No fresh ordinance on enemy property
Intending to avoid antagonising the competing views expressed by leaders of different political parties on the proposed Enemy Property Bill, the government on Tuesday dropped the idea of going in for a fresh ordinance to regulate such properties left behind by those who went to Pakistan during partition. It, instead, decided to bring a new bill in the next session of Parliament.
With reservations from Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and finance minister Pranab Mukherjee during the meeting, the Cabinet noted that there was no urgency to bring an ordinance on enemy property to replace the one that has expired with the completion of the Monsoon session of Parliament on August 31.
With BJP on the one side of the bill and the rest of Opposition parties including the Left, SP and RJD on the other, the government was forced to withdraw the Enemy Property (Amendment and Validation) Bill, 2010.
While withdrawing the bill in Lok Sabha home minister P. Chidambram had said, the government would bring a new legislation in the Winter Session of Parliament incorporating the views expressed by the leaders on the floor.
The proposed ordinance, which was brought in the backdrop of various court rulings, was aimed to make it clear that judiciary would have no jurisdiction over occupation of such properties and the government would solely take the decision. Though his ministry piloted the ordinance, Mr Chidambram noted that several political parties had strongly spoken both in favour and against the bill and therefore it would be appropriate to take everyone on board on the issue, sources said.
Some ministers even recalled that leaders from various parties had met the Prime Minister and Mr Mukherjee to oppose the move. Sources said, after hearing out others in the Cabinet, Mr Mukherjee observed that if government brought an ordinance at this juncture, it would become difficult in the Winter Session to get the legislation passed.
Keeping all these aspects, as expressed by the ministers, the Cabinet decided against bringing an ordinance and instead opted to go for legislative route.
Post new comment