The recent emergence of the Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill, drafted by the BJP government, highlights a disturbing trend in Indian legislative practices. The bill, aimed at regulating all forms of online news and media content, has been drafted under conditions of extreme secrecy. This approach not only stifles transparency but also raises serious concerns about its implications for democratic governance and media freedom in India.
Secrecy in Legislative Processes: A Dangerous Precedent
The drafting of the Broadcast Bill has been characterized by an unprecedented level of secrecy. Rather than being made publicly accessible, the bill is being shared selectively with a small group of “stakeholders” under strict confidentiality agreements. Each copy of the bill bears a unique watermark to trace potential leaks, reflecting a deeply concerning lack of openness in the legislative process.
This secretive approach is not an isolated incident but rather part of a broader, systemic pattern observed over the past decade. The BJP government’s modus operandi involves drafting legislation in closed environments, limiting public engagement and scrutiny. This practice undermines democratic principles and erodes public trust in the legislative process.
The BJP’s Legislative Strategy: Centralization and Control
The BJP’s legislative strategy involves a four-part process that significantly deviates from traditional democratic norms. Firstly, bills are drafted in secrecy with selective distribution for feedback. Secondly, final bills are either not shared publicly or, if they are, the reasons for accepting or rejecting feedback are not disclosed. Thirdly, bills are often passed in Parliament with minimal discussion and without review by the Standing Committee. Lastly, many bills are left as “shell laws,” with crucial details to be filled in through executive rules.
This approach centralizes power within the executive branch, bypassing the legislative oversight that is fundamental to a functioning democracy. For instance, recent amendments to IT Rules and the Digital Personal Data Protection Act exemplify this trend, with significant aspects left to be determined by executive rules rather than through comprehensive legislative debate.
Contrasting Approaches: BJP vs. UPA
The current approach starkly contrasts with the pre-legislative consultation process introduced under the UPA 2 government. This process, championed by the National Advisory Council led by Sonia Gandhi, mandated proactive publication of proposed legislation for public feedback. Despite its uneven implementation, this process represented a commitment to transparency and public participation in the legislative process.
In contrast, the BJP’s method appears designed to circumvent public scrutiny and input. This shift from an open to an opaque process reflects a broader erosion of democratic institutions under the BJP. The party’s disregard for consensus-building and public deliberation highlights its view of democracy as a periodic mandate to rule without restraint, rather than a participatory process of governance.
The Broadcasting Bill: A Call to Action for the Opposition
The introduction of the Broadcasting Bill presents a critical opportunity for the Opposition. There is significant concern among media, technology platforms, and civil society regarding the bill’s potential impact on freedom of the press and democratic engagement. The Opposition has a chance to harness this disquiet to foster public engagement and propose alternative policies.
Establishing “shadow cabinets” and promoting public deliberation can provide a framework for robust debate separate from partisan politics. By articulating constructive alternatives, the Opposition can play a pivotal role in revitalizing democratic processes and ensuring that legislative actions align with democratic principles.
The Role of Civil Society and Media
In this climate of increased opacity, civil society organizations and the media have crucial roles to play. Their involvement in demanding transparency and accountability is essential for maintaining a healthy democracy. The public, media, and civil society must work together to hold the government accountable and ensure that legislative processes adhere to democratic norms.
The Broadcasting Bill serves as a focal point for this broader struggle for transparency and democratic integrity. It underscores the need for a renewed commitment to open and participatory governance in India.
Sunil Garnayak is an expert in Indian news with extensive knowledge of the nation’s political, social, and economic landscape and international relations. With years of experience in journalism, Sunil delivers in-depth analysis and accurate reporting that keeps readers informed about the latest developments in India. His commitment to factual accuracy and nuanced storytelling ensures that his articles provide valuable insights into the country’s most pressing issues.
