Analysis of the four Controversial Draft Laws of Lakshadweep

The Author, Suchandra Mukherjee, is a 4th year BBA LLB student at University of Mumbai Law Academy. She is currently interning with LatestLaws.com.

Introduction:

Lakshadweep is the smallest Union Territory of India, consisting of 36 islands with an area of 32 sq. km. It is a uni-district Union Territory and comprises of 12 atolls, three reefs, five submerged banks and ten inhabited islands. The islands have a total area of 32 sq. km. The capital is Kavaratti and it is also the principal town of the UT. The majorly spoken language is Malyalam because it is very close to Kerala in the Arabian sea. The majority of the people who stay there are Muslims about 93%, and the population is 60,000(approx.). This area is considered very safe, in 2017 there was not even a single murder that was reported in this particular area, so basically, it’s a very peaceful and harmony place where only 7% people consume alcohol.

So, as we all know that Maldives is a very famous exotic tourist destination for the entire world, now even the Lakshadweep group of Islands are also structurally similar to Maldives, but no tourists come there because those arrangements (such as hotels, resorts etc) that generally a tourists will look for are not made. Now the government has decided to attract the Maldives crowd to Lakshadweep, and make Lakshadweep among the most preferred tourist destination in the near future. So, in 2017 an Island development Agency was established, which would suggest what kind of arrangements or changes are to be made to make it a very famous tourist destination.

So, although there are 36 group of Island it is basically divided into 3 major Islands: -

Lakshadweep Island

North

• Amindivi Islands

South

• Laccadive Islands
• Mincoy Islands

Also, there are only 3% of the people who stay below the poverty line, which is very good stat as in India a huge population is below the poverty line, So Lakshadweep is pretty reasonable.

Controversy

Now there are 4 new draft regulations that have been proposed in the Union Territory Lakshadweep that have been the cause of a controversy. Lakshadweep is not the kind of Union Territory that UTs like Delhi or Pondicherry are. Basically, Lakshadweep doesn’t have its own government, it’s managed by the Central Government there is an administrator that is appointed by the central government which manages it. Presently the Administrator is Mr. Prafull Khoda Patel, who has brought these 4 major regulations which have become a reason of huge controversy among the people there. The people residing have vehemently opposed the draft regulations.

The 4 regulations are as follows:

1. The Lakshadweep Animal Preservation Regulation, 2021
2.  The Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Regulation,2021
3. The Lakshadweep Panchayat Regulation, 2021 and
4. The Lakshadweep Development Authority Regulation, 2021

As Lakshadweep is managed by the Central Government so any regulation is first given for public consultation after which it’s finally sent to the home minister after which the final decision is taken whether the regulation is to be passed or not.

The first Regulation i.e. the Lakshadweep Animal Preservation Regulation, 2021

• Seeks to ban the slaughter of cow, calf, bull or buffalo without a certificate from a competent authority.
• It prohibits the sale transport and storage of b beef and beef products
• Penalties include jail term up to one year and a fine of ₹10,000
• Residents view the rule as direct infringement on their culture and eating habits.

The second Regulation i.e. the Lakshadweep Panchayat Regulation, 2021

• Under the draft Panchayat Regulation, 2021, the Administration aims to bar people with more than two children from becoming a member of the gram panchayat
• For those who have already more than two children, the regulation doesn’t disqualify them provided they don’t have further children after the date on which the rule comes into effect.
• The Administration has decided to allow Liquor to be served at resorts on inhabited islands.
• Currently, prohibition is there in all inhabited island, liquor is served only in resorts on the uninhabited Bangaram island.
• Collector S Asker Ali clarified that liquor permits would be given only to resorts for tourists, not for locals.
• Residents have alleged that the move will lead to a proliferation of liquor sales on the island, which had been observing near-prohibition until now.

The third Regulation i.e. the Lakshadweep Development Authority Regulation, 2021

• Constitution of Lakshadweep Development Authority.
• It empowers the administrator, to constitute Planning and Development Authorities under it to plan the development of any area identified as having “bad layout or obsolete development”.
• The authority would be a body corporate with a government appointed chairman, a town planning officer and three ‘expert’ government nominees besides two local authority representatives.
• These authorities are to prepare land use maps, carry out zonation for type of land use and indicate areas for proposed national highways, arterial roads, ring roads, major streets, railways, tramways, airport, theatres, museums etc.
• It establishes penalties such as imprisonment for obstructing the development plan’s work or workers.

The fourth Regulation i.e. the Prevention of Anti- Social Activities Regulation, 2021

• Provides power to detain a person up to one year to prevent him from “acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order”. It allows for detention for anti-social activities from 6 months to a year without legal representation.
• Residents are not sure about need for such a stringent law in UT with one of the lowest crime rates in the country. They argue that it has been brought in to detain those who oppose the administration.

A segment of local residents in Lakshadweep are not liking these regulations because they believe that these regulations will make Lakshadweep a tourist spot which will destroy the ecological balance, where at present more than 90% of the land is forest covered. So, they see this as a threat to their community and culture as well. Further, all these provisions were made without any public consultation. People feel that in such an area where there are such low rates of crime there is no need for bringing such stringent law into action. They feel that the government is trying to supress any descent against them. Thus, they consider it to be violative of the fundamental rights of the people.