Union of Indian States, Separate... What did the MPs of opposition parties say?

frame Union of Indian States, Separate... What did the MPs of opposition parties say?

Sekar Chandra
Three major bills being brought to reform the law can be introduced in the winter session of Parliament.

Meanwhile, opposition MPs included in the parliamentary panel of the home Ministry gave a note of

disagreement regarding the bills, saying that these are copy paste. Also, a strong objection was lodged regarding

the hindi names of the bills. Other opposition parties, including congress, protested against naming the Indian

Judicial Code, indian Civil Defense Code and indian Evidence Bill as hindi, saying that it is unconstitutional.

Actually, these three bills have been brought to replace the indian Penal Code (IPC), Code of criminal Procedure

(CrPC) and indian Evidence Act.

Who expressed disagreement?

Vice President and rajya sabha Chairman jagdeep dhankhar was included in the panel along with congress MPs

Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury, Ravneet Singh, P chidambaram, TMC MPs Derek O'Brien, Kakoli Ghosh Dastidar,

Dayanidhi Maran, Digvijay Singh and NR Elango while giving separate dissent notes on the bill. Opposed many

of the bills included.

What did the opposition MPs say?


Congress leader Adhir Ranjan Choudhary said that the law is the same as before, but the name was changed.

Meanwhile, former chief minister of madhya pradesh Digvijay Singh said that the chairman of the committee was

in a hurry to submit the report. Also, according to news agency PTI, former Union minister P chidambaram said

that the bill is objectionable and not according to the Constitution. Apart from this, DMK mp Dayanidhi Maran

said that india is a union of states. Different languages are spoken in different states. The body of the bill is in

English, but the name is in hindi, which is not under Article 348 of the Constitution. TMC mp O'Brien said that

about 93 per cent of the existing criminal law has not been changed, with 18 of the 22 chapters being copy-pasted

meaning that these major changes were required for pre-existing laws. The law could have been easily amended.

Find Out More:

Related Articles:

Unable to Load More