EDITORIAL ANALYSIS : A verdict on the Money Bill that India awaits

Source: The Hindu

• Prelims: Money bill, Finance Act, Article 110, Article 109, K.S. Puttaswamy vs Union of India (2018) etc

• Mains GS Paper I and II: Parliament-Structure, functioning and conduct of business, powers and privileges and issues arising out of them etc

ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS

• A seven-judge Bench of the Supreme Court is slated to hear arguments over governing the contours of a Money Bill. In Rojer Mathew vs South Indian Bank Ltd. Finance Act, 2017, was passed after its certification as a Money Bill.

• In Rojer Mathew vs South Indian Bank Ltd. Finance Act, 2017, was passed after its certification as a Money Bill.

INSIGHTS ON THE ISSUE

Context

Money bill:

Article 109:

• Money Bills to be enacted as law with only the Lok Sabha’s approval. The Rajya Sabha may make recommendations on the Bill, but any suggestions from it would not bind the Lok Sabha in any way.

• The Rajya Sabha may make recommendations on the Bill, but any suggestions from it would not bind the Lok Sabha in any way.

Rojer Mathew v South Indian Bank Ltd 2019:

• The judgment in this case said that the speaker’s decision was not beyond judicial review though the scope was extremely restricted.

• It said that the 2018 Aadhaar verdict had not answered conclusively the question as to what constitutes a money Bill under Article 110 (1)

• It directed that it be referred to a larger Bench.

Finance Act:

● Finance Bill is a secret bill introduced every year in Lok Sabha (Lower chamber of the Parliament) immediately after the presentation of the Union Budget

● It gives effect to the financial proposals of the Government of India for the immediately following financial year.

● It is presented at the time of presentation of the Annual Financial Statement before Parliament, in fulfillment of the requirement of Article 110 (1)(a) of the Constitution

● It details the imposition, abolition, remission, alteration or regulation of taxes proposed in the Budget.

● A Finance Bill is a Money Bill but not all money bills are Finance Bills

Issue with Finance Act as Money bill:

• The use of the word “only” means that a Bill that has subjects in it which are more than merely attendant to those delineated in Article 110(1) can never qualify as a Money Bill. Yet, this is precisely what the Finance Act, 2017, sought to do.

• Yet, this is precisely what the Finance Act, 2017, sought to do.

• The law made sweeping changes to the functioning of tribunals, invading, in the process, principles essential to the maintenance of the judiciary’s independence.

• The law, apart from rearranging panels and bodies, granted to the Union Executive to make rules on how the subsisting tribunals were to be administered.

• The legislation made amendments to substantive laws, and encroached into areas well beyond the subjects enlisted in Article 110(1).

• Under no circumstances could changes through a Money Bill to terms of office, or the conferral on the executive of unbridled power to regulate tribunals through delegated legislation The incorporation of provisions on qualifications for appointment through a Money Bill

• The incorporation of provisions on qualifications for appointment through a Money Bill

K.S. Puttaswamy vs Union of India (2018):

• Section 7 of the Aadhaar Act concerned subsidies, benefits and services, for which expenditure was to be incurred from the Consolidated Fund of India, the law met the conditions of a Money Bill.

• Issues: It had failed to provide sufficiently clear rules on the standards to be employed in reviewing a Speaker’s decision to certify a draft law as a Money Bill. The effect of the word “only” in Article 110(1) had been overlooked in K.S. Puttaswamy.

• It had failed to provide sufficiently clear rules on the standards to be employed in reviewing a Speaker’s decision to certify a draft law as a Money Bill.

• The effect of the word “only” in Article 110(1) had been overlooked in K.S. Puttaswamy.

Issues with Finance Act, 2019:

• It made far-reaching amendments to the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) through a Money Bill.

• It included alterations to the definition of what constitutes “proceeds of crime” and a bestowal on the Enforcement Directorate of draconian powers of arrest, attachment, and search and seizure.

• Vijay Madanlal Choudhary vs Union of India (2022): The Supreme Court upheld many of these amendments It kept open the question of whether the amendments could have been validly made through a Money Bill.

• It kept open the question of whether the amendments could have been validly made through a Money Bill.

Way Forward

• Chief Justice Chandrachud: The Rajya Sabha is an indispensable constitutive unit of the federal backbone of the Constitution. “Potential differences between the two houses of the Parliament cannot be resolved by simply ignoring the Rajya Sabha.

• “Potential differences between the two houses of the Parliament cannot be resolved by simply ignoring the Rajya Sabha.

• The efficacy of a constitutional body created to subserve the purpose of a deliberate dialogue, cannot be defeated by immunizing from judicial review the decision of the Speaker to certify a Bill as a Money Bill.”

• Money Bills are a means of ensuring that the Rajya Sabha does not scuttle the efforts of the government of the day to access the treasury for basic administration. To use the measure as a tool to circumvent the Council’s role in serving as a check on the state’s legislative function amounts to playing a ruse on the Constitution.

• To use the measure as a tool to circumvent the Council’s role in serving as a check on the state’s legislative function amounts to playing a ruse on the Constitution.

QUESTION FOR PRACTICE

Discuss the role of the Election Commission of India in the light of the evolution of the Model Code of Conduct.(UPSC 2022) (200 WORDS, 10 MARKS)