|
|
The Budget-session of the Parliament
ended in a controversy about an
admonishment motion on a former Lok
Sabha Secretary-General for his
disparaging remarks on the Speaker and
the Opposition opposed the propriety
of the motion and the motives for it.
The
Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)
called the motion an “intolerance of
criticism” and termed it an “assault
on the freedom of the Press.”
To ensure that the Speaker and the
Ruling coalition got their point, the
4 BJP members in the Privileges
Committee resigned and alleged that
the ruling coalition had "tampered
with" the report of the committee.
They objected that their dissenting
view was not incorporated in the
report and instead was “hurriedly”
infused into the Parliamentary process
and passed a resolution “without any
discussion.” BJP Parliamentary Party
Spokesman V.K. Malhotra accused the
ruling coalition of trashing process
and rules of engagement of the house.
He alleged that the circulated
document was changed, no discussion
was allowed, and request for a meeting
with the Speaker denied. The BJP has
often characterized Speaker Somnath
Chatterjee’s rule of the house as 'Tanashahi'
(dictatorship). BJP charges Chatterjee
of dictatorial behavior, cantankerous
attitude towards the Judiciary, and
nepotism when it comes to rulings.
Chatterjee had been on a collision
course with the Supreme Court (SC)
over the
money-for question scam expulsions
The Speaker claims that since there is
no specific law to govern
Parliamentary expulsion, the British
law enacted over 100 years ago will
apply. He also points to a previous
case where the SC had refused to
interfere with a Speaker ruling. The
important questions in this issue are
whether the expelled MPs have rights
to appeal, relief during the appeal
process, and
who the appellate authority will be.
In another incidence of departure from
accepted norms of behavior, Chatterjee
visited the Communist Party of India
(M) office in
Punjab—the CPI (M) is a front
group of the
Naxalite terrorist movement in
the nation. In a breach of etiquette
he was also present in a function that
involved Nepalese Maoist terrorists.
He also apparently was present in a
function that released a book on the
“Office of Profit” issue in which he
was one of the co-accused.
Regardless politics, there are too
many issues that this debate brings
up:
-
If senior leaders of the Government
and nation continue to breach rules,
how can we expect laypeople to follow
the law?
-
If two important arms of the nation
cannot collaborate at the national
level (Legislature and Parliament),
how can we expect collaborative
behavior at the local level?
-
Should Parliament and its members
consider themselves above reproach and
criticism?
-
Should the Parliament be sending
messages of intolerance and rights to
curb right to free speech?
|
