India News | Retrospective Provisions Clarificatory, Says Sitharaman; LS Nod to NDPS Bill

New Delhi, Dec 13 (PTI) Lok Sabha on Monday passed a bill to rectify errors that had crept into the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Amendment) Act with Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman asserting that the retrospective provision made in the bill was not "substantive" in nature, as claimed by the opposition.

The NDPS (Amendment) Bill, 2021 was passed by a voice vote and some amendments moved by opposition members were rejected by the House.

Also Read | Apache Log4j2 Vulnerability: Hackers Making Over 100 Attempts To Exploit a Critical Security, Warn Cyber Researchers.

Responding to concerns raised by members that the provision for implementing the law with retrospective effect was in violation of Article 20 (1) of the Constitution, Sitharaman said according to the opinion of the Solicitor General, the amendment could be permitted as it was not substantive, but clarificatory in nature.

She said the retrospective amendment was allowed as the government did not want to create a new law but only correct a mistake.

Also Read | Ravinder Bhakar, CBFC CEO, Appointed New Head of NFDC, Films Division and CFSI.

"Amendments with retrospective effect to substantive part of criminal law is not permitted, but clarificatory amendment that seeks to remove an obvious mistake is permitted," the minister said referring to the opinion of the Solicitor General.

The minister also allayed concerns that the amendment did not diminish Article 20 of the Constitution, saying that the Tripura High Court had asked the government to issue a notification to the effect.

"Court asserted that both the state and central government shall publish a notification bringing about the content of this order, bringing about in public notice so that requirement of Article 20 of the Constitution of India is not diminished," Sitharaman said.

Referring to the drug haul at Mundra Port, the minister said she would not like to indulge in a debate on the ownership of the port as it was a national port.

She said the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence had taken prompt action and prevented the drugs from reaching several parts of the country as the contraband was seized at the port itself.

The minister said within three weeks the case was handed over to the National Investigation Agency (NIA). Earlier, during the debate some members had flagged the issue of contraband reaching the port owned by a private company.

The debate also saw Shiv Sena member Arvind Sawant and NCP member Supriya Sule hit out at the Centre over alleged targeting of Bollywood actors on the issue of drug abuse.

Sitharaman did not refer to the issue in her reply.

Earlier, several opposition members questioned the retrospective penal provision in a bill which seeks to rectify an anomaly, saying the amendments will not hold good in courts.

The anomaly crept in when the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act was amended in 2014 to allow better medical access to narcotic drugs, and removing state barriers in transporting and licensing of essential narcotic drugs.

Prior to the 2014 amendment, clause (viiia) of Section 2 of the Act, contained sub-clauses (i) to (v), wherein the term 'illicit traffic' had been defined.

This clause was re-lettered as clause (viiib) by the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Amendment) Act, 2014, as a new clause (viiia) in section 2 defining 'essential narcotic drugs'.

However, inadvertently, consequential change was not carried out in section 27A of the NDPS Act, Finance Minister Sitharaman was quoted as saying in the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the bill.

BJD member Bhartruhari Mahtab, Congress member Manish Tewari were among those who opposed the retrospective applicability of the provision, saying according to law, criminal provisions cannot be brought into force on a retrospective basis.

Participating in the debate Tewari wondered whether a substantive provision can be given retrospective effect and be made part of the law. Citing various judgments, he said such a provision will not be tenable in the coming days.

How will courts allow the law to have retrospective effect, he questioned the government.

Tewari claimed that the proposed amendment will set a dangerous precedent and said it will shake people's confidence in the supreme legislative institution.

He said something lawful today could be described as unlawful if laws are amended like this, especially those having substantive provisions.

(The above story is verified and authored by Press Trust of India (PTI) staff. PTI, India’s premier news agency, employs more than 400 journalists and 500 stringers to cover almost every district and small town in India.. The views appearing in the above post do not reflect the opinions of LatestLY)