Lok Sabha Debates Statutory Resolution Regarding Disapproval Of New Delhi International ... on 10 July, 2019 Seventeenth Loksabha > Title: Statutory resolution regarding Disapproval of New Delhi International Arbitration Centre Ordinance, 2019 and passing of the New Delhi International Arbitration Centre Bill, 2019 (Statutory Resolution Negatived and Government BillPassed). HON. SPEAKER: Hon. Members, we shall now take up Item Nos. 23 and 24 together. Shri Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury. SHRI ADHIR RANJAN CHOWDHURY (BAHARAMPUR): Sir, I beg to move: “That this House disapproves of the New Delhi International Arbitration Centre Ordinance, 2019 (No.10 of 2019) promulgated by the President on 2 March, 2019”.” THE MINISTER OF LAW AND JUSTICE, MINISTER OF COMMUNICATIONS AND MINISTER OF ELECTRONICS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (SHRI RAVI SHANKAR PRASAD): Sir, I beg to move: “That the Bill to provide for the establishment and incorporation of the New Delhi International Arbitration Centre for the purpose of creating an independent and autonomous regime for institutionalised arbitration and for acquisition and transfer of the undertakings of the International Centre for Alternative Dispute Resolution and to vest such undertakings in the New Delhi International Arbitration Centre for the better management of arbitration so as to make it a hub for institutional arbitration and to declare the New Delhi International Arbitration Centre to be an institution of national importance and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto, be taken into consideration.” Sir, I hope my friend and distinguished Member, Shri Adhir Babu, he listens to me what this whole thing is about. I will explain to him in detail while responding to the debate, I am sure he would not surely press for the Motion to disapproval of the Ordinance. Our Government is very keen that India should become a big hub of domestic and international arbitration. This New Delhi International Arbitration Centre is basically designed to give the International Arbitration Centre an eminent institution of global importance. I want to just convey to this House that the Government have to spend Rs.30 crore. Since 1995, only 55 arbitrations have taken place. No work was going on. Therefore, the Justice Srikrishna Committee was set up, under an eminent Supreme Court Judge, who had given a recommendation that this Centre must be taken over by the Government to make it an eminent Centre of global arbitration. 16.19 hrs (Shri N. K. Premachandran in the Chair) They have recommended that other proper other arbitration laws should also be made. With that, we had to fast track and convey a good sentiment to the global community and Indian community. I would like to say that we are very serious about fast tracking arbitration proceedings. Therefore, we have come before the house. I would urge the hon. Adhir Babu if he listens to me – that when the debate moves on, he may please explain his point. I will reply to it. In fact, this is one issue. There should be bipartisan understanding for the sake of India becoming a good hub of arbitration. I would request him not to press for it. HON. CHAIRPERSON: Motions moved: “That this House disapproves of the New Delhi International Arbitration Centre Ordinance, 2019 (No.10 of 2019) promulgated by the President on 2 March, 2019”.” “That the Bill to provide for the establishment and incorporation of the New Delhi International Arbitration Centre for the purpose of creating an independent and autonomous regime for institutionalised arbitration and for acquisition and transfer of the undertakings of the International Centre for Alternative Dispute Resolution and to vest such undertakings in the New Delhi International Arbitration Centre for the better management of arbitration so as to make it a hub for institutional arbitration and to declare the New Delhi International Arbitration Centre to be an institution of national importance and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto, be taken into consideration.” SHRI ADHIR RANJAN CHOWDHURY: I do not have any two opinions with you insofar as the contents of the Bill is concerned. So, I am wholeheartedly supporting you because the intention of this legislative document is noble; that I cannot deny. It is commendable in intention but, again, I would like to flag