Main Page     Feedback?

Proposed   administrative   procedure
#LM.12   :   Improving   functioning of   Parliament

Purpose : Reduce damage cuased by noisy MPs.

  1. Background
  2. The problem : rouge MPs
  3. Administrative/technical means to reduce damage created by rogue MPs
  4. Voting by pure majority only
  5. Draft of the law to enact procedure #LM.12


The purpose is to bring India's administration/courts at par with West. How? By improving record keeping in GoI-offices and reducing nexuses in GoI-offices and courts. How? We would need several laws to achieve that.

LM.12 is one of these proposed laws. (To see the list of some of the laws, please click here). The proposed law LM.12 will improve law-making at National level.

The   Problem

A large number of MPs are habitual noise makers, and disrupt the proceedings. This recudes the productivity of other members.

My proposal LM.03, will enable citizens to DIRECTLY register their YES/NO in the Parliament, and so their dependence on MPs will reduce. Also, the procedure LM.06 allows citizens to effectively recall/replace MPs. This further reduces their dependence on MPs. But still, MPs will have significant role to play. So it is important that rogue members are stopped from disrupting the proceedings of the Parliament.

As such, solution to rogue MPs already exists --- the Speaker of the Parliament has powers to use police force against the rogue members. But most Speakers are spineless, and want to keep a good relation with the members, despite their disruptive behavior. Hence rogue members keep on disrupting the Parliament's proceedings again and again and again.


Solution to "rogue MP" problem

Following technical means can reduce the problem
  1. Electronic BulletinBoards :

    1. The Speaker of the Parliament will host an electronic internet based bulletin board.

    2. Any member can start a thread in the bulletin board, and post a proposal/question before the Mayor or any office bearer, and the Mayor will reply, and other member may comment. The member who has started the thread can delete the post of any other member (except Mayor and office bearer) if he thinks that the post is disruptive.

    3. The citizens can ONLY read the forum, and send emails to their corporators. The corporators may publish citizens' posts if he thinks appropriate.

    4. The Speaker may also start a different forum where citizens, after paying a small fee necessary to maintain web-site, can start their threads and post their own posts.

  2. Redesigning conference hall so that only the speaker can heard :

    1. The member whom the speaker allows to speak should come at the center stage in the front, and speak, and MUST NOT speak from his own seat.

    2. The conference hall should be designed in such a way, that ONLY the speaker at the center is heard by all, and any member, no matter how loudly he speaks from his seat DOES NOT get heard by anyone.

    3. The TV-camera in the hall should focus ONLY on the speaker, and MUST not be allowed to focus the member who is making noises. If TV-cameras are to focus the noise-makers, this will only encourage the members to make more and more noises.

    4. The speaker should give EQUAL time to ALL members, and members can allocate their times to other members. The member can speak ONLY for the time he has, and he obtained from other members, and no more. His full speach will be kept on the web, along with the speech he could NOT deliver due to lack of time.

    5. Any member can post a post on the speech the speaking member gave, on the electronic bulletin board, to point out objections he has.

  3. Supervision by Jurors and Grand Jurors :

    1. If a member has behaved in a disruptive way inside the house, any citizen can file a complain against that member before Grand Jurors. The Grand Jurors may or may not decide to read the complain. But if over 15 out of 30 Grand Jurors agree that member's behavior in the house is prima facie disgraceful and disruptive, and needs scrutiny, they may ask for a Jury Trial.

    2. If over 8 out of 12 Jurors declare that member's behaviour was disruptive and disgraceful, the Jurors may impose a fine of upto 12 salaries, and suspension for upto 3 months.

The above measures will be sufficient to reduce disruption, and damage cuased by the disrupting MPs.

Voting by pure majority

One of the reason why so many MPs end up wasting too much time in Parliament than they need to is following
  1. Any member can place a resolution any time
  2. There may be a voting anytime
  3. If 50% of the members present vote in favor of the proposal, even if that is just 30% of ALL members, the law gets passed.
As a result, the political party that is in power is forced to keep a large number of its members in the house as stand-by, lest a damaging proposal by some opposition members would get passed. The procedure should be amended as follows :
  1. an absent should be considered as a NO
  2. the proposal would be considered as PASSED only of over 50% of members vote YES.
This will free up time of several members, and they would no longer have to get "tied" with the house. Also, the PM and Ministers will be able to call houses for a longer duration without being worried about surious proposal getting passed.

Draft for #LM.12

     To enact the administrative procedure #LM.12 in India, a law needs to be passed in the Parliament of India. For the the EXACT Draft (Text) of the law, please click here.

     IMO, it would be wiser for the citizens/activists to first enact the procedure #LM.02, and then pass this draft in the Parliament.

Next : Proposed laws to improve allocation of natural resources and reduce poverty