P Chidambaram criticizes bypassing law commission for new criminal laws
text_fields
Senior Congress leader P Chidambaram accused the Central government of bypassing the Law Commission while enacting three new criminal laws that took effect on July 1.
He expressed these concerns during a protest organized by the DMK advocate wing against the new laws.
Traditionally, the Law Commission, which includes retired judges, legal experts, professors, and permanent legal staff, would draft new laws after consulting with bar council members and advocate associations before presenting them to Parliament.
However, Chidambaram claimed that this process was ignored, and instead, a panel of five or six "part-timers" was appointed to create the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam.
These laws replace the British-era Indian Penal Code, Code of Criminal Procedure, and Indian Evidence Act.
"The Law Commission was neither referred to nor consulted. This is wrong," Chidambaram asserted. He criticized the inclusion of solitary confinement as a punishment, deeming it unconstitutional and an unusual and cruel punishment, noting that the death penalty has been abolished worldwide.
Chidambaram also questioned the new provisions for life sentences, highlighting confusion over the differences between a life sentence and a life sentence for the remainder of life. He emphasized that he had been calling for a debate on these laws for months, but the government had not agreed to one.
He further accused the government of merely engaging in "cut, copy, and paste" work, suggesting that only a few amendments were necessary instead of entirely new laws. Chidambaram pointed out that changes in section numbers would cause confusion, as well-known sections such as 302, which refers to murder, have been renumbered, complicating understanding for advocates, judges, and police officers.
Chidambaram reiterated that while reforms are necessary, they should have been handled through amendments rather than wholesale changes, which he argued would only add to confusion without substantive improvements.