Arun Jaitley vs Yechury: From ‘television’ to ‘illiteracy’ snub

[related-post]

Yechury said it was breach of parliamentary privilege if a member’s notice given to the chair finds its way to the government. Jaitley retorted by saying, “Please educate yourself on procedures… Mr Yechury’s illiteracy of rules does not make valid argument,” he said.
During Wednesday proceedings, Jaitley asked if the discussion on the Lalit Modi scandal was giving “Sitaram Yechury a television opportunity”.

“This is the level to which the government is stooping,” Yechury, the CPM general secretary, said Thursday. “This is impermissible. I have put it on the record with the chairperson who said the matter will be looked into. There is no dearth of television opportunities for MPs.”

Yechury said he had not objected Wednesday as he had thought Jaitley’s remarks would be expunged from the records.

Yechury also sought to answer Jaitley’s question in the House about which provision of law Sushma Swaraj had violated that an investigation be ordered against her. “The Representation of the People Act specifically states that doing a favour to any individual that does not reflect any public interest is an act of corruption,” he said, adding corruption is construed to have taken place if there is an act of commission or omission, and this was a “prime facie case of omission”.

Emphasising that Sushma and other senior BJP leaders embroiled in controversy should resign while a probe is instituted against them, Yechury said it is normal practice for government officials to resign if they are being probed. “What applies to government officials and government servants should apply to MPs and ministers too,” he said.

“Debate cannot be a substitute for investigation,” Yechury added, countering the government’s point of discussing the issue in Parliament.