Consultation
Paper was taken up for consideration, Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap made a point that
there should, as far as possible, be
uniformity in the format of the Consultation Papers. He pointed out that a few
Consultation Papers released earlier had provided for the acknowledgements in
the preface and in some of the others, a reference was made to the composition
of the Advisory Panel also.
6. The meeting
decided that the Consultation Papers should have uniformity and should mention
the names of the Members of the Advisory Panel and the name of its author, in
case the same had not been prepared in-house.
The meeting then took up the Consultation Paper on “Probity in
Governance” and approved the same in principle. It was also decided that an appropriate Questionnaire might also
be prepared and annexed to the Consultation Paper.
7 However,
minor editorial modifications and formatting of the Consultation Paper may be
carried out before the Chairperson finally approved it for being released for
public debate and eliciting public responses.
Shri Soli J. Sorabjee and Shri K. Parasaran were also requested to
discuss some policy issues arising out of the paper before sending it to the
Chairperson.
Item 3: Consideration of
the Consultation Paper on “Effectuation of Fundamental Duties”
8. The
Secretary informed that the Consultation Paper had been discussed thoroughly in
the meeting of the Advisory Panel held on 15.5.2001. The meeting
considered the Paper in
detail. It was decided that the
paragraph 3.3.8 of the Paper needed to be modified by deleting the sub-Para
thereunder mentioning the difference of opinion on whether the contribution of
the Citizenship Development Society, New Delhi to the cause of Citizenship
Development should be included in the Paper or not. The Meeting was of the view that the said aspect need not be
included in the Consultation Paper and this was endorsed by Shri Irani,
Member-in-Charge.
9. The meeting considered paragraph 3.5.1 of the Consultation
Paper regarding the suggestions received for amendment of the Constitution to
ensure full implementation of the Fundamental Duties and decided that the three
suggestions should be re-worded as under:-
(i)
The opening words of article 51A should be reworded as
follows:
“Every
citizen of India shall implement in daily life the following duties”
(ii)
Article 51A should be shifted to Part II (Citizenship) of
the Constitution;
(iii)
Suitable Changes may be carried out to make Fundamental
Duties to form a compendium with Fundamental Rights.
10. Subject to the above, the meeting approved the Consultation
Paper and Questionnaire in principle.
However, minor editorial modifications and formatting of the
Consultation Paper were allowed to be carried out before the Chairperson
finally approved it for being released for public debate and eliciting public
responses.
Item 4: Consideration of
the Progress made in regard to the four Consultation Papers
Appointments
to the Superior Judiciary
11. The meeting was informed that Justice Shri B.P. Jeevan Reddy
had prepared the initial draft. The
meeting decided that no separate Consultation
Papers were needed to be prepared
on the topics of judicial delays and judicial reforms but the final report may
have a separate chapter containing all aspects of judicial reforms.
Parliamentary
Reforms
12. The meeting was informed that Prof. Aswini K. Ray of the
Department of Political Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, had undertaken
the work on this Paper.
Effectuation of Directive
Principles
13. It was noted that the draft Consultation
Paper on the topic received from the
Centre for Developing Societies, New Delhi, was not up to the expectations of
the Commission. The meeting decided
that in view of the time constraints, it would not be advisable to undertake a
redrafting of the Paper. Therefore, the
meeting decided not to take any further action on the said Paper.
14. The meeting noticed that many elements
of the Directive Principles had already been covered in the Consultation Paper
on ‘Pace of Socio-Economic Change under the Constitution’, which was released
for generating public debate and eliciting public response by the Commission
11.5.2001. The meeting, therefore,
decided that while drafting the final Report, all the elements of the Directive
Principles might be taken into consideration.
15. Justice Shri B.P. Jeevan Reddy was
requested to draft the said report and for the purpose he could take the
required assistance from Justice Shri M. Jagannadha Rao, Vice-Chairman of the
Law Commission who is also a Member of the Advisory Panel on “Enlargement of
Fundamental Rights”, and of Shri Raju Ramachandran, Member of the Advisory
Panel on “Effectuation of Directive Principles”.
