CPM game plan: pin down Govt on technicalities

Apart from the breach of privilege motion moved against Prime Minister Manmohan Singh for 8220;violating8221; the assurance given to Parliament...

Apart from the breach of privilege motion moved against Prime Minister Manmohan Singh for 8220;violating8221; the assurance given to Parliament, the CPIM is planning to tie down the Government on technicalities during the session.

Party MPs have given notices against the Government for violating constitutional procedures and parliamentary norms and are planning to raise these issues on Monday. The first notice pertains to Government promulgating an ordinance to amend the Agricultural and Processed

Food Products Export Development Authority Act, 1985 on October 13 on the eve of the Parliament session.

Veteran parliamentarian and former Kerala Assembly Speaker Varkala Radhakrishanan, who has given the notice, said it is 8220;highly objectionable8221; that the Government has promulgated an ordinance after convening the Parliament session.

8220;An ordinance cannot be promulgated after convening the Parliament session,8221; he told The Indian Express.

Besides, the President had not prorogued the Lok Sabha session after it met for two days to take up the confidence vote in July. 8220;The Lok Sabha is alive and the Rajya Sabha has been convened and it is unjustified and illegal to promulgate an ordinance,8221; he said.

According to rules, he said, an ordinance cannot be promulgated after convening the session of if the session is underway.

Story continues below this ad

Radhakrishnan alleged that the Government kept the Lok Sabha alive for three months to ensure that no substantive motion is moved against it as it is in a minority. Besides the posturing by the Samajwadi Party, DMK members have also threatened that they would resign en masse if the Government does not take any steps to stop attacks on Tamils in Sri Lanka, he added.

8220;What was the urgency in promulgating an ordinance after the session is convened. Heavens would not have fallen if they had waited for four days. They did this because they do not have the required number to pass the legislation,8221; he claimed.

He also questions the decision to keep the Lok Sabha alive and without transacting any business for such a long period.

He also refers to the Lok Sabha Speaker8217;s decision in the late 1990s that it should meet for at least 180 days a year. 8220;By clubbing the Monsoon and Winter sessions, the Government has violated this practise also,8221; he said.

Story continues below this ad

Radhakrishanan has also moved a breach of privilege motion against the PM for 8220;violating8221; the assurance he had given in the Lok Sabha during the July 22 trust vote that he would seek the guidance of the House before operationalising the 123 agreement.