LEGAL
AND POLITICAL ASPECT OF POST-LEGISLATIVE SCRUTINY IN ASIA
SPECIAL FOCUS ON NEPAL'S EXPERIENCES
Paper Submitted to
Academic Conference on Post-Legislative
scrutiny in Asia
Yangon Myanmar 17-18 June 2019
by
KhimlalDevkota
Senior Advocate/Member of Constituent
Assembly, Nepal
Contents
Abstract 3
Background. 3
Definition
of Legislative Scrutiny: 4
Introduction of Nepal: 5
Legal instruments: 6
Constitutional Provision. 6
Bylaws of Parliament 6
Major provision of Working
Procedure. 7
Definition of legal audit: 8
Objective of legal audit: 8
Basis of legal audit: 8
Jurisdiction of Legal Audit 9
Time of legal audit 10
Procedure of legal audit 10
Priority of legal audit 10
Timeline of legal audit 11
Limitation of legal audit 11
Law making process: 11
Legislative Scrutiny
Process and Structures: 12
Stages of Scrutiny: 13
Impact 14
Legal Impact 14
Political Impact 15
Conclusion. 15
References. 16
LEGAL AND POLITICAL ASPECT OF
POST-LEGISLATIVE SCRUTINY IN ASIA
SPECIAL FOCUS ON NEPAL'S EXPERIENCES
-KhimlalDevkota
Senior Advocate/Member of Constituent
Assembly, Nepal
The main objective of legislative scrutiny is
an evaluation of the law made by parliament. The paper intends to identify the
importance of the core topic and questions to be addressed. For this purpose,
the paper will find the current status of the legislative scrutiny briefly
around the world and specifically in Nepal. The paper tries to find the subject
on how legislative scrutiny has been carried out in the field through secondary
sources, using websites and available literature and obtaining some empirical
evidences from the parliament. The paper will try to conclude why legislative
scrutiny is needed and what impact it will have in legal and political sector.
Keywords:legislative scrutiny, parliament,
politics
Parliament is the state's legislative body. Law making
and Post - legislative scrutiny are the main tasks of
the legislative body. Laws are made to be implemented and effective
implementation of the law is one of the major challenges faced not only in
Nepal but in most countries in Asia. Law making process is easier compared to
implementing the same law. Legislative work and
effective law enforcement is state's both legal and political task.Political plans are also implemented through legislation. Government performances will bemeasured through effective law enforcement that can be judged through post - legislative scrutiny.
UK is known to be a country
with systematic and advanced legislative scrutiny till date. The Committee of
Public Accounts of the United Kingdom initially performed this task but later
handed over to the Committee of Public Audit and Legislative Scrutiny. Belgium
has an ex-post evaluation parliamentary committee of laws doing this business.
Canadian parliament deals with sunset clause laws. Indonesian experience is
quite interesting, with 17 law analysts setting up a separate committee outside
the parliament. For the purposes of scrutiny, Switzerland has a separate
committee called Parliamentary Control of Administration [PCA]. (Devkota,
September 2018).
The region of South Asia has
different political systems. Nepal and India have similar political system.
India's experience in the parliamentary system is long and deep, whereas Nepal
has very short experience. Nepal and India have both adopted parliamentary and
constitutional systems through constituent assemblies. India is regarded as the
largest democratic country, whereas Nepal has very little experience but has
restored the parliamentary system over and over again. Nepal is a federal
democratic republican country with parliamentary system. The impact of
parliamentary practices is limited despite having substantial history of
parliamentary practice in Nepal. The country in the recent past has gone through
a decade long conflict. It is a positive sign that Nepal is in the phase of
completing the transition. The country has an extraordinary history of
producing seven constitutions in only seven decades. The current constitution
of the constituent assembly elected by the people is the seventh constitution
that now governs the country. Nepal, through a new constitution promulgated in
2015, has adopted a reformed parliamentary system. Nepal is a country that has
been continuously trying to reform and improve the parliamentary system to
align with the aspirations of the general people. With this spirit, I would
like to explain parliamentary functions based on the new constitution's
reformed parliamentary practices. Lawmaking is the parliament's main business.
Oversight function of the Parliament and deliberation of the voice of the
people in the parliament are distinct and regularly practiced function of the
parliament. Legislative scrutiny is a new affair for Nepal, although the
country's initiative is praise worthy. With a few examples, I would like to
introduce the country's initiative on legislative scrutiny. This study was
carried out on the basis of legal arrangements and their practices. I would
like to share some of the impacts of the law-making process in Nepal.
