House in order

Rajya Sabha chairperson Bhairon Singh Shekhawat8217;s rejection of Natwar Singh8217;s privilege motion against the prime minister is a reassuring intervention in a week of political fuss signifying stunningly little. Over the last few days, parliamentarians resolutely latched on to the wrong end of the Pathak report. Opposition MPs worked themselves into an unlovely lather over its leakage before it could be tabled in the House. They forced repeated adjournments of Parliament. They refused to address the substance of the report. Shekhawat8217;s firm decision will hopefully deflate much of this righteous posturing. It must also restore the matter of the leakage to its real place in the whole fracas 8212; as a procedural issue that is secondary, surely, to the vital political questions that l8217;affaire Natwar places in the public domain.

That the issue of parliamentary privilege so completely overwhelmed the content of the Pathak report wasn8217;t incidental, perhaps. It has to do with an unmistakable zealousness our parliamentarians have been known to display on such matters. The powers, privileges and immunities of the Indian Parliament are not properly codified and MPs have often manipulated this fuzziness to their advantage. While the people8217;s representatives need to be assured of the freedom to fearlessly perform their job in the highest forum of debate in the country, and they ought to be vigilant against any encroachments, this immunity must not be used to insulate themselves from public scrutiny or criticism. The several face-offs between the legislature and judiciary on this account have only underlined the worry: a kind of institutional petulance, an unflattering touchiness, may be settling over the House, undermining its dignity and sobriety.

In the pause that Shekhawat8217;s decision brings, some serious thought must be given to the matter of codifying parliamentary privilege. Its vagueness must go. But, more importantly, MPs across the political divide, and especially those who occupy the Opposition benches, must rethink their priorities. Which is more important 8212; the suspected slight to them or the repeated failure of their institution to frame and to debate political issues of national concern?