{"id":254055,"date":"2024-12-19T01:11:41","date_gmt":"2024-12-18T19:41:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/arunachaltimes.in\/?p=254055"},"modified":"2024-12-19T01:11:41","modified_gmt":"2024-12-18T19:41:41","slug":"dignity-of-lok-sabha-is-upheld","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/arunachaltimes.in\/index.php\/2024\/12\/19\/dignity-of-lok-sabha-is-upheld\/","title":{"rendered":"Dignity of Lok Sabha is upheld"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Inder Jit<\/strong><\/p>\n

(Released 16 April 1985)<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

The Lok Sabha successfully warded off last Wednesday a major assault on its dignity. Full marks for this must mainly go to the Opposition which, though largely decimated by the December poll, showed welcome vigilance and capacity for coordinated action. Not a little credit must also go to the Speaker. Mr. Bal Ram Jakhar, who stood up for the honour of the House in accordance with the best parliamentary tradition and tactfully succeeded in upholding it. All this happened around 5.30 pm when the Minister of State for External affairs, Mr. Khurshid Alam Khan rose to reply to the budget demands of the Ministry. The Opposition leaders \u2014 Mr. Madhav Reddi, Telugu Desam, Prof. Madhu Dandavate, Janata and Mr. K.P. Unnikrishnan, Congress-S \u2013 were soon on their legs to protest that the House was being treated in a \u201ccavalier manner\u201d. It was neither right nor proper for the Minister of State, who did not hold independent charge of \u201cthis important portfolio\u201d to reply to the debate. The Prime Minister had been \u201cconspicuous by his absence\u201d.<\/p>\n

The issue had been raised on Tuesday. The Minister of State was thereafter seen taking extensive notes. It was generally expected that he would brief the Prime Minister and that the latter would reply to the debate. Yet this had not happened constraining Mr Madhav Reddi to assert: \u201cIt is downgrading this Ministry. We object to this.\u201d Mr Unnikrishnan did not stop at merely voicing a protest. He raised a point of order after clarifying that he and other members bore \u201cno illwill\u201d to Mr Khurshid Alam Khan, who was \u201ca very good friend\u201d. Earlier Prime Ministers had taken delight in replying to the debate on External Affairs, which was held only once in a way. Said he: \u201cWe have been complaining in this House that we do not have enough occasions to debate the questions of foreign policy. Here the entire gamut of international relations is decided and here is a Minister who does not hold independent charge…\u201d Major issues required to be clarified, said Mr Unnikrishnan and added: \u201cIt is totally undemocratic. It has never happened…\u201d<\/p>\n

Mr Jaipal Reddy, Janata, then pleaded: \u201cThis is the first opportunity for the new Government and the new External Affairs Minister and Prime Minister to put forward his policy on key foreign issues\u2026 The whole world is anxious to know…\u201d However, the Minister of Parliamentary Affairs, Mr H.K.L. Bhagat, characteristically stuck to his guns and asserted: \u201cThe Minister of State is absolutely competent to reply to the debate. There is nothing wrong in that…\u201d Even as the Opposition leaders interrupted, Mr Bhagat added: \u201cThe Prime Minister has all along taken very keen interest in Parliament. Consequently even in the…\u201d At this point, Mr Rajiv Gandhi was seen entering the House. Mr Bhagat then asserted: \u201cThe Prime Minister is here now. The Prime Minister has spoken on foreign affairs many a time… The Minister of State is quite competent to give reply.\u201d The Deputy Speaker thereupon ruled: \u201cThere is no point of order because, as the Parliamentary Affairs Minister has also observed, the State Minister is competent to answer. I do not think there is anything wrong in that.\u201d<\/p>\n

Fortunately for the Lok Sabha, the Speaker Mr Bal Ram Jakhar entered the House at this point \u2014 Just when the entire Opposition was preparing to stage a protest walk-out. Prof Dandavate then said: \u201cFor your information, I would like to summarise the point of order. Right from the first Lok Sabha to the seventh Lok Sabha, it has been the convention\u2026\u201d Before he could complete, some Congress-I members interrupted and Mr. Bhagat asserted: \u201cThe Deputy Speaker has already given his observation on his point of order. There is nothing in the point of order.\u201d However, the Speaker permitted Prof. Dandavate to continue ruling: \u201cI have allowed him\u201d. Prof. Dandavate then said: \u201cThere is not a single debate on the demands of the External Affairs Ministry which was not replied to by the Cabinet Minister or the Ministers holding independent charge\u2026 This is the convention. You are the custodian not only of the rules but of the conventions of this House. If you in your wisdom decide to say good bye to this convention, you are at liberty to do so. But we won\u2019t tolerate it. I would like the Prime Minister to reply to the debate, which will fit in with the traditions and conventions of the House\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n

The Opposition leaders were soon on their legs to protest the House was being treated in a “cavalier manner”. It was neither right nor proper for Minister of State, who did not hold independent charge of “this important portfolio” to reply to the debate. The Prime Minister had been “conspicuous by his absence”.<\/em><\/p>\n