Parliamentary scrutiny is the close
examination and investigation of government policies, actions and spending
that is carried out by the House of Commons and the House of Lords and
their committees.
Pre-legislative scrutiny is the detailed examination of an
early draft of a Bill that is done by a parliamentary select
committee before the final version is drawn up by the Government. Post-legislative scrutiny
is an inquiry by a parliamentary select committee into how a new law has worked
in practice since it came into force. Law commission of UK has defined
post-legislative scrutiny as following,
“Post-legislative scrutiny is a broad and
undefined expression, which means different things to different people. This
statement is certainly borne out by the responses we have received. The best
approach to defining post-legislative scrutiny is to consider what its purposes
and benefits should be……….”(UK_Post_Legislative_Scrutiny_2006)
Since the central argumentation of this study revolves
around the term parliamentary scrutiny, it seems appropriate to provide a
definition thereof. According to Ronald Holzhacker, parliamentary scrutiny can
be defined as the exercise of power by the legislative branch to control,
influence, or monitor government decision-making.
The publication of Westminster Foundation for Democracy
on Legislative Scrutiny, Overview of Legislative Scrutiny, practiced in the UK,
India, Indonesia and France has been drafted by Franklin De Vrieze, on behalf
of the Westminster Foundation for Democracy (WFD), and defines Legislative
Scrutiny as following,
“One of
the main tasks of parliament in a democratic system of governance is to
consider debate, review and adopt legislation. No matter how or by whom a draft
law1 is developed, parliament’s job is to review the draft law prior to
deciding whether or not to adopt the law, with or without amendments.(Vrieze, Legislative Scrutiny UK,India,Indonesia and
France, 2018)
According to the working procedure on legislative Scrutiny 2018 of
legislative management committee, National Assembly of Nepal has defined the legal
scrutiny as following;
“The method of study, investigation and audit
of implementation of any act, clause sub-clause any parts, of federal laws its
positive and negative impact on concern stakeholders is called legal audit.”
Again Franklin De Vrieze writes in
Post-legislative Scrutiny Guide for Parliaments;
‘One of the main roles of parliament is to
create laws that meet the needs of the country’s citizens. It is also a
parliament’s role to evaluate whether the laws it has passed achieve their
intended outcome(s). Post- Legislative Scrutiny refers to the stage at which a
parliament applies itself to this question: whether the laws of a country are
producing expected outcomes, to what extent, and if not, why not.”(Vrieze, Post-legislative Scrutiny Guid for
parliaments, 2017).
On the basis of the above
definition, we can simply define that the term scrutiny is a legislative
review. The stages of legislative scrutiny can be categorized into three phase
namely Pre-legislative scrutiny, during legislative scrutiny and post-legislative
scrutiny.
Nepal is a country of Lord
Buddha, a symbol of peace; Mount Everest, a symbol of height and Gorkha, a
symbol of warrior. Nepal can also be known as a country with a lot of
parliamentary reforms. Reform is an inevitable process and major reforms and
progressive changes have taken place even in political system. Nepal's current
constitution has been reformed in traditional parliamentary practices within
parliamentary system reform. During the constitution making process, political
stability was the country's demand, but the then parliamentary system and
practices could not guarantee that. Therefore, parties were considering changing
the system. There was also a huge debate and initiative to change the system
from parliamentary system to direct elected presidential system. However, all
political parties finally agreed on reforming the major provisions in the
constitution that will create a possibility of political stability. Therefore,
in constitution, the parliamentary system continued. The task of the legislature
has not changed in this continuation of the parliamentary system. Legislative
body makes the law, but making a law alone does not fulfill the legislature's
duty. Legislative body must ensure that the parliamentary law is well enforced.
Parliament's role on the drafting, finalizing and implementing the law is
positive. But there are expectations and concerns on whether the objective of
the law is achieved or not and also whether the law has created a positive
impact or not. These expectations will only be met after the scrutiny process.
Pre, during and post-legislative scrutiny is therefore the parliament's most
important part.
There are a number of
instruments to implement the law. The Constitution of Nepal, the National
Assembly Regulations and the Working Procedure of the National Assembly
Legislative Management Committee are the main legal instruments. All the legal
instruments refer more or less to content and process Legislative Scrutiny.
