On the anniversary of the 2001 terror attack on the Parliament of India, the security of the new Parliament building was breached. The government sought first to downplay the incident, probably because the breach was explicitly facilitated by the office of one of the MPs of the BJP. The disquiet among the Opposition members grew because Home Minister Amit Shah, who seems to have an opinion on virtually every subject under the sun, did not deem it important to appraise Parliament about the security breach and the measures taken by his ministry in response. In his shocking refusal to make a statement on the floor, the home minister has displayed what can only be called a willful dereliction of national duty.
Astoundingly, a large number of MPs who were expressing their concern and pressurising the government to give up indifference on a matter of national security have been suspended. The suspensions this week follow an already strong trend of excluding and targeting MPs whose voices have helped focus the nation’s attention on matters of grave socio-legal and economic concerns — discipline and propriety seem a cover. While safeguarding the dignity of the House and maintaining discipline is an important prerequisite of democratic parliamentary functioning, we must ask ourselves what this requirement is aimed at.
Is the claim of being the mother of democracy just a jumla — a flippant and hollow phrase? Discipline without deliberation and care is just abuse.
One of the avenues from which Parliament draws power is the power of self-protection. It is a matter of regret that the Parliament of India has been reduced to a House that fails to take self-protection seriously or worse a parliament that fails in self-protection quite literally.
In a literal sense, this self-preservation pertains to the physical security of the building and the persons working there. This is heightened by the fact that the building and the Members of Parliament are rendered symbolically more important because they represent all of India’s citizens, indeed the nation itself. But in the figurative sense, it pertains to protecting the sanctity of the democratic processes. When senior minister Piyush Goel sought to justify the record-breaking number of suspensions of Opposition MPs by alleging that the Opposition does not want the House to run, he conveniently forgot that Parliament is not bereft of morals. Parliamentarians cannot be expected to unquestioningly submit to the mass production of legislation by the executive without any application of mind.
The dissent of MPs to the unprecedented abuse of democracy by the government and the enabling of this abuse by the chairs of the two Houses cannot be termed a disruption of Parliament. A virtual exclusion of the Opposition by suspension is an unparalleled shameful episode in India’s parliamentary history.
Already the BJP ran parliamentary business with open contempt for democratic values even if they repeatedly faced embarrassment due to shoddy legislation and no stakeholder consultation. The tactics of mass exclusion of Opposition MPs have rendered the entire Parliament of India a chamber of silence, a giant rubber stamp. The Upper and Lower Houses of Parliament (including the well of the House) are not meant to be ritual spaces where everyone must perform according to the prescribed order. The Parliament of India is no place of worship where the priest commands the devotees to bow their heads in supplication.
Everyone knows that the people of India do not elect a prime minister, although the BJP continuously runs election campaigns as a vote for the PM. What is often not recognised, but is important to highlight, is that Indian voters do not merely elect a government, they also elect an Opposition. The Opposition represents the diversity of views among the Indian electorates and is tasked with the important role of critiquing the government and thereby strengthening people’s interest in the legislative and even the policy-making process.
The arrogance of the BJP led by PM Modi and HM Shah has reached astounding proportions now. No MP should not face suspension without first being heard by an impartial and experienced forum.
While the Parliament of India has the power to constitute itself, it has no provision to alter the composition of the House by any measure whatsoever except through election by the electorate of that constituency. Indeed, in India, even the electorate has no power to recall an MP once elected. With this kind of mass suspension, we can see and hear the arrival of an authoritarian state which loves to use fear and intimidation to suppress opposition and maintain complete control over all institutions. If the idea to suspend parliamentarians was to have a chilling effect — discouraging others from asking critical questions and challenging the status quo due to the fear of similar punitive measures, let me convey that history shall judge this regime as one of those who came through the route of democracy to kill the spirit of parliamentary democracy.
No individual should have the authority to dismiss or exclude members from parliament business in a manner that changes the composition of the House, thereby altering its constitution. Doing so goes against the principles of democracy and amounts to subverting democracy. I hope I am not compelled to write another piece soon with the title, “RIP Indian Democracy”.
The writer is a suspended MP, Rashtriya Janata Dal
Is the claim of being the mother of democracy just a jumla — a flippant and hollow phrase?
11
15
23.12.2023
On the anniversary of the 2001 terror attack on the Parliament of India, the security of the new Parliament building was breached. The government sought first to downplay the incident, probably because the breach was explicitly facilitated by the office of one of the MPs of the BJP. The disquiet among the Opposition members grew because Home Minister Amit Shah, who seems to have an opinion on virtually every subject under the sun, did not deem it important to appraise Parliament about the security breach and the measures taken by his ministry in response. In his shocking refusal to make a statement on the floor, the home minister has displayed what can only be called a willful dereliction of national duty.
Astoundingly, a large number of MPs who were expressing their concern and pressurising the government to give up indifference on a matter of national security have been suspended. The suspensions this week follow an already strong trend of excluding and targeting MPs whose voices have helped focus the nation’s attention on matters of grave socio-legal and economic concerns — discipline and propriety seem a cover. While safeguarding the dignity of the House and maintaining discipline is an important prerequisite of democratic parliamentary functioning, we must ask ourselves what this requirement is aimed at.
Is the claim of being the mother of democracy just a........
© Indian Express
visit website
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Andrew Mitrovica
Mort Laitner
Rami G Khouri
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
Nikkei Editorial