16. As Smt. Sumitra G. Kulkarni,
Member-in-charge of this subject could not attend the meeting, it was decided
that before action on the above lines is initiated, her consent be obtained.
17. The meeting discussed the Consultation
Paper in detail. It was noticed that
article 139A of the Constitution of India provided, inter alia, for transfer of
cases to the Supreme Court if the cases involving same or substantially the
same question of law are pending before two or more High Courts. The meeting decided that the Consultation
Paper should contain an alternative suggestion that if a case challenging a
central legislation on grounds of lack of legislative competence was pending
even before a single High Court, there should be a provision for withdrawal of
the case to the Supreme Court, as such an issue would bear upon the larger
question of distribution of legislative powers between the Union and the
States.
18. Subject to the above, the meeting
approved the Consultation Paper in principle. However, minor editorial
modifications and formatting of the Consultation Paper were allowed to be
carried out including a reference to the nature of issues arising in cases
under Article 131 now pending before the Supreme Court before the Chairperson
finally approved it for being released for public debate and eliciting public
responses.
Item 5: Review of the progress of preparation of other
Consultation Papers and Questionnaires
19. The statement indicating the status of the progress made in
each Consultation Paper, submitted by the Secretary, was taken on record.
20. The meeting took notice of delay in the finalisation of the
Consultation Papers on the topics relating to the Advisory Panel on Legal
Control of Fiscal and Monetary Policies.
It was decided that draft final reports might be prepared on the
following three topics: -
(i)
Legal Control of Monetary and Fiscal Policy;
(ii)
Standards in Public Life: For a corruption free governance;
(iii)
Reforms in Administrative System.
For the purpose, the
Member-in-charge (Dr. Abid Hussain) will hold a meeting on 12.6.2001 with the
various experts including Dr. E.A.S. Sarma, on the subject.
21. The meeting noticed the discussions held by Dr. K.V. Raman,
Director, P.V. Rao Centre for Sustainable Food Security, Chennai, with the
Hon’ble Chairperson and Shri K. Parasaran on 23.5.2001 at Bangalore. It was decided to request Dr. Raman to
prepare draft final reports on the two topics, namely, ‘Literacy’ and ‘Social
Security’. The meeting also decided to
pay an amount of Rs. 60,000/- to Dr. Raman for preparation of each draft
report, as suggested by the Secretary pursuant to discussions had with Dr.
Raman.
Item 6: Report of Secretary about the responses to the
Consultation Papers and Questionnaires, received so far from the Central/State
Governments/Political Parties, etc.
22. The Report
submitted by Secretary on the item was taken on record.
Item 7: Holding
of Seminars on the Consultation Papers
23. The meeting noticed that a Committee of Shri P.A. Sangma, Dr.
Subhash C. Kashyap and Shri C.R. Irani, constituted by the Commission in its
third meeting held on 8th and 9th July, 2000, had
suggested the names of the IIPA, New Delhi, and the ICPS, New Delhi, for
holding of the Seminars.
24. In view of the fresh offers and the discussions held by the
various representatives of National Law Schools and Central Universities, etc.,
the meeting decided that the following ten institutions may organize seminars
and provide the necessary feed back to the Commission:
1. National
Law School of India University, Bangalore
2. West
Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences, Kolkatta
3. National
Law School of India University, Bhopal
4. National
Law School of India University, Hyderabad
5. Centre for
Political Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi
6. Mangalore
University, Mangalore
7. Central
Law College, Salem
8. Guru Nanak
Dev University, Amritsar
9. North East
Hill University, Shillong
10. Banaras
Hindu University, Varanasi
25. The meeting agreed that the Commission’s contribution towards
each seminar would be Rs. 40,000/-. The
institution itself will incur the rest of the expenditure for organizing the
seminar. The seminars will be in the
form of ‘informed public debates’ i.e., public will also be involved in
controlled conditions to have public interactive sessions for discussing the
various consultation papers released and the subjects identified by the
Commission. The meeting also decided
that major emphasis should be laid in the seminars on Electoral, Judicial, and
Parliamentary Reforms, being the subjects, which are of larger public interest It was also decided to suggest to the
Universities that emphasis should also be on public interaction and the events
should be made in the nature of public inter-active sessions or informed public
debates.
