NEW DELHI, Aug 30: Amid frequent run-ins between the Chair and opposition leaders in both Houses of Parliament, Congress MP Manish Tewari stressed the need for deep-seated Parliamentary reforms and called for considering even having presiding officers from the “apex judiciary” on a temporary basis.
Tewari said such run-ins were unfortunate and a reflection of the need to revisit the role of presiding officers in a democratic system.
“So essentially you have the Speaker of the Lok Sabha who is from a particular political party and if he has to get re-elected, he has to again seek a ticket from that particular political party. Howsoever objective and impartial you might try to be, there is a natural instinct of self survival if I can put it very mildly which tends to propel you to lean in critical moments in a particular direction,” Tewari told PTI.
In the United Kingdom, he said, the outgoing speaker is not subject to a re-election in terms that nobody puts up a candidate against him or her -– freeing him from the stains of being partial — which is an unwritten convention that facilitates a far more impartial role as the arbiter or Parliamentary proceedings.
“Unfortunately, we haven’t had those conventions in India. So under those circumstances time has come to revisit the entire manner in which the presiding officers are elected or selected. Maybe the time has come to pierce the Chinese wall and really think about having presiding officers from the apex judiciary on secondment for a particular period of time,” Tewari said.
“Everybody has the highest respect for the chair but coupled with that also is the imperative of being allowed the space to be able to articulate your point of view freely and fearlessly,” the three-time MP said.
Tewari’s remarks come amid repeated standoffs between the Chair and the opposition MPs in both Houses of Parliament.
In the last Monsoon session, there were reports that the opposition was considering bringing a resolution for the removal of Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar, the default Chairman in Rajya Sabha, citing his “partisan approach”.
Asked about disruption rather than debate being the norm in Parliament, Tewari said disruption is not a phenomenon which is confined to the past 10 years.
“I remember that between 2004 and 2014 (during the UPA Government) this was more the norm than the exception and entire sessions of Parliament were wiped out. Under those circumstances, it is unfortunate but the Indian parliamentary system has been traveling down that road for a very long time,” he said.
“To my mind, I have always held this view that if we keep going down this road, we will make legislative institutions irrelevant to India’s democratic discourse,” Tewari told PTI.
The Chandigarh MP also asserted that the responsibility of running Parliament is not of the Opposition and lies squarely with the Government.
“Parliament is not only to transact Government business. There are people’s issues which need to be articulated and I have once in an informal conversation told one of the presiding officers.
“Ultimately what is it all about? It is all about the opposition wanting space to articulate their views so everyday from 6-9 PM in the evening, at least three days in a week, why don’t you allow a rule 193 discussion and which the joint opposition agrees to,” Tewari said.
“Therefore if you have three rule 193 discussions in the Lok Sabbha in a week between 6-9 PM in the evening, the opposition would have found its space,” he said.
Tewari said there was a time in 1952 when Parliament used to meet 150 odd days in a year which has come down to 55 days, the Congress leader said.
“The biggest problem is that the anti-defection law, which is actually a well-intentioned law to try and curb the menace of defections, has failed to do that but has sucked democracy out of legislative institutions. No longer members of Parliament and members of legislative assemblies are free to exercise their conscience,” he said.
Tewari pointed out that he keeps moving a private member bill almost every session that seeks to strike a balance between stability which the anti-defection law seeks to bring, and which it has failed in bringing, and the space for legislators or parliamentarians to articulate their point of view. (PTI)
Follow our WhatsApp channel
