The Congress on Wednesday did not rule out approaching the court against a move to turn the Aadhaar Bill as a “money bill” to bypass the Rajya Sabha where the government lacks majority.
The Congress on Wednesday did not rule out approaching the court against a move to turn the Aadhaar Bill as a “money bill” to bypass the Rajya Sabha where the government lacks majority.
“We reserve the right to take recourse to all available alternatives including a court challenge,” party spokesman Abhishek Singhvi told reporters, asserting that “by no stretch of imagination, the Aadhaar Bill is money bill”.
Responding to questions on this issue Mr Singhvi said, “ It is a misuse of power, it is a colourable exercise of power. I cannot speak what we will do....We reserve our right to take recourse to all alternative methods which includes the court challenge. Now, most apposite example is that of the repromulgation of ordinance which was described by the Supreme Court as a fraud on power as a colourable exercise of power.” To a related question that the Speaker has given a certificate, he said the government has to move to the Speaker to get a certificate.
“I am faulting the government’s entire intent to get a certificate that is no ground to get such a certificate by approaching the Speaker in the first place, merely because you do not have a majority in the Rajya Sabha or you want to bypass the Rajya Sabha or you do not like voting in the Rajya Sabha. And I also said the conclusivity of a Speaker’s ruling may operate intra-Parliament. The Speaker’s certificate is there, but the Speaker’s certificate is not higher than Constitution itself.” “The Speaker’s certificate is given under Article 110(3). Article 110 (1) says a bill is a Money Bill ‘only’ and the word ‘only’ has been forgotten by everybody. If it deals only with (a), (b), (c), (d), (e). So if you deal with (a) and also deal with issuance of a card or other aspects of a card, it is not the Money Bill. So, merely imparting conclusivity to it may work temporarily intra-Parliament because we respect the Speaker’s ruling intra-Parliament,” he said.
Article 110(1) of the Constitution is clear and unequivocal. To qualify as a money bill, a bill must only deal with any of the items listed in art 110 (1). The word only is vital and unambiguous. A bill dealing with topics other than any of those listed in art 110 (1) or a bill dealing with those topics along with other topics or dealing partly with those subjects listed in art 110 (1) and also other topics ,would clearly not qualify under art 110(1) which emphasises only the listed topics.
He steered clear of questions whether the Congress would bring a motion of breach of privilege against finance minister Arun Jaitley, who is Leader of the Rajya Sabha, for “misleading” the House on the issue.
Insisting that the practice of getting a “certificate” from the Lok Sabha Speaker cannot become “methodology” of bypassing the Upper House, he said it was an insult of the Rajya Sabha.
“Congress opposes bypassing of the Rajya Sabha by government by ...Colorable exercise of power. It is a blatant attempt to bypass the upper half of Parliamentary democracy,” Mr Singhvi said.
Replying to questions, he said the Speaker’s ruling may operate inside Parliament, but it is “not higher than the Constitution” and “not binding on court”.
