MAKE LAW SANS INTERPRETATION IMBROGLIO
Can laws be made without the conundrum called interpretation? Interpretation of laws already enacted with lots of deliberations, due diligence, legality, going through a gruelling approval process like the vaccines from the govt departments to the law ministry, where is is dissected threadbare. Then it goes into the parliamentary affairs, select committees at times and finally it is tabled in the Parliament. The parliamentary debates leading to the passage of the law sometimes becomes legendary. It takes years and years to pass through the portals of our legislature. Then the assent of the President and it becomes the law of the land. Data Protection / Privacy is still in the process.
The law has to go through a stringent legal process and that is how it is supposed to come out as a robust legal mandate fit enough to find solutions to challenges in the area being addressed, for which the law has been enacted. The efforts hundreds of law makers make or don’t make is of critical value. Does it get the full attention of every law maker, or it just goes through the process. How many of the law makers have put their heart and mind in making their presence felt while the Bill goes through the parliamentary rigmarole. Is party diktat final? Do the law makers match the capabilities of top legal doyens and top judges of the country, who sit there to dissect the law and pronounce verdicts. This is the complexity of the law.
Does the law reflect the reality, stitch solutions and provide the best trajectory in the area for which the law has been enacted? While in Bill stage itself the subject matter experts raise a hue and cry. Undeniably, every nuance of every single expert cannot be factored in but does it fit the anticipated slant of the govt. with domain and legality full covered. Given the complexity of the world today both in the conventional and the new areas, creation of law becomes a world class research, then brought down into tangibles and then put into the legalese format. This whole process has to be objectively and seamlessly successful. Can political thought play with reality? We see successive repealing / amending laws and changing so the called earth shattering directives of the earlier regimes.
The next issue is the language which in itself is open to interpretation. Can the legal language not change to become more utilitarian and less prone to interpretation. The capability to interpret law 360 degrees can in some way be termed as the art of litigation. The result is unpredictable and that is the jig saw puzzle the country is in. Same sections invoked and with exactly the same evidence, there are different judgments. When facts and the law are the same, the myriad results and the intertwined process leading to it is called legal imbroglio. Most of issues have roots there. We are neck deep into it already, hope we don’t end up there.
LAWS ARE TO SMOOTHEN LIFE, NOT TO MESS WITH IT.