February 3, 2017
Saugata Roy opposes the introduction of Specified Bank Notes (Cessation of Liabilities) Bill, 2017
Let me first respond to the Point of Order by Hon’ble Finance Minister. He, not having been ever a Member of this House, is not aware of the Rules of Procedure of this House. Madam, please allow me.
“If a leave to introduce a Bill is opposed, the Speaker, if he thinks fit, after permitting brief statements from the Member who opposes the motion and the Member who moved the motion, may without further debate put the question.”
The rule is up to this. The Finance Minister, the clever lawyer that he is, read the proviso. The proviso is not connected with this. Any member can say ‘I oppose the introduction of this Bill’. Whether I am questioning the legislative competence or not comes later, that is part of the provision. Just read the first paragraph of section 72(1), any member may oppose the introduction of the Bill. I am not raising question on the legislative competence, so let me now be allowed to raise my objection.
Madam, this Bill is actually illegal because the basic statement by the Prime Minister, without any notification, on the November 8, 2016, announcing demonetisation was illegal. No reference was made to the Parliament.
And again Madam, you see Sub-Section 1 of Section 34 of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934, on the liabilities of the Reserve Bank. The RBI writes on the note ‘I promise to pay the bearer the sum of rupees 1000 or 500’.
The notification of demonetisation should not have been given by the government, rather than the RBI. What happened in this case is that the government wrote to the RBI to hold a meeting because the Prime Minister wanted to announce a demonetisation, a disruptive step overnight, that’s why the RBI wrote back to the government.
The notification should have been issued under Sec 34(1) of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 and Sec 26(1) of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934. That’s why I think that this is outside of the minister’s competence and legislative competence to bring this rule.
This notification should have come from the RBI because according to the Act, RBI is the ultimate authority which will guarantee the safety of the legal tender. It is the RBI that should be saying that they are notifying. That is why this ordinance is illegal and the government has imposed a disruptive step on the whole economy and the whole country, disrupting rights of millions and crores of people, they have put everybody to shame. This is totally illegal and unparliamentary and I oppose the introduction of this Bill.