26. The meeting also noticed that out of the ten institutions
mentioned above, four had already agreed and had been requested to proceed with
the arrangements for the seminars in the month of July, 2001 and the necessary
financial sanctions had also been issued.
27. The draft format for the Final Reports was placed before the
Meeting. After considering the same,
the meeting decided to constitute a committee consisting of Shri K. Parasaran,
Dr. Abid Hussain, and Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap to look into it and suggest the
final format for consideration of the Commission.
28. The Meeting continued on 9th June, 2001 also and
the additional agenda items were taken up as under:
Item 1. To consider whether the remaining consultation papers
which are at various stages of finalisation may now be prepared in the shape of
the draft final report.
29. The meeting was informed about the delay in finalisation of
the remaining Consultation Papers (other than those Consultation papers
released by the Commission on 8.1.2001 and 11.5.2001 and those to which
approval in principle was granted by the Commission on 8.6.2001) and the
limited time available for preparation of the final reports. In the circumstances, the meeting decided
that instead of preparing the Consultation Papers, finalizing them and
releasing the same for public debate and discussion and eliciting public
responses on the topics, draft final reports on the relevant topic be prepared
and placed before the Commission for consideration. The meeting also decided that the above decision would not apply
to the four Consultation Papers relating to the Advisory Panel on
“Decentralization and Devolution; Empowerment & Strengthening of Panchayati
Raj Institutions” and the Consultation Paper on “Appointments to the Superior
Judiciary”, all of which should be finalized at the earliest and released in
the traditional form as Consultation Papers as per the earlier procedure.
Item 2: Consideration
of the letters dated 6.6.2001 received from Justice Shri J. Eswara Prasad,
Chairman, Appellate Tribunal for Forfeited Property.
30. The meeting considered the letter containing proposals for
amendment of section 2(2) (c) of the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange
Manipulators (Forfeiture
of Property) Act, 1976. It was decided that the topic contained in
the proposal would be suitably discussed in the Consultation Paper on “Probity
in Governance”. The second letter
containing proposal for amendment of article 348(1)(a) of the Constitution was
deferred to be taken up at the next meeting.
The
meeting thereafter ended with a vote of thanks to the Chair.
(RAGHBIR
SINGH)
Secretary
To
All Members of the Commission
ANNEXURE
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS OF THE EIGHTH MEETING
1. Hon’ble
Justice Shri M.N. Venkatachaliah (In Chair)
2. Justice
Shri B.P. Jeevan Reddy
5. Shri K.
Parasaran
6. Dr.
Subhash C. Kashyap
7. Shri
C.R. Irani
8. Dr. Abid
Hussain
9. Dr.
Raghbir Singh, Secretary
(9)
MINUTES OF THE NINTH MEETING OF THE COMMISSION HELD
FROM THE 20TH TO 22ND JULY 2001
The
Ninth meeting of the Commission was held in the Conference Room of the
Commission in Vigyan Bhawan Annexe, at 11.00 a.m. on 20th, 21st
and 22nd July, 2001. Hon’ble
Justice Shri M.N. Venkatachaliah chaired the meeting. The list of participants is at Annexure.
2. The
Hon’ble Chairperson extended a warm welcome to the Members and requested the
Secretary to take up the Agenda.
Item: 1. Confirmation of the minutes of the Eighth meeting of the Commission held on 8th and 9th
June, 2001
3. The modified
Minutes of the Eighth Meeting of the Commission held on 8th and 9th
June, 2001 were taken as read and confirmed.
Item 2: Review of the
progress of public interactive sessions/seminars being organized by the
National Law Schools/Universities
4. Secretary explained that the Commission
had identified ten Universities/institutions during the eighth meeting for
organizing seminars. Thereafter, Aligarh Muslim University also agreed to
organize a seminar. An amount of Rs. 40,000/- being the contribution of the
Commission for each seminar has already been released in respect of seven
institutions. In respect of the remaining institutions, the amounts will be
sanctioned as soon as confirmations are received. The meeting was also informed
that the West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences, Kolkata
conducted public interactive seminar on 7th and 8th July,
2001. The official report from the University has not yet come. Reportedly, it
achieved a high degree of success in presenting the work of the Commission in
proper perspective.