As per the constitution of
Nepal there is a federal parliament provision In Chapter 8 and formation of
parliament by mixed electoral system and nominee from the head of state in
Article 83. Article 97 has provision of different committees. There is also a
provision of Joint Committee to resolve the business of both Houses. In
addition to that the constitution also has a separate procedure to conduct
parliamentary affairs. The Constitution states as follows:
“Procedures relating to
conduct of business:
(1) Each House of the Federal Parliament
shall frame rules to conduct its business, maintain order during its meetings
and regulate the Constitution, functions and procedures of the committees and
procedures of the House or its committee. Until such rules are framed, the
Federal Parliament shall regulate its procedures on its own.
(2) The conduct of business of the joint
sitting of the Federal Parliament, and constitution and proceedings of the
joint committee of the Federal Parliament shall be regulated by the rules or
procedures approved by the joint sitting of both Houses of the Federal
Parliament.” (The Constitution of Nepal 2015)
The executive body must be
controlled by different means by the parliament in the context of the limited
government such as by asking questions, seeking clarifications in various
issues including plans, programs and annual budget. Parliament monitors the
executive by discussing various proposals in the house and issuing various
directives. Constitutional obligation of the parliament is also to have
democratic control on the executive body and ensure concerns of the general
public.
Most of the parliament's
functions are mentioned in the Constitution. The Constitution has given
Parliament a mandate to make rules for the parliament to function. Parliament
can make the rules of procedure which is called "Bylaws." Bylaws made
by the parliament especially by National Assembly specify the task of the
committee on scrutiny. The National
Assembly's Rules of Procedure chapter 18 clauses 146 are related to the various
committees. The National Assembly shall include various subject-matter wise
committees or special committees to support the regular function of the
National Assembly.
Under the subject committees
referred to in Article 97 of the Constitution, there shall be following
committees referred to in clause 147 to ensure government accountability,
oversight of government functions and issuance of direction and instructions.
There are four different committees in place in accordance with clause 147,
including legislative management and government assurance committee. The
Legislative Management Committee, including other tasks, is responsible for
legislative scrutiny. It has made working
procedure 2075 based on the bylaws (Bylaws of National Assembly, 2018)
committee and is now being implemented. (Working Procedure of Legislative
Scrutiny, 2018).
Legislative scrutiny is a
new task that has begun in Nepal through the National Assembly's specific
committee. It is not only the task but the provisions of the law, bylaws and
procedures are also new. Though most committee members are new, the committee
has started their work very smoothly. They are looking for experiences from
around the world. It is necessary for them to understand about international
experiences. In the initial phase committee consulted experts on committee
business. In addition to the committee's regular task, experts advised the committee
to initiate legislative scrutiny as stated in the bylaws. First of all, the
Committee itself tried to understand what scrutiny is and how it operates. The
Committee asked the expert to submit a paper on the specific topic. The
Legislative Management Committee decided after a series of meetings to organize
a major seminar on legal scrutiny. Committee invited all parliamentary and
government officials including House Speaker and National Assembly Chairman,
Law Minister and Attorney General for discussion.
The committee decided to
draft a working procedure with the help of experts. The committee has set some
ground, standards and tools for measuring the law as a scrutiny task in the
working procedure. Very clear understanding was developed in the working
procedure on the need for scrutiny. Objective, basis, process, tools, timeline,
priority and limitation were very clearly specified.
The committee made the work
procedure after rigorous exercise. Major working procedure provisions developed
by the committee are basically referred to the various legal audit provisions.
Procedure relating to an act implementation measure, study and investigation
standard 2075 has been approved and effectively started on..... November 2018.
Preamble of the procedure mentioned that the legal audit task is regulated and
managed by the working procedure. Legal audit is not an easy task without
principles. Examining the work already done by the parliament, execution by the
government and interpretation by the Court is a sensitive task. The task of
examining must therefore be within the principles. Author Franklin De vrieze
writes the principles of scrutiny “the Principles discuss the mandate to conduct Post-Legislative Scrutiny
in Parliament (the “why”), the scope (the “what”), the participants (the
“who”), the processes (the “how”) and the timing (the “when”).”(Vrieze, Principles of Post-Legislative Scrutiny by
Parliaments, 2018)
Initially, defining their
job, working procedure and limitations was a difficult job. The committee
defined the meaning of the legal audit that prescribes the task successfully. As
per the working procedure legal audit is defined as "The method of
studying, investigating and auditing the implementation of any act, sub-clause
any parts, federal laws its positive and negative impact on stakeholders
concerned is called legal audit."
