Tags:
Journalism of Courage
Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee8217;s long-running exasperation with the flock of parliamentarians that he minds touches a chord with most of us. He has tried to reason with, shame, coax and bully MPs into better behaviour, out of a genuine conviction that parliamentary democracy rests on accountability. He instituted the telecast of House proceedings to ensure people can watch their representatives in action, and MPs might in turn feel the constant scrutiny of the people. The drop in the number of functioning hours, the inattention and absence of MPs from vital debates that they themselves raise, and most visibly, the theatrics and chaos that hijack precious time allotted for legislative discussion are all issues that plague the Indian Parliament.
And the anguish of the speaker and Rajya Sabha Chairman Hamid Ansari is well-publicised, with the speaker dramatically demanding the burning of the rulebook near Mahatma Gandhi8217;s statue, and recently claiming to have turned the lights off 8220;with shame and regret8221; in the middle of the din over the T.R. Baalu issue it was a power failure. Certainly, cooperation and respect for parliamentary norms would allow a richer, more rational debate, instead of personal attacks, stalling proceedings to register protest, et cetera. But fetishising discipline must not detract from a thorough engagement with issues that concern people, even if these debates are not always seemly or decorous. While the speaker and the chairman have irreproachable intentions in trying to keep the Question Hour productive, there must also be an acknowledgement of legitimate discord, and going overboard with the class-monitor act might also be counterproductive. After all, a Parliament session is not a ceremonial but the live, contentious arena of our political life.