Item 3: Review of the Progress
made in regard to the four Consultation Papers
(i)
Local Self-government: Municipalities
(ii)
Panchayats
(iii)
Decentralization in the Tribal Context
(iv)
73rd Amendment of the Constitution, where
applied in the North-East
5. The meeting was informed that the draft
Consultation Papers had been received on the topics mentioned at (i) and (ii)
above and the same were discussed in the third meeting of the Advisory Panel held
on 20.6.2001. Shri P.A. Sangma,
Member-in-charge of the Advisory Panel, informed the meeting that he would make
all efforts to ensure that the Advisory Panel finalizes the Consultation Papers
by 30.7.2001.
Item 4: Consideration of the Background Papers on
(i) Concurrent Powers of Legislation under List III of the Seventh Schedule;
and (ii) Article 262 and Inter-State Disputes Relating to Water
6. The meeting discussed these Papers in
detail and approved the same in principle subject to editorial modifications
and formatting. It was agreed that
these would not be required to be released for discussion and public debate,
being background papers. When the draft
final report on the subject of Union-State Relations comes up for discussion,
these background papers, to the extent the Commission may approve, could be
integrated into the basic theme of the report and would again be discussed.
Item 5: Review of the progress in drafting of the
Background Papers.
7. The meeting was informed of the present
status of drafting of all the background papers. The meeting agreed that in view of the limited time available
with the Commission for completing its task, all the background papers should
be ready latest by 10th August, 2001.
Item 6 & 7:
Review of the progress in drafting of Volumes I and II of the Final
Report
8. The meeting was informed of the present
status of drafting of Volumes I and II of the Final Report. A time schedule for preparation of the draft
final report containing the contents, estimated length of the topic,
Consultation/Background Papers to be reflected in writing the topic, the name
of persons to prepare the report on each topic and the date of completion of
drafting of the report on the topic was circulated at the meeting. The meeting generally agreed with the broad
design and proposed contents of the two volumes. Regarding the estimated length
of the topics, it was agreed that the limits mentioned could be varied
depending on the requirements. The
meeting decided that in the column indicating the name of the persons
responsible for the preparation of the report, only the names of
Members-in-charge of the subject be mentioned and the names of other persons
who would assist in drafting them, should find a place in the column under the
heading ‘Remarks’. It was agreed that each Member-in-charge should take the
responsibility for the draft final report relating to the topic under his area.
The
meeting decided that there was need to have uniformity of approach in the
structure of the various chapters of the final report since the drafts are to
be prepared by different Members. After
a brief discussion, it was agreed that a chapter on each topic should first,
mention the relevant constitutional provisions in brief; secondly, discuss as
to how the same have worked during last fifty-one years - whether any problems
have arisen in their working; thirdly, evaluate what the various options
available to tackle the said problems are and finally, make the
recommendations.
Item 8: Consideration
of the letter dated 6.6.2001 received from Justice Shri J. Eswara Prasad,
Chairman, Appellate Tribunal for Forfeited Property.
9. The issues arising out of the letter
regarding inclusion of “National
Appellate Tribunals and Commissions” after “Supreme Court and in every High
Court” in article 348(1)(a) were discussed. The meeting decided that the issue
basically related to the Government’s policy on official language. No specific
decision was taken.
Item 9: Consideration
of the letter dated 26.6.2001 received from Justice Shri M.C. Jain, Lokayukta,
Rajasthan, regarding the Model Lokayukta Bill.
10. The meeting decided that the issues
raised in the letter were relatable to the topic of ‘Probity in governance’ as
well as the area of ‘Union-State
Relations’ and as such these should to be taken up for discussion while
considering draft final reports on these subjects.
Item 10: Consideration
of the letter received from The India Country Office of UNICEF regarding
“Enlargement of Fundamental Rights”.
11. The letter was taken note of by the
meeting and it was decided that the issues raised in the letter could be
considered by the Commission while considering the draft final report on the
topic relating to “Enlargement of Fundamental Rights.”