The objective is set out in
clause 3 of the legal audit work procedure 2018. Clause 3 focuses primarily on
research of proper law enactment and effective law enforcement. While the laws
are being audited, it can look at whether the procedure is being properly
implemented, imagining the laws ' error, duplications and redundant clause. The
following five objectives are specified in the procedure:
Ø
To take necessary action to
remove duplication of any laws
Ø
To repeal inactive or
redundant laws in whole or in part or any clause of the laws
Ø
To create a conducive and
necessary environment for the enactment of laws
Ø
To encourage effective
implementation of laws immediately after the enactment of laws
Ø
To create a suitable
condition for making laws in accordance with the spirit of constitution and the
principles of natural justice.
Legal auditing is not an
easy task. Since it is a new practice in Nepal, a lot of caution should be
taken while performing the activity. With this understanding, committee has
specified the basis for the legal audit. It means there is no limitation in
auditing the law. The committee is very concerned about effective law
enforcement throughout. Consequently, committee found some basis for ensuring
effective law enforcement. The Committee always has the competence to decide
the legal audit basis. That is why the working procedure made it clear that the
basis for the legal audit will be as initially prescribed by the committee. In
addition to this working procedure, some legal audit measures have been
mentioned. Following the 2018 working procedure, measures shall be adopted for
this purpose;
Ø
To confirm whether the act
allowed the relevant authorities to draw up rules, bylaws, directives and
procedures.
Ø
To confirm whether
regulations, bylaws, directives and procedures were permitted by the
authorities. If it permitted then whether or not the authorities followed it
properly.
Ø
Confirm whether target
groups and stakeholders can achieve the social, economic and inclusive
expectations or any benefits.
Ø
To confirm whether laws have
been implemented after the laws have been promulgated.
Ø
Confirm whether or not the
Supreme Court has ordered any law.
Ø
To confirm whether or not
the provisions of state policy and guidelines referred to in the constitutions
have been implemented.
Ø
Confirm whether or not any
institution is expected to implement the laws established
Ø
Confirm whether equality is
maintained for the purposes of law enforcement
Ø
Confirm whether or not law
enforcement is consistent with the purpose, intention and purpose.
Ø
Confirm whether or not the
law has any economic, social or cultural impact.
Ø
Confirm whether or not any
provision of law required any modification.
Ø
Confirm whether there is any
objection and obstacle to law enforcement.
Ø
Confirm whether laws are
compatible with Nepal's international treaty and conventions.
Ø
Any other basis that the
committee considers.
Working procedure has the
number of subjects listed as the committee's jurisdiction for legal audit
purpose. The working procedure has study, research and investigation as topics.
Law auditing must focus on state policies, state liabilities, and state
mechanisms. According to the procedure, the Legislative Management Committee is
entitled to study and research through committee itself or through staff,
experts and expert groups on the following subjects;
Ø
Theoretical aspect of the
bill and concerned state policy.
Ø
Whether the act is genuinely
compatible with the spirit of the bill.
Ø
Whether the liability of the
consolidated fund or any government financial liability.
Ø
Submission or omission of
any offense or increase or decrease substantive punishment clauses.
Ø
Imposing, reducing or
suspending tax.
Ø
Establishment of all
judicial or quasi-judicial bodies and their jurisdictions on matters relating
to them.
Ø
Any management of the
regulatory framework or permission on matters relating to them.
Ø
Implementation of acting in
accordance with the law referred to in the Constitution.
Ø
Any restriction on matters
relating to fundamental rights.
Ø
Regulation and management of
everyday behavior and conducts of citizens.
Ø Any subject considered by the committee.
The job of law auditing is not an open task. Not all laws are
subject to auditing. Legal audit is not a task that never ends. Instead, the
legal audit task is limited in terms of the law's length of time and maturity.
Even so, the committee has full rights to decide what to do on legislative
scrutiny and when to do it. According to the working procedure on the timeframe
for legal audit, "Except
for any instruction by the committee, generally audits of the laws shall be
made if the laws are implemented for at least 3 years”.