The Speaker then retrieved the situation saying: \u201cThe Deputy Speaker in his wisdom has already stated that it is not out of order if the Minister replies. But the Prime Minister has come.\u201d Mr.\u00a0 Unnikrishnan promptly interjected: \u201cBut you can correct his wisdom.\u201d Prof. Dandawate also pleaded: \u201cYou can complement his wisdom, Sir. I won\u2019t say \u2018correct\u2019\u201d The Speaker replied: \u201cThe Prime Minister has come and he will explain it.\u201d The Prime Minister then said: \u201cFor your information, I think my Minister for External Affairs is fully competent to reply to this debate. If there are any questions left after he has answered, I will answer.\u201d But the Opposition was not satisfied. Mr. Basudeb Acharia asserted: \u201cThe Minister can intervene but the final reply should come from the Prime Minister\u201d. While Congress-I men interrupted and protested, the Speaker said: \u201cHe will sum up.\u201d Prof. Dandavate, however, refused to take any chance and said: \u201cSir, do we take it that there will be intervention by the Minister of State and the final reply will come from the Prime Minister.\u201d The Speaker replied: \u201cHe will take care of the rest.\u201d<\/p>\n

Mr Unnikrishnan protested afresh: \u201cBut he is holding charge of External Affairs.\u201d The Speaker replied: \u201cHe is right here in the House to look after it. Yes, he will also reply to it. He will also take part.\u201d Mr Madhav Reddi said: \u201cLet the Minister speak and let him (Prime Minister) reply.\u201d More interruptions followed. The Speaker then said: \u201cThe Prime Minister has already explained to you that he will sum up if anything is left from the reply.\u201d Prof Dandavate then clinched matters: \u201cLet it be understood that there is no disrespect to Mr Khan… We have no doubt about his competence. The question is about propriety and conventions… Let it go on record that the Prime Minister will reply and this will be an intervention by the Minister of State. It will be in the best interest of the conventions of the House.\u201d Mercifully, the speaker then ruled: \u201cNow, let us say that Mr Khan will intervene in the debate and finally the Prime Minister will reply to the debate tomorrow.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Speaker\u2019s final decision did not come through on the basis of the exchanges alone as it might appear. Quiet work went into it behind the scenes initially leading to the Prime Minister\u2019s unexpected arrival \u2013 and thereafter on the front Treasury Benches as witnessed from my perch in the Press Gallery overlooking the Prime Minister\u2019s seat. Mr. Veerendra Patil, Union Minister of Chemicals and Fertilisers and of Industry, was seen inviting Mr. Ghulam Nabi Azad, Minister of State for Parliamentary Affairs, to his side and saying something to him. Mr Azad soon walked over to the Speaker and had a quiet word with him. He next spoke to the Prime Minister and was soon back again with the Speaker who then announced: \u201cMr Khan will intervene in the debate and finally the Prime Minister will reply to the debate tomorrow.\u201d Enquiries later showed that this formula was first mooted by Mr. Patil who, as an experienced legislator, felt that the wrong needed to be corrected. He then suggested to Mr. Azad that the Prime Minister could reply to the debate the following morning. This would give him enough time to prepare his reply. Both the Speaker and the Prime Minister agreed and the controversy was resolved.<\/p>\n

Cleary, the Prime Minister was not properly advised in regard parliamentary procedures and conventions. Nevertheless, three points need to be noted. First, he did not intend to go against the established tradition and cause any insult to the Lok Sabha. As he himself told me later, he had asked Mr. Khan to reply to the debate as part of their overall decision to give the Ministers of State full opportunity to handle debates on the budget demands of their respective Ministries. Second, he bowed to the wishes of the Opposition and himself replied to the debate once he discovered that there had been a lapse. Third, he replied to the debate the same evening and did not wait to do so until the following morning as proposed by his colleagues \u2013 and announced by the Speaker. Some newsmen left the Press Gallery after the Speaker\u2019s announcement and missed hearing him in the bargain. But the important thing is that a mistake was gracefully corrected and the earliest step taken to uphold the dignity both of the Lok Saba and the office of Prime Minister.<\/p>\n

Major policy announcements are required by convention to be made first in Parliament. Nehru refused to make any policy statement outside Parliament even a fortnight prior to its session. Parliament may not have been adequately jealous of its privilege. But the Prime Minister as the leader of the House in the Lok Sabha must be clear on fundamentals.<\/em><\/p>\n

That, however, is not all. One unfortunate aspect of the whole affair remains to be mentioned. The debate on foreign affairs or the Prime Minister\u2019s reply lacked any great public or diplomatic interest. Normally, one would have expected the Visitors and the Diplomats Galleries to be packed to capacity to hear the new Prime Minister on foreign affairs. Yet, these were virtually empty. The reason? The Prime Minister had already expressed himself on major world issues through several interviews to both Indian and foreign media during the past few weeks. Doubtless, these interviews have their advantage. But these have undermined the prestige of Parliament now in session. Major policy announcements are required by convention to be made first in Parliament. Nehru refused to make any policy statement outside Parliament even a fortnight prior to its session. Parliament may not have been adequately jealous of its privilege. But the Prime Minister as the leader of the House in the Lok Sabha must be clear on fundamentals. Parliament\u2019s dignity and conventions are as vital as the Constitution. \u2014 INFA<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By Inder Jit (Released 16 April 1985) The Lok Sabha successfully warded off last Wednesday a major assault on its dignity. Full marks for this must mainly go to the Opposition which, though largely decimated by the December poll, showed welcome vigilance and capacity for coordinated action. Not a little credit must also go to […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[16],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-254055","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-features"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/arunachaltimes.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/254055","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/arunachaltimes.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/arunachaltimes.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/arunachaltimes.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/arunachaltimes.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=254055"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/arunachaltimes.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/254055\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/arunachaltimes.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=254055"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/arunachaltimes.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=254055"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/arunachaltimes.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=254055"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}