Items 11 & 12: Consideration
of the letters dated 18th June, 2001 from Shri Syed Shahabuddin and
dated 20th June, 2001 from Shri Dawa Lama, M.P.
12. The issues brought out in these two
letters relating to the rights of religious minorities were considered by the
meeting. The Chairperson explained the background of the matter in brief. Shri
Soli J. Sorabjee, the Member-in-charge of the subject ‘Enlargement of
Fundamental Rights’ informed the meeting the reasons why the Advisory Panel had
not discussed the subject in the Consultation Paper on the topic that had been
approved by the Commission and released for public debate and discussion on 11th
May, 2001. However, as Shri Syed Shahabuddin was to be invited to meet the
Commission, the matter could be discussed further.
Item 13: Report of
the Secretary about the responses to the Consultation Papers and
Questionnaires.
13. The report submitted by the Secretary on
the item was taken on record. A gist of the responses to the Consultation
Papers and Questionnaires received so far from the Central/State Governments/UT
Administrations and Political Parties etc. was circulated to the Members during
the meeting.
Item 14:
Interaction with prominent persons.
14. A list of the prominent persons proposed
to be invited for interaction with the Commission was circulated in the
Meeting. The meeting felt that there was need to prescribe some broad norms
informing the preparation of the list of invitees. It was, however, agreed that
the list might include the names of former Presidents, former Prime Ministers,
former Chief Justices of Supreme Court, former Speakers, former editors of the
national dailies, Chairpersons of the statutory Commissions. It was also agreed
that former Governors, whose number may be in the neighborhood of three, based
on their seniority, be invited. Similarly three to five senior serving
Governors could also be invited.
Item 15: Any other item, with the
permission of the Chair.
15. No item was taken up under this agenda item.
Item 16: Letter received from Shri P.A. Sangma in the matter of
entitlement of persons of foreign origin to hold public offices.
16. The various issues raised in the letter of Shri Sangma were
discussed by the meeting.
Item 17: Letter
received from the Counselor, High Commission of India, Nairobi, suggesting
visit of the Chairperson and other Members of the Commission to Nairobi.
17. The meeting discussed the letter under consideration. The
meeting authorized the Hon’ble Chairperson to take appropriate decision in the
matter.
Item 18: Review of the progress in the disposal of
representations from organizations and bodies in respect of various issues.
18. The meeting was informed that in pursuance of the decision of
the Commission taken in its fifth meeting held on 29.12.2000, the Hon’ble
Chairperson had, vide his proceedings dated 3.1.2001, allocated certain
representations to the Members/Group of Members for examination and
recommending to the Commission the course of action to be taken thereon. The
Hon’ble Chairperson requested the concerned Members to take action on priority
basis so that action could be completed on the representations. If the Members
so desired, they could hear the representationists before taking a view
thereon.
Item 19: Consideration of the
cover design for the final Report;
19. The meeting decided to request Shri C.R. Irani to have a few
samples of cover design for the final report prepared and place the same for
consideration of the Commission. Shri Irani agreed to do so and requested the
Secretary to send a few samples that were submitted before the Commission so
that he could have an idea of the content part of it.
Item 20: Constitution of an
“Editorial Committee” for processing of
final Report on day-to-day basis.
20. The Meeting agreed to request Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap to Chair
the Editorial Committee proposed to be constituted. It was left to the Hon’ble
Chairperson to decide about the other Members/Experts to be included in the
Committee in consultation with Dr. Kashyap.
Item 21: Consideration of the
proposal to fix dates for two meetings each month for at least four days each
in the months of August, September and October 2001.
21. The Hon’ble Chairperson explained the need to have regular
meetings in the next three months in order to complete the task in hand. The
Meeting left it to the Hon’ble Chairperson to decide the dates and duration of
the meetings.
The meeting thereafter ended with
a vote of thanks to the Chair.
(RAGHBIR SINGH)
Secretary
To
All Members
of the Commission
ANNEXURE
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS OF THE NINTH MEETING
1. Hon’ble
Justice Shri M.N. Venkatachaliah
(In Chair)
2. Justice
Shri B.P. Jeevan Reddy
(10)
MINUTES OF THE TENTH MEETING OF THE COMMISSION HELD
FROM THE 23rd TO 25th
AUGUST 2001
The
Tenth meeting of the Commission was held in the Conference Room of the
Commission in Vigyan Bhawan Annexe, at 10.00 a.m. from 23rd to 25th
August 2001. Hon’ble Justice Shri M.N.