Legal audit is the committee's substantive task. The
committee has the right to recommend in any legal matter to the government
through the legal audit. If committee finds some loopholes in the law then
committee can recommend new legislation. If committee finds that proper bylaws,
regulations and directives are not made properly, it may recommend taking
necessary action for amendment. If committee finds some redundant clauses or
non-compatible provisions then committee may recommend revising. This huge task
must be properly accomplished. Therefore some process has been fixed in the
working procedure. Another important part of the working process is how the
legal audit objective has to be fulfilled. Consultations are the focus of the
working procedure. Chapter
3 and clause 7 of the working procedure states that ,"Consultation with federal, provincial and local
authorities and other stakeholders, observation, field visits and any other
methods, consultation with experts, consultation with government authorities,
consultation with civil societies, consultation with university professionals
and research institutes, consultation with any others as considered by the
committee". It is very clear that the legal audit is a very
sensitive job and therefore proper consultation with the concerned stakeholders
is a must.
Legal auditing must be carried out, but should not be open to
everyone. There are some criteria for prioritizing the audit task. Once again,
the committee has full rights although some priorities have been set for this
purpose by the working procedure. The Committee shall determine the priority
according to the working procedure on the following basis
Ø Citizen’s rights and freedom and citizenship
related issues
Ø Public interest issues
Ø Good governance and judicial administrations
related issues
Ø Use of natural resources related issues
Ø Consumer rights and public supplies related
issues
Ø Drinking water, education and health related
issues
Ø Women children senior citizens disable
inclusion and social welfare issues
Ø Agriculture industries employment and labor management
related issues
Ø Tourism and civil aviation management issues
Ø Urban development road and infrastructure
development and others related issues
Ø As per consideration of committee issues
Law auditing is not an open-ended task. The
audit task must be completed within three months from the commencement. Three
months is a legal audit timeframe. In the event of an unfinished task, the
committee shall have full rights to take appropriate decision.
Legal audit is not an infinite task. It has some limitation.
Constitutional provisions, general principles of law and justice, due respect
of gender, colors, caste and languages, principles of balance of convenience,
financial limitation and others limitations are limitation of the task of legal
audit.
Some of the miscellaneous provisions are also mentioned in Chapter 5
according to the legal audit working procedure. As per the legal audit working
procedure the committee secretariat
shall also be a legal audit secretariat. Subcommittee and task force
shall be established as necessary. Expert support and expert panel
shall be obtained as required by the committee and the terms and references of
the experts and expert panel shall be as prescribed by the committee.
Committee’s task force and subcommittee shall submit the report
that has been approved by the committee to the National Assembly on behalf of
the committee. Record
will be sent to the library of the parliament. Interpretation
of the working procedure is finalized after the consultation in the committee
which is chaired by the Committee Chairman.
The process of law making varies across different regions, continents
and countries. Although most parliamentary practices appear to be similar in
the process of making law. Nearly the same practice was adopted where we tried
to address common issues like why it is necessary to make law and how the law
making takes place and what results are the substance of the law. Legislation
aims at implementing government policies, maintaining the rules of law,
institutionalizing decision-making processes, and fulfilling international
obligations. These are the basics of making the law. From the very beginning,
Nepal practices the same procedure. Mostly the financial and security bill
known as the government bill can only be initiated by the government but any
other bill known as the private bill can be initiated by any parliament member.
Origin of the bill is mostly from the concerned ministry if it is a government
bill and from a Member of Parliament if it is a private bill with adequate
justification. Justification for bringing this bill must be provided at this
stage. The bill is proposed when the existing laws are not sufficient and even the
amendment cannot satisfy the need. If the cabinet is satisfied, the ministry
will be then allowed to draft the bill. In the second stage, before the cabinet
approval inputs from the law ministry is required to determine whether the bill
is compatible with constitution and already existing state policies and
international obligations. Upon consent from the law ministry the Cabinet will
provide approval and the bill will be tabled in the parliament. After
discussion in the parliament committee the bill will be approved and will be
forwarded to National Assembly and finally for authentication by the parliament
after which the bill will turn into Act.
Legislative scrutiny practices also vary in different regions,
continents and countries as previously mentioned processes of law making. In
parliamentary bylaws, Nepal formally adopted a separate committee. The
committee has developed numerous parameters, standards and legislative scrutiny
modalities. The scrutiny was initially defined by the working procedure with a
clear objective. One of the major tasks in the field of legislative scrutiny is
the establishment of the basis and jurisdiction by the working procedure.
