Editorial
Delivering energy on fast track
Should not circumvent norms of procedures or law
Does one have to throw the normal order of work or for that matter the established procedures of the government, out of the window to deliver something to the people in quick time? And should speedy work necessarily entail bending the rules for which the government functionaries need protection of the law through enactment of a 'Super Law'? That is exactly the impression we get from what the government is trying to do to give itself immunity from prosecution in respect of projects related to quick generation, distribution and marketing of power and gas for the next two years.
As reported in this newspaper on Monday, the proposed legislation will keep the action of the government, related to awarding energy contracts on the basis of unsolicited negotiations, out of the court's purview.
We appreciate the fact that the government is under great deal of pressure to ameliorate the conditions of the power and energy sector. And given that the power generation sector had suffered the most during the almost nonproductive years during the 4- party rule, it feels it must deliver fast to the people on its promise to add to power output, which, regrettably, has not happened as yet.
It is acknowledged that bureaucratic procedures are more often an excuse for inaction rather than action. But why is it that anything that has to be done fast need the circumvention of the normal rules of procedures. Delivering quickly needs quick decision making ability and thinking process that allows for quick analysis, and perhaps also working overtime and with due diligence rather than discarding the laid down system. Our worry stems from not only the possibility of misuse of power but also from the fact that trimming the procedures will invariably compromise the quality which in turn will go against our national interest.
We stress that no democratically elected government can make any of its actions unaccountable to the people through legislation or keep it beyond the scrutiny of the judiciary. And we would like to ask why this law after almost two years of the present regime in office? Why the work in this regard could not have been started sooner? And in any case the government has already entered into agreements to obtain electricity with several companies and even governments.
We would like to make it unequivocally clear that the proposed legislation has all the makings of a bad law. We wonder why a democratically elected government has felt compelled to resort to such a legislation that has many legal loopholes. Being unconstitutional, it runs the risk of being challenged in the court because it purports to take away the jurisdiction of the highest court to look into allegations of government's misuse of power.
Comments