Lack of clarity in laws will lead to judicial intervention: Amit Shah

"I know that whatever I am going to speak will create a controversy, but I want to tell you that the judiciary will intervene only when you leave any grey area in drafting the legislation. More clarity in the legislation, less the intervention of courts," Shah said in his address to the House, where MLAs, MPs as well as former legislators and Speakers were present.

Citing the Modi government's move of abrogating Article 370, he said, "When the Article was drafted, it was clearly written that it is a temporary provision of the Constitution which can be removed through an amendment that can be passed through a simple majority in Parliament."

"Now, if it was written that it is a constitutional provision instead of a temporary one, then we would have required a two-thirds of majority during voting instead of a simple majority. Thus, more clarity leads to less judicial intervention," the minister added.

In August 2019, the Centre revoked the special status granted under Article 370 of the Constitution to Jammu and Kashmir. The Supreme Court later also upheld its abrogation stating that it was a temporary provision.

Shah claimed that "bad drafting" of legislations is the main reason why the difference between legislature, executive and judiciary is getting blurred today.

"Our Constitution is very clear about the roles of legislature, executive and judiciary. It says that the government will formulate policies and the legislature will pass laws as per those policies. Judiciary will define the laws and the executive will implement them. But lines are blurred today between these three because of bad drafting of legislations," he said.

The "art of drafting legislation" is slowly getting extinct, he said, and opined that every legislative assembly should conduct such workshops for its staff to enhance their drafting skill. He also stressed that officials involved in this process should be given guidance on what to include in the Act and what provisions should become part of the rules of that act.

Shah said India's Constitution, drafted and edited under Dr B R Ambedkar, is the most ideal example in the entire world on legislative drafting. "At that time, there were 72 barristers who were part of the constituent assembly...Nearly 14 per cent of their time was spent on discussing fundamental rights. After such intense discussions, our Constitution was prepared. And today, some NGOs give us advice on the issue of fundamental rights," he said.

The senior BJP leader said national and international perspectives should be kept in mind while drafting any act and common man should be able to understand its language also.

Giving an example, Shah said the three new criminal laws - the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA) - have been prepared keeping in mind Indian perspective as directed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

These three new laws replaced the Indian Penal Code (IPC), Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and the Indian Evidence Act, all of which came into existence during the British era, he said.

"Once these laws are fully implemented in the next three to four years, people will get justice within three years, starting from registration of an FIR till hearing in the Supreme Court. In the coming days, this reform will be considered as the biggest one in the world," Shah said.