The monsoon session of Parliament is underway and proceedings are being adjourned. It is assumed that action begins in both houses, during the chaos, the government passes the bill without any discussion and both the houses do not function properly.
The government does not trust the opposition. The demands of the opposition are not taken into consideration. Opposition parties have stated they will not run in the by-elections, but the government is reluctant to comment on the issue.
Both sections are adamant about their role, the government says the country has lost nearly Rs 150 crore due to obstruction of Parliament by the Opposition and the Opposition is adamant about its demands.
It is a matter of concern that Parliament has now become an arena, but the question arises as to whether the full study is now obsolete as there is no longer any MP in the House to have a thorough discussion. MPs should keep in mind that the place to shout slogans is not the parliament but the roads. In a democracy both the parliament and the road are important, but when both the government and the opposition are firm, the question of how things should be is bound to arise.
In the democratic tradition, the responsibility of running the parliament is considered to be mainly on the government side. Opponents are also expected to contribute. Given the current crisis in Parliament, it is not easy to understand why the government has no objection to the demands of the opposition. Opponents are demanding an investigation into the Pegasus espionage case.
They want to know if the Indian government has bought espionage equipment from an Israeli company. The government does not explain. If the government is transparent, it is expected to answer. In the end, what is the objection to the government?
The Pegasus espionage scandal has caused problems in many countries around the world. The United States, France, Hungary, and many other European countries have also ordered an inquiry into the matter. Israel itself is investigating the matter.
So why is the Indian government insisting that it will not allow this matter to be discussed or investigated? An inquiry must be held. The truth must come before the people of the country. If the role of the government is clear, then why is the government hesitant to investigate.
The Pegasus espionage case is serious. Now the case has reached the court. It is expected that the sooner this work is done the better it will be to clarify its role to the government. But the repeated adjournment of Parliament has also called into question the functioning of the democratic system.
Opponents say the government’s intentions are wrong, accusing the opposition of not allowing the government to function. The question is not just about counter-accusations, but about defending democratic values and traditions.
In a democracy, the voter decides who forms the government. In this regard, the BJP-led NDA government has been elected by an absolute majority of voters. He has supported the BJP’s customs and policies. The BJP has the right to work according to the policies that were supported by the voters. It can do this through prudent discussions in Parliament.
But here it is also important to remember that in a democracy the electorate chooses not only the government but also the opposition. In this method, the opposition also has its importance, its place. Opposition groups called for a boycott of the assembly. Opposition groups called for the beleaguered PM to resign.
While opposed to the BJP, both Sushma Swaraj and Arun Jaitley took the path of stopping work. Unfortunately, these two leaders are not with us today. If it were today, he would probably have explained something to the government.
On one such occasion, when the work of Parliament was halted by the Opposition, the late Sushma Swaraj had said, “Not allowing Parliament to function is also a form of democracy.” Earlier, the late Arun Jaitley had also said, “There are occasions when the country benefits more from the chaos in Parliament.
Today, when the financial loss due to the functioning of Parliament is being sought, one should also talk about the benefits pointed out by Arun Jaitley. This advantage is to protect democratic values and traditions. The BJP had said the same in 1995. Then the government was led by Congress.
The BJP did not allow Prime Minister Narasimha Rao’s colleague Telecom Minister Sukh Ram to run the government for several days due to allegations of corruption. Similarly, in 2012, the winter session of Parliament was disrupted when the BJP put pressure on the Manmohan Singh government to demand a joint parliamentary committee inquiry into the 2G telecom scam.
The ideal situation in Parliament is to formulate policies, to pass laws through fair discussions in the right manner in the right environment. There may be political motives behind the chaos in our Parliament this time, but the situation seems to be not limited to political gain. Perhaps the current opposition will benefit from this as the BJP benefited from 1995 and 2012.
Then the BJP government was formed. The question is not only for political gain, but also to protect democratic traditions and values. It is the responsibility of the government to give due respect to the opposition. The opposition was also elected by the electorate. And then when questions are being raised about the government’s intentions, it becomes more important to prove its connection to alleged spying like Pegasus. The ball is in the government’s court, not the oppositions.
(Views are personal)
