Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Indian government withdraws Personal Data Protection Bill

accessnow.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 126 posts

Re: Indian government withdraws Personal Data Protection Bill

#61

Post by valarauko »

portpecos wrote: post #55
dustypotato wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow. Do you have the source for the numbers? It's very surprising

I also need clarification on what he means by Modi bypassing parliament to pass his own bills. That’s not how a parliamentary system works. Imagine Tony Blair bypassing the House of Lords and the House of Commons to pass his own bill. Or Obama bypassing the Senate and House of Representatives to pass his own bill. It’s a very strange claim to me.

Not GGP, but I assume they mean that bills were passed through parliament without any real debate or amendments, since the governing party holds a super majority.

Re: Indian government withdraws Personal Data Protection Bill

#62

Post by [deleted] »

blueblisters wrote: post #57
woweoe wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having a majority in parliament is the normal way of doing things

A majority in a parliamentary system still allows some room for debate and dissent since MPs are, in principle, representatives of their constituency and not of the party. However, in India, it is illegal for an MP to vote against the party line - that is grounds for their disqualification - due to the anti-defection law. Any debate is pure theatrics at this point and the party leadership is free to pass any law they…

[deleted]

Re: Indian government withdraws Personal Data Protection Bill

#63

Post by valarauko »

woweoe wrote: post #53
simiones wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, in many parliamentary systems it is very unusual for any one party to have an absolute majority. In most such systems, the winning party of an election often only wins a plurality of votes, and has to woo other parties to govern - either through a coalition or just a minority government.

India does not have a single party majority either but an alliance majority

The BJP by itself has a simple majority in the Lok Sabha, and makes up over 87% of the NDA's members in the Lok Sabha.

Re: Indian government withdraws Personal Data Protection Bill

#64

Post by portpecos »

happyopossum wrote: post #60
blueblisters wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A majority in a parliamentary system still allows some room for debate and dissent since MPs are, in principle, representatives of their constituency and not of the party. However, in India, it is illegal for an MP to vote against the party line - that is grounds for their disqualification - due to the anti-defection law. Any debate is pure theatrics at this point and the party leadership is free to pass any law they…

> in India, it is illegal for an MP to vote against the party line Inn what way is this a functioning parliamentary system then?

> In what way is this a functioning parliamentary system then?

You can ask other parliamentary systems the same questions. For example, the Australian Labor Party requires its members to pledge their support for the collective ui decisions of the caucus, which prohibits them from "crossing the floor" as well.

Just as importantly, the Anti-“Crossing the Floor” law was passed in 1985 by the Congress Party under the leadership of Rajiv Gandhi (Son of Indira Gandhi, Husband of Sonia Gandhi, and Father of Rahul Gandhi). India’s been functioning under that system for almost 40 years, and I doubt Rahul Gandhi and Congress Party will repeal that law when they come back into party. That’s because it’s their law. They wrote it.

Re: Indian government withdraws Personal Data Protection Bill

#65

Post by valarauko »

portpecos wrote: post #59
givemeethekeys wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a parliamentary democracy, if the elected party in power has a majority, they can do what you're describing.

In a presidential democracy, if the Senate and House of Representatives is majority Democrats, then yes, the Democrats can do the same. Obama once had majority in House of Reps and Senate as well. There is one thing that is different. The Filibuster is very powerful in the US. I’m not so sure the filibuster is a powerful tool in UK’s parliament and India’s Parliament.

> There is one thing that is different. The Filibuster is very powerful in the US. I’m not so sure the filibuster is a powerful tool in UK’s parliament and India’s Parliament.

The filibuster isn't a thing in the Indian system, but even in the US it can be broken by a super majority - which the governing alliance in India does have. Besides, the filibuster has rarely been used in recent times - more often than not, it's simply the threat of one.

Re: Indian government withdraws Personal Data Protection Bill

#66

Post by alephnerd »

pvsukale3 wrote: post #39

Related: If you want to read policy research on Indian goverment PRS research is a good resource. They usually analyse new bills and amendments in Indian parliament. https://prsindia.org/

+1 on this. I'm surprised I've never come across this before. Their annual reviews are on point.

Re: Indian government withdraws Personal Data Protection Bill

#67

Post by portpecos »

valarauko wrote: post #61
portpecos wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also need clarification on what he means by Modi bypassing parliament to pass his own bills. That’s not how a parliamentary system works. Imagine Tony Blair bypassing the House of Lords and the House of Commons to pass his own bill. Or Obama bypassing the Senate and House of Representatives to pass his own bill. It’s a very strange claim to me.

Not GGP, but I assume they mean that bills were passed through parliament without any real debate or amendments, since the governing party holds a super majority.

The UK has done the same when having a party majority in the House of Lords and House of Commons.

In the US things are different. Even if there is a party majority in the Senate and House, the Filibuster is powerful enough to table the party majority’s bills.

Re: Indian government withdraws Personal Data Protection Bill

#68

Post by darth_avocado »

blueblisters wrote: post #57
woweoe wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having a majority in parliament is the normal way of doing things

A majority in a parliamentary system still allows some room for debate and dissent since MPs are, in principle, representatives of their constituency and not of the party. However, in India, it is illegal for an MP to vote against the party line - that is grounds for their disqualification - due to the anti-defection law. Any debate is pure theatrics at this point and the party leadership is free to pass any law they…

> in India, it is illegal for an MP to vote against the party line

That is not true at all. Anti-defection law is applied when elected officials run on a party and once elected decide to change their party affiliation. Not for individual bills.

Re: Indian government withdraws Personal Data Protection Bill

#69

Post by valarauko »

happyopossum wrote: post #60
blueblisters wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A majority in a parliamentary system still allows some room for debate and dissent since MPs are, in principle, representatives of their constituency and not of the party. However, in India, it is illegal for an MP to vote against the party line - that is grounds for their disqualification - due to the anti-defection law. Any debate is pure theatrics at this point and the party leadership is free to pass any law they…

> in India, it is illegal for an MP to vote against the party line Inn what way is this a functioning parliamentary system then?

It's not a perfect system, but the provisions of the Anti-Defection Law tried to address what was a bigger issue in Indian politics - legislators changing sides for what turned out to be enormous sums of (undisclosed) money. In this climate, the incumbent party could bribe opposition members to prop up the government, and attempts to poach new legislators right after the elections reached ridiculous levels.

For what it's worth, while this does hinder a legislator from voting as per the will of their constituents even where they are at odds with the party line, within the Indian political system there are so many special interest parties that differ from each other in minor details of policy. In theory, the will of constituents could have been made manifest by voting for the policy adjacent party instead.

Again, it's not a perfect system, but it's attempting to fix the obvious issues that arose in India.

Re: Indian government withdraws Personal Data Protection Bill

#70

Post by HaloZero »

valarauko wrote: post #61
portpecos wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also need clarification on what he means by Modi bypassing parliament to pass his own bills. That’s not how a parliamentary system works. Imagine Tony Blair bypassing the House of Lords and the House of Commons to pass his own bill. Or Obama bypassing the Senate and House of Representatives to pass his own bill. It’s a very strange claim to me.

Not GGP, but I assume they mean that bills were passed through parliament without any real debate or amendments, since the governing party holds a super majority.

I thought Modi's party only had a super majority in the lower house though, don't they need both houses?
Post reply on HN