New Delhi: The Narendra Modi government, which last month brought an ordinance to extend the tenure of the heads of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), disregarding both parliament and a recent Supreme Court order, on Thursday pushed through with two Bills despite strong objection by Opposition leaders.The Delhi Special Police Establishment (Amendment) Bill and the Central Vigilance Commission (Amendment) Bill were passed in the Lok Sabha, replacing the ordinances that were brought on November 14.Union minister of state Jitendra Singh said these Bills seek to extend the tenure of the two agency chiefs to five years.The Bills provide that the tenure of the two agency chiefs can be extended for one year, three times, after the completion of two years in office. Prior to the ordinance, both the posts had a fixed tenure of two years.Singh said that the government would still not enjoy the liberty to grant extensions and that a selection committee, which appoints these officers, would also look into the extensions. However, the Opposition decried the move, terming it “arbitrary” and “against the Constitution”.Also read: With ED, CBI Ordinance, Centre Ups Its Game for ‘Fourth Gen Warfare’ Within Civil SocietyWhat did the Opposition say?During the discussion on the Bill, Congress leader of the House Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury charged that the government was promoting a “culture of subservience” and that its intent was “ominous”. He also urged that the government should “not tinker with this premier investigation agency only to serve the baritone and parochial interest of this present dispensation.”Another Congress leader Manish Tewari, too, accused the two Bills of being “arbitrary, capricious and a colourable exercise of power”. An advocate by profession, Tiwari also cautioned that on becoming law, these Bills “will not only fall foul of the Supreme Court judgment in the Jain Hawala case, but there are larger issues also with regard to the legality of the CBI, as also the Delhi Special Police, which has the anti-corruption remit.”He was referring to the Supreme Court direction in the Vineet Narain vs Union of India case, which is better known as the Jain Hawala case, in which the apex court had fixed the minimum tenure of CBI and ED directors at two years.Tiwari also accused the Union government of weakening the institutions and claimed that “over the past year, this government has made every attempt to dismantle the system of checks and balances that are intrinsic to our constitutional scheme. These Bills are yet another milestone in that direction.”The reason behind the apex court ruling to fix the tenure at two years for these posts was “to ensure that the heads of these organisations are insulated from any type of government interference, and moreover, ensure that the hierarchies of these organisations do not get disturbed. People who are qualified to hold these positions also get a chance”.Also read: Rahul Gandhi Asks for Compensation, Jobs for Families of Farmers Who Died During ProtestsBut, these Bills seek to “subordinate what the Supreme Court had contemplated to be an independent and autonomous organisation, which will be completely subservient to the government,” he said.By having the power to grant one-year-extensions, he insisted, the government will be “dangling a carrot before the officers” at the end of their two-year term. It is as if “the government is telling these officers ‘do as we say and get extensions’,” he added.Trinamool Congress leader Sougata Roy shared a similar view as he termed the Bills “mala fide”. He said the move was aimed at enticing officers. “These are like hanging carrots before the donkeys heading these agencies. This is a clear violation of all principles of the Constitution.”A barrister-at-law and AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi also termed the two Bills an “audacious attempt to undermine the Supreme Court judgment”.He further said that the government deliberately brought the ordinance and the legislation to overcome the impact of the apex court judgment of September this year in which it had said that no further extension can be given to the present ED director S.K. Mishra.He also said the issue would impact the independence of investigating agencies and cautioned that “fixed tenure cannot be on the whims and desires of the present prime minister”. Recalling the SC’s observations in the matter, he said, “The CBI was called the ‘caged parrot’ by the honourable court’s observation, but this ordinance wants to take away the vocal cords of the CBI.”Supriya Sule of the Nationalist Congress Party demanded to know how the two legislations would result in “good governance, transparency and integrity” and how they would lead to creating “a robust process”.When Singh answered that “everything has a process” and there needs to be a start, Sule said that she sees no merit in how replacing the two-year-formula with the one-plus-one year would work. She added that the Bills made the government appear “vindictive and not transparent”.Communist Party of India (CPI) leader A. Raja also opposed the Bill, saying it would lead to “political interference” in the working of the two agencies and make the posts of their chiefs “positions for loyal returns”.While most Opposition parties opposed the Union government’s move, it received the support of the Janata Dal (United) and the Rashtriya Loktantrik Party.