Venkatachaliah chaired the meeting. The
list of participants is at Annexure.
2. The
Hon’ble Chairperson extended a warm welcome to the Members and requested the
Secretary to take up the Agenda.
Item: 1. Confirmation of the minutes of the
Tenth meeting of the Commission held
from 20th to 22nd July, 2001
3. The
meeting decided that the minutes under Item 16 might be substituted with the
following:
“There was
a brief discussion on the issue raised in the letter of Shri Sangma. Further discussion on the issue was deferred.”
Subject to the above, the Minutes
of the ninth Meeting of the Commission held from 20th to 22nd
July 2001 were taken as read and confirmed.
Item 2: Review of the
progress in the preparation of the following Papers on Judiciary:
(i)
Consultation Paper on ‘Procedure for appointment of
Judges of Supreme Court and High Courts’;
(ii)
Background Paper on ‘Financial Autonomy of the
Judicial Branch of the State’.
4. The
meeting was informed that the Consultation Paper on item No. (i) above has been
drafted and the same has been circulated amongst the Members of the Advisory
Panel on 25th July, 2001.
The meeting was also informed about the progress in the drafting of the
Paper on Item (ii) above. The meeting desired that the two Papers should be
finalized before the next meeting and placed before the Commission for
consideration at the next meeting.
5. The
Members were generally of the view that the two Papers would not cover a
comprehensive review of the working of the Judiciary in the country, such as the
quality of the trial systems, judicial delays, cost of litigation,
docket-explosion, the quality of judgments, lack of uniform procedures in the
High Courts, etc. It was decided that
there was need to prepare a Paper covering all these aspects.
6. The
meeting accordingly decided that Prof. N.R. Madhava Menon or, if for any reason
his services are not available, some one else with comprehensive knowledge of
the working of the judicial branch may be requested to prepare a Paper covering
all the above mentioned aspects also taking into account all the existing
Reports/studies available on the subject in the country. The meeting left it to Shri K. Parasaran and
Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap to discuss with Prof. Madhava Menon and persuade him to
undertake the work.
7. The
meeting also indicated that the above Paper should encompass ‘Systemic and
Procedural Reforms’ of Judiciary and Shri K. Parasaran and Dr. Subhash C.
Kashyap were requested to supervise the work and thereafter prepare a draft
final report on the topic.
Item 3: Consideration
of the following Consultation Papers on
‘Decentralisation and Devolution; Empowerment and Strengthening of
Panchayati Raj Institutions’:
(iii)
Panchayats
(iv)
Municipalities
(v)
Empowerment and Strengthening of Local
Self-Government in Cantonments
8. The
meeting discussed these three Consultation Papers in detail and approved the
same in principle. However, the
requisite editorial modifications and
formatting were authorized to be carried out before the Chairperson finally
approved these for being released for public debate and eliciting public
response.
(vi)
Literacy
(vii)
Employment and Social Security
9. The
meeting discussed these Papers in detail and approved the same in
principle. However, the requisite
editorial modifications and formatting of the same were allowed to be carried
out before the Chairperson finally approved these for being released as
Consultation Papers for public debate and eliciting public response.
Item 5. Review of the progress in the preparation of
other Background Papers
10. The progress in drafting of all the remaining background
papers was intimated to the meeting.
The meeting desired that the following background papers might be
finalized and placed before the Commission in its next meeting for approval:
(i)
Parliamentary Reforms
(ii)
Standards in Public Life and Reforms in Administration
(iii)
Constitutional Response to Good Governance and Macro
Economic Management
(iv)
Legal Control of Monetary and Fiscal Policy
11. The meeting was informed that the draft of the Paper on
‘Barriers to Inter-State Trade and Commerce’ had been received from Prof. M.P.
Singh only a day earlier. The meeting
desired that this Paper might be referred to the Advisory Panel concerned for
consideration at the earliest.