Procedure and priority and timeline are another achievement developed by
Nepal's parliament in the field of legislative scrutiny. Nepal's parliament
also identifies and incorporates the number of miscellaneous provisions and
practicalities into the working procedure as a major contribution.
Stages of legislative scrutiny holds equal importance as legislative
scrutiny these days. The entire purpose of legislative scrutiny is to ensure
effective law enforcement. Parliament, although less focused on implementation,
is liable to make laws. The parliament has also been given an oversight
function that is also directly related to the government's effectiveness as
well as legislation. Therefore, if it was done by proper investigation,
pre-legislation will be insured during the legislation and effective
enforcement of legislation. Thus, for the purpose of legislative scrutiny,
pre-legislation, during legislation and post-legislation stages were developed
by parliament of Nepal.
The task of legislative scrutiny has just been introduced in the
committee which has already drawn several attentions. Only preparatory work has
been done by the committee to make all concerned stakeholders including
ministries aware of the legislative work, the process of drafting legislation
and finally the scrutiny to see whether the law is properly implemented or
not. Only after a good discussion at
each stage of legislation drafting and proper preparatory work we can make
fruitful and result oriented law. There are a number of laws without rules and
procedures and it makes implementation of these laws very difficult. During the
scrutiny process, some of the bylaws are made.
Basically, in parliamentary system they have two kind of bill having
registered in parliament. Government bill is in top priority and private bill
is in second. According to constitution there is attractive provision for
private bill in principle but in practice it is rarely happening. Nepal
experiences out of 70 years only three private bill had registered. It means
bill drafting and presenting in the parliament is almost the task of
government. Government in parliamentary system there is always having with
commanding and relaxing majority. Once bill presenting in parliament by
majority commanded government, it is obvious to be passed with limited
discussion. Once government in majority, the law making process also shall be
badly dominated by the effect of majority. In the absence of the legislative
scrutiny unwanted consequences happening. With this stake the practices of
legislative scrutiny has increasing day by day. When legislative scrutiny work
started, the legal impact has seen in legal jurisdiction. Drafting a bill is
not just for pass by parliament but it is beyond that. It means after enactment
of law it should be functionable and it is scrutinizes by the parliament
itself. This is a key massage conveying to draft person. Secondly, bill after
approved from the parliament during the process of implementation, it has to be
practical receptive and result oriented. In this phase of implementation the
implementing agencies are always looking for effective implementation of law,
which is most important legal impact. Thirdly, the objective of scrutiny is
conveying clear message to drafting and implementing agencies both for better
result and better law.
Nepal has just entered in the phase of scrutiny. Being a very young
country in legislative scrutiny it has serious impact in bill drafting,
implementation and taking care of positive results. Draft persons they are
drafting a bill keeping in mind that it has to face scrutiny at any coast and
in any phase. Because of such cause Nepal has getting better laws after the
legislative scrutiny.
Very interesting fact is that India's
lawmaking process is becoming increasingly controversial. A typical bill is
drafted in secret by the government department concerned (sometimes in
consultation with other departments, and often with just a few bureaucrats
preparing a bill in a hurry), and this secret bill is approved by the Cabinet
for presentation to the House of Parliament (or the State Legislature, as the
case may be).Usually,
the content of the Bill is only made public when it is introduced in the House.
You can deduce the attention paid to a typical Parliament bill from the
following data:
Ø In 2009, only 16% of the total Parliamentary
time was spent on legislative business. 27% of the total Bills passed in the
year by Lok Sabha was discussed for less than 5 minutes. Only five Bills passed
by the Lok Sabha in 2009 were debated for more than three hours.
A rule of law is a key component of modern
democracies. Without proper law and effective enforcement, it will be pointless
to maintain the rules of law. Legal impact on the field of legislative scrutiny
is therefore most important. Proper and effective implementation of the laws
will be ensured by the practice of legislative scrutiny. In addition, it is
possible to identify lapses and gaps and resolve them in order to modify them. Anomalies
and duplications will be removed as well as redundant laws. These actions will
make the legal regime smarter than the past and strengthen the rules of law and
democracy. By establishing a culture of post-legislative reviews, these can be
designed to assess whether a piece of legislation's objectives and anticipated
effects actually took place on the ground. They can also identify any
unintended effects that the legislation may have had. A key advantage would be
the systematic data collection that would be a prerequisite for any such
evaluation. Regular post-legislative assessments should therefore be translated
into better laws.
