Karnataka Governor gives nod to Greater Bengaluru Governance bill
The Bill proposes the creation of multiple municipal corporations (upto 10) to enhance decentralised governance, improve infrastructure, and ensure participatory and responsive administration.
The GBA, chaired by the Chief Minister, will oversee and coordinate development across these corporations and parastatal agencies. The Bill also aims to empower ward committees and enhance political accountability.
It faced significant opposition during its passage in the Karnataka Legislative Assembly and Council. BJP and JD(S) legislators staged walkouts, arguing that it violates the 74th Constitutional Amendment Act, which emphasises devolving power to urban local bodies.
Critics claim the Bill centralises authority under the state government, particularly through the GBA, potentially undermining local self-governance.
The Governor had previously returned the Bill on March 26, seeking clarifications due to legal and public interest concerns raised by citizens' groups and urban governance experts. These concerns included potential interference with elected local bodies and insufficient
stakeholder consultation.
The assent is likely to further delay BBMP elections, as the restructuring process will require delimitation and administrative reorganisation. This has raised concerns among local people about prolonged delays in local representation.
The Congress government, however, justifies the breaking of BBMP into smaller corporations for better management of civic services.
Currently, one Mayor oversees the entire Bengaluru, making decision-making slow and less representative and the Congress administration believes that multiple city corporations would allow more localized leadership. The Bill also introduced heritage conservation regulations, categorising buildings into three grades, with different levels of protection.
While the Bill allows the establishment of ward committees and city corporations to have independent budgets, the state government retains the power to appoint or remove commissioners in these corporations, making them dependent on state directors.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
a minute ago
- The Hindu
Protection against misuse: on POCSO Act, adolescent sex
The key objective of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 is the protection of children, but over the past few years, courts around the country and rights activists have called for some exemptions. Noticing a trend that adolescents, above 15 years but under 18, in voluntary relationships and having consensual sex were often being persecuted, the courts sought a review. In that backdrop, senior advocate Indira Jaising's written submission to the Supreme Court that consensual sex between teenagers aged 16-18 years must not be criminalised is a welcome move. She was appointed amicus curiae and her submissions are part of a petition filed by advocate Nipun Saxena. Her brief challenged the designation of 18 years as the age of consent. She said the only solution lies in declaring that sex between consenting adolescents between the age of 16, an almost universal age of sexual maturity, and 18, is not a form of 'abuse'. Ms. Jaising called for this exception to be read into the POCSO Act and Section 63 (sexual offences), of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). 'Such an exception would preserve the protective intent of the statute while preventing its misuse against adolescent relationships that are not exploitative in nature,' she said. In a 2023 report, the Law Commission had said that it was against changing the age of consent. It advised 'guided judicial discretion' instead, while sentencing in cases that involve children between 16 and 18 years in a voluntary, consensual relationship. Under the POCSO Act and under several provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the BNS, whoever commits a penetrative sexual assault on a child — who is anyone below 18 years — can face stringent punishment under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, Section 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, and provisions of the IPC and BNS. A 16-year-old is considered a 'child' under Section 2(d) of the POCSO Act and hence her consent does not matter. But caveats have to be put in place so that the broad intent of the law is adhered to, as the Madras High Court suggested in 2021, in Vijayalakshmi vs State Rep. The High Court said the age difference in consensual relationships should not be more than five years to ensure that a girl of an impressionable age is not taken advantage of by an older person. Educating adolescents about the law on sexual offences and its consequences is a must too. Criminalising normal adolescent behaviour is not the way to protect against non-consensual, exploitative sexual offences.
Time of India
a minute ago
- Time of India
Parliament to Debate Operation Sindoor; BJP, Congress Trade Barbs Ahead of Clash
As Parliament prepares to discuss Operation Sindoor, political tempers are rising. While the BJP asserts that the government has shown transparency by accepting the opposition's demand for a debate, Congress leaders continue to press for clarity on the operation's outcome and the government's foreign policy handling. Union Minister Sukanta Majumdar said the BJP-led government has nothing to hide and welcomed the discussion. In contrast, Congress MPs like Rajesh Thakur and Imran Masood have raised serious questions — from whether the terrorists involved in the Pahalgam attack were neutralized to why there has been no response to US President Biden's claims. The debate promises to be a heated face-off between BJP's narrative of national strength and Congress's charge of secrecy and failure. #operationsindoor #sukantamajumdar #parliamentdebate #nationalsecurity #modigovernment #pahalgamattack #terrorism #monsoonsession #indiaupdates #politicsnews Read More
Time of India
15 minutes ago
- Time of India
Bandi takes dig at BC declaration, calls it ‘Muslim Declaration'
Hyderabad: Union minister of state (home) and Karimnagar MP Bandi Sanjay on Sunday dubbed Congress' BC declaration at Kamareddy during the 2023 election campaign as a 'Muslim Declaration', stating that it prioritises the interests of the community over those of the Backward Classes (BC). Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Speaking to the media after inaugurating a hospital in Karimnagar, the minister stated, "Congress is giving a false impression to BCs. They are only offering an additional 5% reservations. BCs already have 27% reservations, and if the 10% reservations for Muslims are removed, then BCs would only receive 5% extra as part of the 42% reservations." He emphasized that what was being presented was not BC reservation, but rather reservation allocated to Muslims. Bandi Sanjay vowed to block the BC reservation bill, accusing Rahul Gandhi of mocking Hindus and asserting that he was threatening Hinduism. "We don't have a problem with the BC reservation bill if they exclue Muslims in it, otherwise we will stop this. If we don't stop this here, it will become a template across India," he stated. He also mentioned that Hindu organisations across Telangana were expressing anguish over demolition of the Banjara Hills Peddamma Temple. He questioned whether the govt was trying to appease a community that constitutes 30% in Jubilee Hills for the sake of by-election votes. Bandi Sanjay pointed out that many temples, mosques, and churches were located on roads in Hyderabad and Telangana, questioning the necessity of demolishing the Banjara Hills temple. He demanded the immediate suspension of the officials responsible for the demolition of the temple.
