December 9, 2019
Sukhendu Sekhar Ray speaks on The Recycling of Ships Bill, 2019
FULL TRANSCRIPT
Sir, I rise to support this Bill. However, there are concerns expressed by Madam Yagnik and Vaishnav Ji; I associate with those concerns. We are talking about the Honk Kong International Convention for Safe and Environmentally Sound Recycling of Ships, 2009 and we are observing the 10th anniversary of that Convention.
But Sir, many NGOs including the internationally famous NGO GreenPeace, had criticised the objectives and recommendations of the Honk Kong Convention in view of the fact that it will impact our environment.
Sir, coming to the Bill, in the statement of objects and reasons, it is said that Ship Breaking Code, revised in 2013, which is existing in our country, does not provide penalties for contravention of the provisions of Code. For that reason, some penalties have been prescribed in this Bill in Chapter 9 Clause 31 (1-5) and Clause 32.
In several provisions, penalties from Rs 5 lakh to Rs 10 lakh have been provided for. But, Sir, I think that this amount is very small amount. Now a days, Rs 5 lakh or Rs 10 lakh for a shipping company is nothing. It should be at least Rs 25-30 lakh. It is my suggestion to the Hon’ble Minister.
Sir, the next point is that Clause 3 of the Bill proposes to establish a National Authority. What will be the formation of the National Authority? It will comprise an officer not below the rank of Joint Secretary. So, only one officer will comprise the National Authority? Why are any qualified environmentalists not included in the National Authority, I wonder. It will be a one man show? So, my request to the Government will be, through you Sir, that this point should be taken care off that one reputed environmentalist should be included in the authority.
Sir, next point is that in proviso Clause 8 (1), the owner of a ship, if he has not applied, is to make an application to the National Authority within five years of the commencement of the Act. Why such a long period has been given for application to the National Authority? Why not one year? I think one year is more than reasonable time. So, the time period should be reduced. This is my suggestion that the five years is a long period, it must be restricted within one year.
Sir, my next point in Clause 13 (4), it is stated that the competent authority may suspend and cancel any ship recycling facility without issuing any notice. This is highly arbitrary and arbitrariness on the part of the government authorities is an antithesis to the rule of law. There should not be such provisions. In other provisions, there is a provision for giving notice but here it says that any time it can cancel, suspend, whatever, without giving a notice. Any opportunity of being heard is a necessary condition precedent to natural justice. So, I would request the government to consider this.
Sir, I would like to refer to a judgement. Some people have said about the Supreme Court judge and even the Hon’ble Minister, who otherwise is a very competent minister, has referred to the Supreme Court judgement. I would like to refer to one judgement dated September 11, 2007 of Supreme Court in the Matter of Research Foundation of Science versus the Union of India and another in writ petition number 657 of 1995, where the apex court had mentioned about Section 3.3 and 3.2 of the expert committee, I mean technical experts of the ship breaking activities committee, dated August 30, 2006 and issue directions for chief complaints.
There are so many guidelines that the committee had prescribed for the performance of those guidelines and the Supreme Court ruled that those guidelines should be adhered to. But there is no murmur about those guidelines in this Bill. So, I would request the government to incorporate those guidelines in the rules and regulations.
Sir, in this judgement the Supreme Court at paragraph 11, I would quote one or two lines with your kind permission, “when we apply the principle of sustainable development we need to keep in mind the concept of development on one hand and the concepts like generation of revenue, employment and public interest on the other”.
This is where the principle of proportionality comes in and this concept of balancing is also given importance by Dr Amartya Sen in his book ‘Development as Freedom’. I have used the name of Dr Amartya Sen, pleased do not object to that because nowadays this name is not very familiar and is not acceptable to many people. But Dr Amartya Sen has also said this.
My final point would be that the recycling of ships is not only hazardous for the environment it is also hazardous particularly for those labourers who are working in the recycling process. Sufficient safeguards are to be taken for the interest of the labourers who work in the recycling of ships. Sir, unless the law, rules or guidelines are strictly followed in this regard then Sir, it would create hell on Earth.
I expect, sincerely hope and believe that the Hon’ble Minister will accept the suggestion of the Members who are deliberating on this issue today.
Thank you.