The major task of the parliament is law making. In principles it is
fine. However in practice it is happening rarely. The concern of the law makers
is beyond that. Elected representatives are waiting for minister and task of
development rather than law making. Any Efforts made by Member of Parliament in
law making process has not count any more by the society. Peoples are not concern
about who is contributing a lot in law making process and no one paid attention
for better laws. Peoples are looking for immediate impact and benefit from
development work. Better laws shall produce the impact in the society for long
run. But peoples are losing their patient. Gradually the task of parliament is
shifting towards developmental works from law making. In this critical scenario legislative
scrutiny has taking vital role in parliamentary politics. When legislative
scrutiny became a part of major task of parliament it effects on performance of
parliament and working style and executive and law implementing agencies simultaneously.
There is no doubt; the goal of politics is to establish a civilized
society and to run it smoothly to serve the nation and people. Only after
proper law and effective law enforcement will the ideal goal is fulfilled.
Legislative scrutiny will be a appropriate tool and it can prove itself.
Legislative scrutiny therefore has an important role to play in promoting
democracy. People will be happy and nation will only prosper in proper
execution of law and democratic society. If the massage has disseminated that
the law will be scrutinizing, then and there the journey of accountable
politics has started. The rule of law has been implementing. Democratization of
the society has been started through democratization of law making process.
Ultimately, legislative scrutiny is developing as a appropriate tool of
developing democracy. Therefore, political impact of the legislative scrutiny
is most important in every country. It is fact the the whole world are not
suffereing from lack of appropriate laws hut lack of effective implementation
of the existing laws. Effective implementation of laws can be ensure through
legislative scrutiny. Finally, the purpose of the review is to determine
whether a law works in practice as intended and, if not, to find the reason and
quickly address it through parliamentary process. Since there is no requirement
for an ex-post law assessment, policymakers and bureaucrats do not have any
systematic evidence of a law's effectiveness and performance.
The major task of parliament around the world is to make law, even
though time in this job has not been given. India's world's largest democracy
has bitter experiences. In 2009, only 16% of the total Parliamentary time was
spent on legislative business. 27% of
the total Bills passed in the year by Lok Sabha was discussed for less than 5
minutes. Only five Bills passed by the Lok Sabha in 2009 were debated for more
than three hours. This is just another example not different from other
parliaments as well. My conclusion, therefore, is that Parliament has not given
the right time to make laws. The result would be a lack of proper laws and
effective implementation due to less attention paid to the law making business
which might have negative effect on legal, political and other sectors.
Therefore, due consideration must be given to legislative scrutiny for positive
legal and political impact.
Jha, Suman.
‘Government not keeping Opposition on Board’ the Indian Express 15 April 2010, Retrieved
from http://www.indianexpress.com/news/govt-not-keeping-oppn-on-board-complains-bjp/606522/0 .
Retrieved from, https://www.parliament.uk/site-information/glossary/pre-legislative-scrutiny/
Retrieved from, https://www.parliament.uk/site-information/glossary/post-legislative-scrutiny/
Bylaws of National Assembly. (2018). Kathmandu: Federal Parliament Secretariate.
Devkota, K. (2018).
Important of legislative Scrutiny and International Eperiences,Paper Presented
at Conference on Legislative Scrutiny Organised by Legislative Management
Committee, National Assembly, Nepal at Kathmandu November, 2018.
Federal parliament
secretariate,Shinhadurbar Kathmandu. (2075). Rules of procedures of National
Assembly.
The Constitution of Nepal. (2015). Kathmandu: Government of Nepal, Ministry of Law and
justice, Law Book Management Committee.
Vrieze, F. D. (2018). Legislative
Scrutiny UK,India,Indonesia and France. Westminster Foundation for
Democracy.
Vrieze, F. D. (2017). Post-legislative
Scrutiny Guid for parliaments. London: Westminster Foundation for
Democracy.
Vrieze, F. D. (2018). Principles
of Post-Legislative Scrutiny by Parliaments. London: Westminster Foundation
for Democracy.
Working Procedure of
Legislative Scrutiny. (2018). Kathmandu:
Legislative Management Committee, National Assembly.
