Parliamentary panel ‘taken aback’ as NMC issues regulations without law ministry clearance
The report was tabled in the recently concluded Budget session of Parliament
360° Perspective Analysis
Deep-dive into Geography, Polity, Economy, History, Environment & Social dimensions — AI-powered, on-demand
Context
The Lok Sabha expressed strong displeasure over the (NMC) issuing regulations without vetting them through the Union Law Ministry. The Committee emphasized that legal and constitutional scrutiny by the Law Ministry is an essential prerequisite for framing subordinate legislation to prevent future legal infirmities.
UPSC Perspectives
Polity
The concept of Delegated Legislation or Subordinate Legislation refers to the power given by the legislature to the executive to make rules, regulations, and bye-laws to implement acts passed by Parliament. Since the legislature lacks the time and technical expertise to detail every aspect of a law, it delegates this power to the executive branch. The in both Houses of Parliament exercises crucial oversight by scrutinizing whether these delegated powers are being appropriately used within the limits defined by the parent Act and the Constitution. In this case, the bypassing the Law Ministry's vetting process undermines this procedural safeguard, raising concerns about the legal validity and drafting accuracy of the regulations. UPSC often asks about the mechanisms of parliamentary control over the executive, and this incident serves as a prime example of a parliamentary committee enforcing accountability.
Governance
The functioning of regulatory bodies like the (NMC), established under the , 2019, requires strict adherence to established procedures to maintain their credibility and legal standing. The dictate that administrative ministries must get rules and regulations vetted by the Legislative Department before publication. By skipping the Law Ministry's vetting, the NMC risked creating regulations that could be challenged in court due to drafting flaws or constitutional conflicts. This highlights a broader issue in governance where autonomous bodies might act independently of necessary checks and balances. For Mains, this illustrates the challenges in ensuring that independent regulatory agencies function efficiently while remaining compliant with overarching legal and constitutional frameworks.