12. The meeting was informed that the Paper on ‘Financial
Relations amongst the Union and States was being prepared by Shri P.N. Mittal,
a retired Member of the Central Board of Direct Taxes and the draft was likely
to be received shortly.
Item 6: Review of the progress of public interactive
sessions/seminars being organized by the National Law Schools/Universities
13. The meeting was informed that the seminars had already
been conducted/proposed to be conducted as per the following programme:
(i)
West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences,
Kolkatta on 7-8 July, 2001
(ii)
Mangalore University, Mangalore on 30-31 July, 2001
(iii)
NALSAR University, Hyderabad 25-26 August, 2001
(iv)
Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh 6-7 September, 2001
The other Universities had again
been requested to expedite the seminars. The meeting was also informed that in
addition to the National Law Schools/ Universities identified earlier, Assam
University, Silchar had also agreed to organize the seminar and it was proposed
to pay the Commission’s contribution (Rs. 40,000) to them for the proposed
seminar. The meeting endorsed the proposal. The meeting also desired that the
Secretariat should follow up with the North East Hill University for organization
of the seminar and there would be no objection if there were more than one
seminar in the NE region of the country.
Item 7: Consideration of the Cover Design for the Final Report
14. The meeting discussed the Cover Design for the Final Report
as prepared and sent by Shri C.R. Irani and desired to have some more designs,
particularly in relation to the colour combination as well as the content and
size of the font.
Item 8: Review
of the progress in drafting of Volume I of the Final Report
15. A draft compilation of
volume I of the Final Report was circulated at the meeting with the
request that suggestions, if any, may be made after the Members went through
the draft, so that the same could be improved.
Item: 9: Review of the Progress
in drafting of Volume II of the Final Report
16. The meeting discussed the format and broad contents of Volume
II of the Final Report. The Hon’ble Chairperson suggested that a small chapter
on ‘Secularism’ might be added at an appropriate place in the Report. The
meeting agreed to the suggestion.
Item 10: Report of the Secretary about the responses
to the Consultation Papers and
Questionnaires, received so far from the Central/State Governments/Political
Parties, etc.
17. The report of the Secretary on the subject was taken on
record. A summary of the suggestions and responses to the Consultation Papers
and Questionnaires received up to 17th August, 2001, duly
ledgerised, was circulated amongst the Members during the meeting.
Item 11: Review of
the progress made in interaction with prominent persons
18. The meeting reviewed the progress made.
The meeting deliberated upon the desirability of using a tape recorder for
recording the interaction with the prominent persons for facilitating preparation
of the record of discussions. There was no consensus on the issue. The meeting
decided that the draft of summary of discussions prepared by the Secretariat
should first be sent to the dignitary concerned for his approval. After such
approval of the draft, the same should be circulated amongst the Members of the
Commission and can be appropriately used for the purposes of the Report.
Item 12: Any other item, with the permission of the Chair.
19. With the permission of the Chair, a copy of the letter dated
6th August, 2001 received from Professor Iqbal A. Ansari, Secretary
General of the Minorities Council, New Delhi forwarding there with his note of
the discussion of the interaction with the Commission in the meeting held on 22nd
July, 2001 was circulated. The meeting
was of the view the note of discussion sent by Prof Ansari contained his
version of the discussions. The meeting, however, decided that a reply might be
sent to Prof. Ansari acknowledging his letter and informing him that the Secretariat
of the Commission had prepared their own record of the discussions for being
placed before the Commission.
20. It was generally agreed that the next meetings of the
Commission might be held from 6th to 12th September and
from 17th to 30th September, 2001. However, the Hon’ble Chairperson
was authorized to fix the actual dates for the meetings after ascertaining the
convenience of the members. The
Chairperson stressed the importance of the presence and participation of all
the Members at the future meetings, which were crucial to the quality of the
Final Report.
The meeting thereafter ended with
a vote of thanks to the Chair.
(RAGHBIR SINGH)
Secretary
To
All Members of the Commission
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS OF THE TENTH MEETING
1. Hon’ble
Justice Shri M.N. Venkatachaliah (In
Chair)
2. Justice
Shri B.P. Jeevan Reddy (not
present on 25th August)
8.
Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap