& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

News Analysis

Attorney General’s views trigger fresh dispute

By Staff Correspondent
The rejection of Attorney General’s views on a parliamentary standing committee’s jurisdiction lu'address an issue has once again triggered a dispute between the executive and the legislative branches of the
The AG. chief law officer of the state, had given his views at the request of the Finance Ministry.
"Without a reference being made by Parliament, a standing committee on ministry cannot entertain a complaint for in-vestigation." the AG observed.
The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance Ministry had met on January 23 to discuss why Bangladesh Bank had not allowed rescheduling of the loans of Rahman Group, a top defaulter with Sonali Bank.
Sonali Bank had allowed rescheduling of the loans several times. But Rahman defaulted anfl sought further rescheduling without making the required 10 per cent down payment. Later. Bangladesh Bank directed Sonali Bank to go for legal action.
A latest Bangladesh Bank investigation report found that Rahman Group had indulged in massive irregularities in taking loans from the SB. The Group owes Sonali Bank Tk 129.80 crore outstanding loans as of June 30. 1999, of which Tk 46.16 crore loans are bad.
Following this development. Rahman appealed to the Standing Committee on Finance Ministry to address the issue and the Committee discussed it.
Finance Minister SAMS
Kibria later contested the Jatiya Sangsad body’s discussion and sought suggestion from the AG througTT tne Law Ministry. But when he presented the AG’s view on the matter, it was rejected by the JS body saying only the Speaker could give an explanation of the Constitution and that the AG did not have the Jurisdiction.
The Finance Minister’s plea for referring the matter to the Speaker was also rejected on the ground that matters are referred to the Speakers only when disagreements arise among the members.
However, different quarters now feel that events like these may crop up in future and this should be settled once for all. otherwise the. Standing Committee would become controversial.
Handling of the case of a single defaulter may encourage other defaulters to follow the same path. In such cases, the objective of the financial sector reform programmes to take to I ask the defaulters may be jeopardised and the banking sector as a whole will suffer.
As the matter stands today, it now seems that it is only the other wing of the state — the judiciary —which can resolve the dispute between the executive and the legislative branches.
The AG in his observation regarding the JS standing committee s jurisdiction said. "Having regard to the rele”ant provisions of the Constitution ,and the Rules of Procedure. L am firmly of opinion that without a reference being made by Parliament in a matter of public importance, a standing committee on a ministry cannot entertain a complaint for investigation."
He went on. The chairman of the standing committee has stressed the role and importance of the standing committee. Certainly, the standing committee has an important role to play, but it must be remembered that Parliament, not to speak of a standing committee. being creature of the Constitution. is bound by the provisions of the Constitution which is supreme and as such neither Parliament can concede to the standing committee, nor the standing committee can arrogate to itself, unfet-tered/uncondltional power which the Constitution has not granted.”
Article 76 of the Constitution deals with parliamentary committees and I provides as follows —
(1) Parliament shall appoint from among its members the following standing committees, that Is to say,
(a) a public accounts committee;
(b) committee of privileges; and
(c) such oti jr standing committees as the Rules of Procedure of Parliament requires.
(2) In addition to the committees referred to in Clause (1). Parliament shall appoint other standing committees, and a committee so appointed may, subject to this Constitution and to any other law —
(a) examine draft bills and legislative proposals;
(b) review the enforcement of laws and propose measures for such enforcement ;
(c) in relation to any mailer referred lo it by Parliament as a matter of public importance, investigate or inquire into the activities or administration of a ministry and may require it to furnish, through an authorised representative, relevant information and to answer questions, orally or in writing:
(emphasis added)
(d) perform any other func-Uqh assigned_lQ_iL.by.Parlia-menl. (emphasis added)
The AG observed. ^According to Article 76 a standing committee may examine draft bills and legislative measures referred to it. Though there is no mention of reference by Parliament in respect of sub-clause (b), one can argue that a standing committee can do the work of review of the enforcement of laws when it is referred to it by parliament as it is on such delegation a standing committee can perform'the function.
