Maternity bill passed by Lok sabha

                     By Kunj Khandelwal
The Maternity benefit (Amendment) bill, 2016 was passed in the Lok Sabha on 9th March ,2017. The passed bill is likely to benefit 1.8 million women working in an organised sector. The law applies to all the factory establishment having 10 or more employees working. The bill entitles 26 weeks leave for women with first two children surviving and for the third child, the paid leave will be entitled for 12 weeks only. The bill is not likely to benefit the 90℅ of the country female workforce working in unorganized sector.
The bill provides with a 26 weeks leave which a mother can take eight weeks before the due date of delivery while the remaining after that, in case a women expects a third child, she can take a maximum of 6 weeks leave before the delivery. The amended bill includes a provision of paid maternity leave for women who adopts a child aged 3 months or less or a child commissioned through surrogacy a duration for such paid leave will be for 12 weeks.
The bill also propose for the establishment of a child care center for a company of 50 or more employees and also may give the facility to work from home if the nature of the work permits.
The Central civil services leave rules 1997 also provides man a 15 days paid leave for all government employees and a leave for week or two in private sector. Few companies even offer men a paid leave for 6 weeks during such period.
The bill was introduced by ministry of labour & employment.

Demonitisation of old notes : proposed law

The Specified Bank Notes (Cessation of Liabilities) Bill, 2017,being discussed in Parliament. The main aim of the bill was to replace the ordinance promulgated on December 30,2016 by the central government to remove Reserve Bank of India's liability and government's guarantee to honour old notes of Rs 500 & RS 1000 notes which were demonetised on November 8,2016. In light of this the provision of this act has been explained.

According to the proposed bill and under the RBI Act, 1934, RBI is responsible for issuing currency notes, and is liable to repay the holder of a note upon demand.  The Bill states that, from December 31, 2016, RBI would no longer be liable to repay holders of old notes of Rs 500 and Rs 1,000, the value of these notes.Further, the old notes will no longer be guaranteed by the central government.

The bill also provides with a restriction from holding old notes i.e a person is not allowed to keep the old currency with him. It exempts some people from this prohibition including: (i) a person holding up to 10 old notes (irrespective of denomination), and (ii) a person holding up to 25 notes for the purposes of study, research or numismatics (collection or study of coins or notes). If a person further holds the old notes, except in the circumstances mentioned above, will be punishable with a fine: (i) which may extend to Rs 10,000, or (ii) five times the value of notes possessed, whichever is higher.

The proposed bill has certain loop holes as :

No window to deposit old notes before imposing penalty:  The notification of November 8^th allowed old currency notes to be deposited till December 30, 2016 and specified that people unable to deposit them till this date would be given an opportunity later.  However, the Ordinance which came into force on December 31, 2016 made it an offence to hold old currency notes from that day onwards and imposed a penalty.  This overnight change did not provide a window for a person holding the notes on that day to exchange or deposit them.  Therefore, not only did the holder lose the monetary value of the notes but he was also deemed to have committed an offence.  This implies that a person who had the notes did not have an opportunity to avoid committing an offence and attracting a penalty.

Unclear purpose behind penalty on possessing old notes:  The purpose and the objective behind imposing a penalty for the possession of old currency notes is unclear.  One may draw a comparison between holding an invalid currency note, and an expired cheque since both these instruments are meant to complete transactions.  Currently, a cheque becomes invalid three months after being issued.  However, holding multiple expired cheques does not attract a penalty.

The government has specified a grace period under the Bill to allow: (i) Indian residents who were outside India between November 9, 2016 to December 30, 2016 to deposit these notes till March 31, 2017, and (ii) non-residents who were outside India during this period to deposit notes till June 30, 2017.  The government may exempt any other class of people by issuing a notification.  In addition, RBI has permitted foreign tourists to exchange Rs 5,000 per week.  No other person can exchange or deposit old notes after December 30, 2016.

This the topic of debate whether the proposed bill harms the constitutional norms.While the notification issued on November 8 specified that after December 30, 2016, any person unable to exchange or deposit old notes would be allowed to do so at specified RBI offices, the Bill does not provide such a facility except in the circumstances discussed above.On may question whether this violates Article 300A of the Constitution, which states that no person will be deprived of his property except by law.  Though this Bill will be a “law”, one may want to think about whether its provisions meet the standards of due process and are not arbitrary.

by Kunj Khandelwal

Surrogacy bill bans single parents

 

The Union cabinet approved the surrogacy regulation bill 2016 passed by the union cabinet last august which now prevents single parents to have a child through surrogacy. A per the recent reports the doctors says many practioners have stopped doing surrogacy for single men,women and gay couples.

Recently Producer-director Karan Johar, who became father to twins through surrogacy on Sunday, could be among the last of single men and women who can do so, as the Surrogacy (Regulation) Bill, 2016 passed by the Union Cabinet in August last year bans single men, women and gay couples from opting for surrogacy.
The draft Bill, currently pending with the parliamentary committee, also puts an end to commercial surrogacy and allows it only in an altruistic form without any monetary benefit to the surrogate mother, who has to be a blood relative.
Mr. Johar’s babies were delivered at Masrani Hospital in Andheri, while the surrogacy procedure was carried out by in-vitro fertilization (IVF) specialist Dr. Jatin Shah, who runs a clinic on Grant Road. Dr. Shah is one of the few IVF specialists who continue to carry out surrogacy for single parents; most doctors have discontinued doing so after the draft Bill was passed. In fact, the last such surrogacy was carried out for actor Tusshar Kapoor, who became father of a boy in June 2016.


According to the draft Bill, only a blood relative aged 25 to 35 years can become a surrogate. The woman also has to be married and should have a child of her own. Doctors say there are so many limitations in the Bill that surrogacy will practically disappear when it comes into place.
The law not only bans singles and homosexuals from having surrogate children, it also makes it difficult for heterosexual couples with medical indication for surrogacy. “How many of your blood relatives will opt to carry out a pregnancy for you? Especially in the age group of 23 to 35? The government is forcing intending parents to go abroad for the procedure. Those who can afford it, like Karan Johar, can do it but lakhs of Indian couples who don’t have the money are going to suffer,” said Dr. Nayana Patel, a surrogacy specialist from Anand, Gujarat. She added that intending parents will head to the US, Ukraine and Georgia, where it is legal. “India had an opportunity to be a world leader in this field. Instead, the government has taken a regressive step with the draconian law,” said Dr Patel.
Doctors say the law will send surrogacy underground, and there will always be possibilities of blackmail within families. “Just like it used to happen with organ donation, what is the guarantee that mothers-in-law or other vulnerable women in the family will not be emotionally blackmailed into this?” a doctor said, adding that instead of banning commercial surrogacy, the government could have worked towards regularising it. They also said a large percentage of surrogacies are medically intended, while cases of single men or women are negligible.

The draft Bill also bans egg donation. In the cases of Mr. Kapoor and Mr. Johar, while the sperm was their own, a donor egg was used. Doctors say donor eggs are required for heterosexual couples as well. There are many women who have low quality eggs, due to which they are unable to conceive. In such cases, we use the husband’s sperm and a donor egg.The proposed bill has alot of loop holes which need to be checked through a proper body and also to regularise the commercial surrogacy and its misuse

 by Kunj Khandelwal