Constitute Law Commission

The efficacy of law normally is taught right from the beginning at homes followed by institutions in a formal way. Laws of man in reality make the people afraid much more than those of the God because their punishment seems to be nearest. With this background of reality about the laws, one feels mortified and driven to touch the Achilles heel of the State Government in respect of indecisiveness taking the toll of things which otherwise should have had a smooth sailing.
In other words, it seems unexplainable to deduce as to why even after a period of ten months of Cabinet approval, the State Law Commission is not constituted and continues to be just on papers only. Taking a cue from the National Law Commission and having a dire feeling of establishing a State Law Commission has been on priority of the Coalition Government but it took them more than two years to get the Cabinet nod which looks prosaic on the face of it. Is it not, perhaps ,  too early to comment as two years inaction  and ten months net loss is rather “no loss”when perused in terms of the benchmark of delays and deferments having gained ascendency in the State administration ?
Prime Minister Narendra Modi very often, is articulating about the major cause of red tape or impediments in ease of doing business and even in settling very minor issues, even of day to day nature, because of the existence of obsolete, worn out and over stated laws that needed a fast review to be done away with. In that spirit, our State too is overdue to have a deep peep into the statute book to sort out, with intent to bid adieu, to such laws which were no longer required or which created problems much more than solving any.  Has a cumulative conscientious agreement in respect of who could be the members on the prestigious Commission not yet reached which is the cause of its apparent deferment?
Records reveal that in August 2017, the State Department of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs ordered creation of posts of Chairperson, two full time members, two part time members, one Secretary and one Administrative Officer with the approval of Finance and Planning Departments. We have learnt that despite preparation of the panel of the eligible persons for the posts of the Chairperson and full time members etc, the same has not been kept before the Cabinet for consideration for reasons not known. Because of there being no consensus among the partners in the dispensation, the very proposal has been kept in an indecisive mode.
Coming to the technical aspect of the entire exercise, the partners in the Government are bound by rules, precedents, procedures as well as conventions in a democratic set up whereby the Cabinet is the supreme decision making body and its decisions were to be respected and implemented. By a totally unexpected response to the Cabinet decision, the ones who agreed are now, as on date, impliedly disagreeing. If it is not so, then what keeps them from making the maiden Law Commission functional?
We are also reminded of what usually is complained of law, presumably because of the unusual time taken, very often in dispensation of justice that “Laws are like cobwebs which may catch small flies but let wasps and hornets break through”. To prove this old statement wrong, the State Government must complete all formalities required for constituting the Law Commission and make it functional at an early date.