"However, for the present, we proceed with the assumption that there is no requirement of reference by Parliament In case of sub-clause (b). But the language of sub-clause (c) and (d) is such that there cannot be any doubt that a standing committee cannot perform any function mentioned in sub-clause (c) and (d) of Article 76 unless Parliament makes a reference of the matter to the standing committee.
"One may say that investigation of a particular matter is implicit in the function of review of enforcement of laws. If this would be so. there was no need to provide separately in sub-clause (c) the matter of in vcstigatlon.
"It Is a cardinal principle of' interpretation of the Conslltu-Uon that the provisions of the Constitution snail not be interpreted in such a way as to ren’ der any of Ils provisions redun dant and ft must be assumed that each provision has a separate purpose.
"Investigation and inquiry having been specifically mentioned In sub-clause (c). there is no escape from the conclusion thal investigation into some complaint comes within the purview of sub-clause (c) and not sub-clause (b).
"In order to attract subclause (c). a matter must be of Eublic importance and must ave been referred to a standing committee by Parliament.
The point would be clear if we take into consideration the relevant provisions of the Rules of Procedure.
“Chapter XV of the Rules of Procedure makes separate provisions in respect of petitions. Rule 100 provides as follows --Petitions may be presented or submitted to the House with the consent of the Speaker on —
(I) a bill which has been published under Rule 76 or which has been introduced in the House;
(II) any important matter connected with the business pending before the House; and
(III) any other matter of public importance;
Rule 105 provides as follows
(I) every petition shall, if presented by a member, be countersigned by him.
(Il) A member shall not present a petition from himself.
Rule 108 provides —
A petition may be presented by a member or be forwarded to the secrelary. who shall report it to the House. No debate shall be permitted on the presentation, or the making of such report.
Rule 110 provides —
Every petition shall, after presentation by a member or report by the secretary, as the case may be, stand referred to the committee on petition."
The AG further said. "It can be seen that any person can submit a petition to a Member of Parliament who can present it to the House by countersigning the petition. Such person may also present the petition to the Secretary of Parliament who shall make a report of il lo the House and on such presentation of a petition lo the House through a Member of Parliament or through the Secretary of Parliament, the petition shall stand referred tne committee on petition.
"Rule 240 of the Rules of Procedure provides —.Parliament shall, as soon as may be. after the inauguration of each new Parliament, appoint the Standing Committees on each ministries which may. subject to the Constitution or any other law. —
(a) examine draft bills and other legislative proposals;
(b) review the enforcement of laws and propose measures for such enforcement; and
(c) examine any other matter referred to them by Parliament under Article 76 of the Constitution" (emphasis added)
“Rule 248 provides as follows
Each such standing committee shall meet at least once a month and the functions of a committee shall be to examine any bill or other matter referred to it by Parliament, to review the work relating to a ministry which falls within its jurisdiction, to inquire into any activity or irregularity and serious complaint in respect of the ministry and to examine, if it deems fit. any such matter as may fall within its jurisdiction and to make recommendations:
(Emphasis added)
"Rule 248 has to be read along with Rule 246 as Rule 246 stipulates the extent of Jurisdiction of standing committee and Rule 248 describes the nature of the function of lhe standing committee.
“Furthermore, the rules cannoribe interpreted in a way which will bring them in conflict with the provision of Article 76 of the Constitution.
"Any grievance made by a person snail on presentation in. or report lo. the House of Parliament shall stand referred lo the committee on petition unless the House specifically refers it to the standing committee. If a different interpretation is given lo the relevant rules, there will be conflict between Article 76 and the rules referred to above and also between the rules referred to above which is absolutely impermissible.
"In the present case, no reference having been made by Parliament, the Standing Committee on the Ministry of Finance has no authority to investigate or inquire into the complaint lodged with the Chairman of the Standing Committee''.