By Inder Jit
(Released on 20 December 1983)
Parliament and its proceedings have seldom caused greater anguish all round than during the current session, now drawing to a close, not only acknowledged experts but ordinary folk are beginning to ask: Is Parliament serving any purpose? Both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha have outwardly continued to hit the headlines. Nevertheless, popular interest in their proceedings has plummeted and is today as low as in the lifeless review of Parliament put out daily by the Doordarshan late in the night under the title: Parliament News. What is worse, Parliament seems to make less and less impact on the executive. Nothing illustrates this more poignantly than the explosive Punjab situation. Unlike at any time in its history, both Houses demanded that law and order be enforced firmly in the state. The Speaker of the Lok Sabha, Mr Balram Jakhar, too, expressed himself boldly as never before. But nothing came out of the entire exercise. The Union Home Minister, Mr P.C. Sethi, merely sat back, presenting a pathetic picture of indecision and helplessness.
That was at zero hour on Monday, December 5 —- three days after Mr Jakhar felt compelled to convey to the Home Minister the strong feeling of the House on Sant Bhindranwale’s provocative statements and to firmly direct Mr Sethi to report on what action was taken. Yet Mr Sethi merely did two things. First, he appealed to the Akali Chief, Sant Harchand Singh Longowal, and the SGPC President, Mr Gurcharan Singh Tohra, to ask Sant Bhindranwale to leave Nanak Niwas and surrender to the authorities. Second, he advised Sant Bhindranwale to surrender where cases had been registered against him by the police. The issue came up in the Lok Sabha again later that day when the House discussed reports about training camps for Punjab terrorists. Members from both sides of the House renewed their demand for stern action. However, Mr Sethi said it would not be proper to discuss in the House the details of what the Government intended to do and added: “These are matters which have to be dealt with at an appropriate level by a competent authority,”
Appropriately, the Rajya Sabha as the Council of States took up the issue the following day —Tuesday, December 6. Leading members from both sides of the House urged the Government to give up forthwith its “policy of drift” and take strong and pragmatic measures to stem the tide of extremist violence in Punjab. Mr Harkishan Singh Surjeet, CPM, seemed to air the strong feelings of the House as he said that Mr Sethi’s statement (in the Lok Sabha) was most disappointing and did not reflect the gravity of the situation nor did it give any idea about how the Government proposed to tackle it. But Mr Sethi again declined to say anything on the members’ demand for immediate action against Sant Bhindranwale. He repeated what he had stated in the Lok Sabha. It would not be proper for him to discuss the details at present. “Kindly leave the matter to competent authorities.” However, he did give one bit of information. Eight first information reports had been filed against the militant Sikh leader since February this year.
Matters did not mercifully end with one angry outburst. The issue came up again in the Lok Sabha a week later – on Monday, December 12 – when the irrepressible Mr Maniram Bagri, Lok Dal, disclosed that the Speaker was now on Sant Bhindranwale’s “hit list” because of his stern directive to the Government for action against the latter’s inflammatory statements. Mr Jakhar told the House that whatever he had said was “in the line of duty” and he was not bothered if his name was on any hit list. He then turned to the Government and observed that anybody who talked in terms of killing others should be caught and punished. The Rajya Sabha, too, expressed concern over the reported threat to the Speaker. The Deputy Chairman, Mr. Sham Lal Yadav, said the whole institution of Parliament was being threatened. He asked the Government to take “strong measures” to ensure the safety of the Speaker. The Leader of the House, Mr. Pranab Mukherjee, assured the House that “all steps” would be taken. When members pointedly suggested “arrest” of the Sant, Mr. Mukherjee merely said the Government would not hesitate to take the necessary measures.
Not surprisingly, Mrs Gandhi is widely blamed for the sad state of affairs, informally admitted to be “humiliating” by Congress-I MPs too. She is both Prime Minister and the Leader of the House and as such is expected to uphold the dignity of Parliament and to preserve its priceless heritage. (At least one MP in the Lok Sabha movingly recalled the time when Sardar Patel, India’s Iron Man, was the Home Minister.) Unfortunately, Mrs Gandhi continues to treat Parliament lightly and has generally been conspicuous by her absence from the two chambers on major or controversial issues. One looked in vain for her when the Lok Sabha, for instance, discussed the Punjab issue on Monday, December 5 following the Home Minister’s prepared statement (Some members, visibly provoked by Mr Sethi’s eloquent silence on specific questions, pointedly demanded a statement from the Prime Minister.) There was no sign of Mrs Gandhi either when the two Houses held a mid-term appraisal of the Sixth Plan or discussed the price situation which does not seem to have created any problem for most Congress-I MPs.
