Tags:
Journalism of Courage
THE thumb rule for any party luanching on a protest action is to know where to stop. The Congress, however, not used to playing the role of an opposition, does not.
After boycotting Defence Minister George Fernandes in Parliament following his return to the Government post-Tehelka about two years ago, the Congress does not know what to do next. Continuing boycotting Fernandes means ignoring all security-related issues. Giving it up, on the other hand, implies a loss of face. The monsoon session of the Parliament highlighted this dilemma.
Commenting on the Congress presence in the Rajya Sabha on July 30 while Fernandes answered questions, Kapil Sibal said the party would not react when the minister replies to questions from non-Congress members. However, the Congress would continue to object to the minister making a statement in either of the Houses since the party does not accept his position in the cabinet. Contrary to this, the Congress stages a walkout whenever Fernandes gets up to speak in the Lok Sabha.
For a while, it appeared that the Congress may lift the boycott following an understanding with the Government. The two sides indicated that the government had agreed to a discussion on the Tehelka issue in the Rajya Sabha as part of the deal. The Congress, according to sources, had agreed to confine a motion for a short-duration discussion under rule 176 by Suresh Pachauri to the Tehelka issue without touching the Prime Minister8217;s prerogative to pick up anyone for an induction in to his council of ministers.
Lok Sabha Speaker Manohar Joshi also indicated a breakthrough to this deadlock. Responding to demands by K Yerrannaidu of the Telugu Desam, Prabhunath Singh of the Samata Party and Vijay Kumar Malhotra of the BJP for a ruling on the opposition boycott issue, the Speaker stated on July 24 that the issue may be resolved 8216;8216;next week8217;8217;.
The following day the situation reversed and Congress spokesman Satyavrat Chaturvedi stated: 8216;8216;The Congress can consider ending the impasse if a discussion on the Tehelka tapes takes place in both Houses. The government8217;s first responsibility is to the Lok Sabha because there are people8217;s representatives in in this House. That is why traditionally, all important matters are discussed in Lok Sabha. So why should Tehelka discussion be only in the Rajya Sabha? It should be held in both Houses.8217;8217;
Parliamentary Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj promptly responded to the demand: 8216;8216;If the official position of the Congress is to have a discussion in both Houses, then we will not have it in either House.8217;8217;
Back to square one, the Congress has now pinned its hopes on another initiative by the Government. Party spokesman S Jaipal Reddy said on July 29: 8216;8216;We are of the view that the Prime Minister has been deliberately and inordinately insensitive to the impasse. We would be favouring ending the impasse if the Prime Minister takes the initiative.8217;8217; The government does not appear inclined to oblige.
The boycott, initially intended to focus on Fernandes8217; reinduction into the cabinet without being cleared by the Tehelka inquiry commission, has itself become an issue. Any astute politician could have seen it coming. A section of the Congress is apparently conscious of the turn the issue has taken. The rest of the party, perhaps, requires more time to do so.
