E.Bat-Uul: Livestock may lose special state protection
Is the present provision indicating that livestock is under state protection likely to be included for amendment?
The Great Ikh Khural deputies, 70% of whom were herders, took part in the discussions that led to the adoption of the Constitution in 1992. They wanted the present provision and that is why it is there. However, things have changed in the last 18 years and there is a growing demand for herds to be privatized. The existing provision is also seen as clashing with the 16th Chapter of the Constitution that calls for no differentiation by category and type among items seen as property. This does not allow livestock, as just one of many types of property, to claim special state protection. The present heavy punishment for livestock theft is justified by it being an offense against the state, so much so that R.Rash has said animals have more security than human beings in Mongolia.
Another likely conflict may arise if someone were to say that livestock cannot be exported as it enjoys state protection.
What is the main feature of the procedures now proposed?
We want to make sure that the Constitution cannot be amended because of political expediency.
Does this mean the previous amendments, widely seen as taken under selfish political pressure, will themselves be amended now?
This cannot be ruled out as the previous seven amendments have indeed attracted much criticism. There is no need to take any hurried decision. It is true that the proposals rule out any amendment in the six-month period before an election, but there will be enough time for amendments after the law is passed as the next election is only in 2012.
0 Response to "E.Bat-Uul: Livestock may lose special state protection"
Post a Comment