Both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha have outwardly continued to hit the headlines. Nevertheless, popular interest in their proceedings has plummeted and is today as low as in the lifeless review of Parliament put out daily by the Doordarshan late in the night under the title: Parliament News. What is worse, Parliament seems to make less and less impact on the executive.
The Opposition is, however, no less to blame. Their top leaders are equally conspicuous by their absence from the Lok Sabha on crucial occasions. Most of them generally come to the House only on special occasions to make a speech. Perhaps, they have good reason to become cynical over the years. The present Government invariably functions as a brute majority and generally refuses to play the parliamentary game according to rules. But in doing so they show ignorance of parliamentary practice and tactics. Nothing is achieved by raising an issue just once and in delivering a broadside, howsoever powerful. Issues have to be pursued, especially where public passions are roused or basic principles and values are involved. The late H.N. Kamath and Thakur Das Bhargava achieved a lot more through patience and perseverance than many latter day orators. In the case of Punjab, an intervention in the discussion on December 2 or 5 by Mr Charan Singh, as a former Prime Minister, or by Mr Jagjivan Ram, Mr Chandra Shekhar or Mr Vajpayee should have made all the difference. They had a clear notice of three days.
Consequently, Parliament has lost some of its effectiveness and the executive has got away with murder time and again. What is more, truth has often become one of the major casualties. All kinds of statistics and figures were, for instance, trotted out during the discussion on the Sixth Plan and soaring prices. But at the end confusion became worse confounded and few were any the wiser. Time was when facts were sacred and comment free — as in the fourth estate in the years gone by. Today, facts have tended to become free and are often fabricated, bringing to mind the Churchillian quip: There are three kinds of lies today. Lies, damn lies and statistics.” The various price indices — wholesale, retail, consumer and what have you — bear little relation to facts in the market. Every Government makes its own statistical claims in regard to various matters, such as the number of people still below the poverty line. Ironically, no Opposition leader has thought it fit to demand an institution which can give the country objective, credible facts.
Mrs Gandhi is both Prime Minister and the Leader of the House and as such is expected to uphold the dignity of Parliament and to preserve its priceless heritage. Unfortunately, she continues to treat Parliament lightly and has generally been conspicuous by her absence from the two chambers on major or controversial issues.
Our country has always laid store by truth. The Constitution makers, therefore, advisedly opted for satyamewa jayate as free India’s motto. Truth is basic to Parliament and nothing is considered unpardonable at Westminster, the mother of Parliaments’, than a lie told in its sanctum sanctorum. Profumo had to go because he told a lie on the floor of the Commons and not because he went to bed with Christine Keeler. Since parliamentary democracy provides for rule by discussion and consensus, great emphasis is placed on facts — authentic and credible — and every effort made to ensure an informed debate. In Britain, the Government makes it a point to present “Command Papers” considered to be of interest to Parliament whose presentation is not required by the statute. Often it issues white Papers for purposes of debate or consultation prior to final government decision. Yet, a legitimate demand in the Rajya Sabha for a White Paper on the Punjab situation was rejected by Mr Sethi on the facetious plea that “all the facts are known.”
Consequently, Parliament has lost some of its effectiveness and the executive has got away with murder time and again. What is more, truth has often become one of the major casualties.
Many unprintable stories are today heard in Parliament’s Central Hall about the Union Government’s inaction and impotence vis-a-vis Punjab. All this may be fun and one that has tended to add a much-needed sparkle to the dull and largely lack-lustre atmosphere of the historic hall. (Where oh where are the well-informed MPs?) But it raises certain basic questions of vital interest to Parliament and its future. On the very day the Rajya Sabha was agitatedly clamouring for Government’s mind on Punjab, namely on Tuesday, December 6, the Prime Minister reportedly met some of her party MPs informally on Punjab and gave the impression that she wanted the law and order problem in the state dealt with first. She should instead have come before one or the other House and taken Parliament into confidence — something none of her colleagues, alas, are in a position to do. Either we stand for parliamentary democracy or we do not. Mrs Gandhi is welcome to have her reservations. But she has a duty to Parliament —and to an anxious nation. — INFA