Maharashtra Special Public Security Bill: joint committee didnt comply with course of correctly, alleges Congress

Facing a flak for not giving a dissent observe within the joint committee which scrutinised the controversial Maharashtra Special Public Security Bill earlier than it was tabled within the Maharashtra Legislature, Congress has accused the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) of intentionally subverting the method by making final minute adjustments to the schedules of the joint committee conferences. The committee held 5 conferences earlier than clearing the Bill unanimously. The authorities has stated on document that not one of the members, together with distinguished Opposition leaders, gave any dissent observe to the committee when the Bill was scrutinised.

The Bill has been introduced “to supply for efficient prevention of sure illegal actions of Left wing Extremist organisations or related organisations.”

“The proceedings of the committee weren’t carried out correctly. Only two conferences had been held as per the schedule. Else, the federal government saved altering the dates and timings of the committee conferences. It was to be sure that the opposition members usually are not in a position to attend the conferences as a result of final minute adjustments,” Harshwardhan Sapkal, Maharashtra State Congress president, instructed The Hindu.

The joint committee of the legislature was shaped in December 2024 to scrutinise the Bill. It consisted of 25 members and was headed by Maharashtra income minister Chandrashekhar Bawankule. The committee included a number of distinguished opposition leaders from the MahaVikas Aghadi together with Congress leaders Nana Patole, CLP Vijay Waddettiwar, Satej Bunty Patil; NCP SP leaders Jitendra Awhad, Shashikant Shinde, Shiv Sena UBT chief Bhaskar Jadhav. Maharashtra Legislative Council’s Leader of Opposition Ambadas Danve, a Shiv Sena UBT chief, was a particular invitee member.

Mr. Sapkal stated that the social gathering leaders raised a number of legitimate objections to the Bill when it was being mentioned within the joint committee. But stated that because the date of the assembly was preponed on the final minute, the social gathering couldn’t submit a dissent observe. “We didn’t get any time to provide written objections. The authorities obtained it cleared and tabled in a whole lot of hurry,” Mr. Sapkal stated.

“There was no dissent observe given by any of the opposition events’ legislators who had been members of the committee. The Bill was cleared by everybody unanimously,” chairperson of the joint committee Chandrashekhar Bawankule stated.

When requested concerning the allegations of the Congress, he refuted the claims. “All the proceedings had been held as per process. In truth, it was Jitendra Awhad, an NCP SP MLA, who had instructed adjustments to the Preamble. We have modified the preamble accordingly. Several directions by the opposition had been taken on document and adjustments had been included accordingly,” he instructed The Hindu.

The Bill was thereafter handed by the Maharashtra Legislature through the latest monsoon session of the Assembly. Congress and Shiv Sena UBT didn’t oppose the Bill brazenly within the Legislative Assembly on July 10, however took a powerful stand towards it within the Legislative Council and staged a walkout earlier than the Bill was put to vote. The Governor has been despatched the Bill for his assent now.

Civil society upset

“We are upset with what occurred within the Assembly. We had been working with the opposition leaders for months, because the starting of the joint committee proceedings. We had anticipated them to take a powerful stand towards this anti-democratic Bill. Instead, they gave delicate speeches,” stated Ulka Mahajan, a distinguished civil society activist and the State convenor of Bharat Jodo Abhiyaan.

When requested why the Congress leaders who had been part of the committee didn’t oppose the Bill within the Assembly or submit a dissent observe to the Speaker, committee member and senior Congress chief Nana Patole instructed The Hindu, “We had been instructed that as per the procedures, the members of the committee can not converse on the ground of the House and oppose the Bill. It was unsuitable data.” CLP Vijay Waddettiwar requested, “What is the purpose of giving a dissent observe after the Bill has been handed within the Assembly?” On the following day, the MVA gave a dissent observe to the Chairperson of the Legislative Council after the Bill was handed within the Upper House.