Spread the love

Kathmandu, Aug 11: Lawmakers have raised concerns over revised provisions in the controversial Land Bill after the Ministry of Land Management, Cooperatives and Poverty Alleviation presented a new draft in Sunday’s meeting of the Agriculture, Cooperatives and Natural Resources Committee. The bill seeks to amend certain sections of the Lands Act 2021, but MPs say the ministry has inserted ambiguous language that could repeat the “cooling-off period” controversy from the Civil Service Bill.

The dispute centers on Section 12(6) of the Act, which requires public institutions, industries, companies, educational institutions or organizations to prepare and obtain approval for a Detailed Project Report (DPR) and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) before holding land beyond the legal ceiling. Last Friday, the committee agreed to keep the existing provision intact and shift the government’s new proposal to a separate sub-clause.

But on Sunday, the ministry brought back a provision under 12(6) with more convoluted phrasing. It states that when seeking approval to hold excess land, applicants must submit certified copies of DPR and approved EIA if such reports are required by law for operating the project. MPs said the language was unnecessarily roundabout and unclear, potentially leaving room for interpretation.

Rastriya Swatantra Party MP Ashok Kumar Chaudhary rejected the ministry’s wording outright, saying the agreement was to keep the old clause unchanged. Congress MPs Bir Bahadur Balayar, Pratima Gautam and Shanti Bik echoed the objection, calling the repetition and rewording confusing. Balayar argued that the committee should have the authority to draft the bill itself, accusing the ministry of tampering with agreed points.

The controversy has revived memories of the Civil Service Bill, where disputes over the cooling period provision forced the formation of an investigation committee. UML lawmaker Saraswati Subba warned that unless all MPs signed off on the final text, a similar episode could unfold. Chaudhary also cautioned that unclear language could spark another “cooling-off period”-type scandal.

Minister Balram Adhikari, however, appeared impatient to pass the bill, dismissing MPs’ concerns as trivial. He insisted the language was simple enough and urged lawmakers not to get stuck on minor points. According to him, Friday’s agreement had already been reflected in the proposal, and raising new objections would only stall the process.

The committee will now need further discussions before finalizing the disputed section, as lawmakers remain unconvinced by the ministry’s revised draft.

People’s News Monitoring Service