Jan Vishwas 2.0: Trust-Based Regulation for High-Wage Jobs
Jan Vishwas 2.0: Trust-Based Regulation for High-Wage Jobs
Source: The Indian Express
Syllabus: GS II: Governance, transparency, rule of law. GS III: Economy, employment, regulation
Why in news
An opinion piece argues that after the decriminalisation of thousands of offences under Jan Vishwas, India needs three further reforms: Siddhant (principles of trust), Sangreh (a single source of legislative truth) and Ashwasan (certainty of enforceable obligations). Its aim is to remove "regulatory cholesterol" that blocks productive, high-wage jobs.
The economic problem
• India ranks 128th in per-capita GDP, despite its democratic achievements.
• Nearly one-third of the workforce is in employed poverty.
• The issue is not scarcity of land, labour or capital but their inefficient use. The goal is not just jobs but high-wage, productive jobs.
• China's per-capita GDP is about five times India's, though the two were comparable in 1991. The gap is attributed to the institutional environment rather than talent or work ethic.
• Regulatory cholesterol (opaque, inconsistent, distrustful enforcement) discourages formalisation and traps workers in informal wage work and low-productivity self-employment.
Pillar 1: Siddhant (philosophy of trust)
Six toxic regulatory mindsets
1. Prior approval: Everything is banned until permitted.
2. Enforcing the unenforceable: Rules ignore the State's real enforcement capacity.
3. Process as punishment: Procedures burden even compliant citizens.
4. Compliance and instrument blind spot: Over 25 types of non-legislative instruments escape scrutiny.
5. Writing laws for edge cases: Rare incidents justify restricting whole sectors (for example, drunk driving used against automobiles).
6. Excessive criminalisation: Jail terms are ineffective when cases are rarely filed or prosecuted.
New philosophy: Freedom (presume people are free to act), Necessity (regulate only for a genuine public purpose) and Proportionality (burdens match the harm). This needs a mindset shift among over 30 million civil servants.
Pillar 2: Sangreh (single source of legislative truth)
• Ignorantia juris non excusat assumes laws are accessible. Secret or scattered obligations weaken the rule of law.
• Judicial support:
o Harla v. State of Rajasthan (1952): Secret laws cannot bind citizens.
o K. Srinivasan v. State of Karnataka (1987): Laws must be reasonably knowable.
o Viraj Impex v. Union of India (2019): Laws operate only after proper publication and notice.
• Global models: Federal Register and CFR (US), legislation.gov.uk (UK), EUR-Lex (EU), Statutes Online (Singapore), Federal Register of Legislation (Australia).
• Sangreh as legal digital public infrastructure (DPI): A searchable, machine-readable national platform built through:
o Institutional integration of gazettes, e-Gazette and India Code.
o Legal standardisation through a common legal language, as in Bharat Niti Lipi.
o Technological integration through an open, API-enabled DPI platform.
• Ministries and States keep their own repositories, while Sangreh aggregates and indexes them.
Pillar 3: Ashwasan (certainty of obligations)
• Earlier attempts failed because of fragmented authority, weak technology and design, lack of sustained attention and institutional resistance. The deeper flaw was no guarantee that unlisted obligations would not be enforced.
• Transparency of Rules Act (TORA): Every enforceable obligation, whether in an Act, rule or administrative instrument, must be published on Sangreh.
• Benefits: Legal certainty, predictable investment planning, administrative credibility and less corruption from hidden rules and discretion.
• Sangreh thus moves from a repository to a legally guaranteed source of obligations.
Critical analysis
• Strengths: Targets the real barrier of compliance burden and discretion, and builds on India's DPI strengths.
• Challenges: Cultural change among officials, State-level buy-in under federalism, a huge backlog of rules and circulars to digitise, and the risk that a "no unlisted obligation" rule leaves gaps in urgent regulation. The Jan Vishwas Acts of 2023 and 2025 decriminalised provisions across dozens of central laws; this piece goes beyond decriminalisation.
Way forward
Blend liberty and rule of law, as Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations and the Constitution both do: governments should expand freedom, not constrain it unnecessarily. Making regulation transparent, proportionate and predictable reconciles the two.
Conclusion
These reforms can promote formalisation, productivity, investment and high-wage employment. Replacing discretion with transparent, predictable governance can turn India's democratic strength into mass prosperity.
