‘Rajasthan govt itself said zero love jihad, 13 conversion cases in 5 yrs… Then why this Bill?’: State LoP

* What is the alleged snooping issue?

We came to know about it (on September 8), just the day before we raised the issue. The Speaker told me, perhaps unintentionally, that two new cameras have been installed. We then raised this issue but weren’t given any response.

It is a simple issue; since long, House proceedings have been recorded on video. And later on, it was made live for the public on YouTube. The Assembly has access to old cameras and anyone in the Assembly can see it when it is live. The Speaker said he has had two cameras upgraded; but the tender for upgrading cameras is still underway — the technical bid opening date was in August — and there is still a few months’ time for their installation. So, the question arises what are these two cameras which he has already upgraded? How can two cameras be upgraded when the overall upgradation work is yet to begin?

Next, only the Speaker has access to these two cameras, he has kept the access with him in one of his rooms. For the remaining cameras, the access is with the Assembly authorities as per rules.

* Why do you think the Speaker has personal access?

If you see the Assembly proceedings, I said adjourn the House for 15 minutes and I will show it (the place where he accesses it). If they were not at fault, they would have adjourned the House, then and there, and for an hour, not just 15 minutes. They would have taken us and asked us to show where the access was. And had I been wrong, they would have taken me to task.

And among the existing cameras, only the audio of the one speaking is recorded while the audio of members sitting on their seats and talking among themselves is not recorded.

But (with these new cameras) the audio is constantly recorded and continues even once the House is adjourned. The most important issue is that only the Speaker has access and the voice recording is on irrespective of whether the House is in session. And both these cameras are pointed at us, one over our head and one in front to cover us. This is 100% illegal. It is not like this in the Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha or in any state Assembly.

They’re saying that is not our private space but we have to prepare our Assembly strategy; we talk among ourselves and decide our issues. If they listen to this, then how can we work? And if we talk with our family (when the House is not in session), then they will listen to all of it too. This is a serious encroachment on our privacy.

* Why would the Speaker snoop on the Opposition?

It is for the Speaker to answer what his intention is. The Parliamentary Affairs Minister (Jogaram Patel) is saying he has no knowledge of such a thing. When he doesn’t know, and the Chief Minister (Bhajan Lal Sharma) doesn’t know and we don’t know about it either, then how and why were these installed?

You (Speaker) are saying you have made them 360-degree; during (former Speaker) C P Joshi’s tenure, the cameras were linked to YouTube. And they were all good cameras that already had a 360-degree view… The information being given by the Speaker in the House is misleading.

* What are your demands?

What has been done is a crime. They are making a mockery of the Constitution and want to do away with democracy. This whole issue should be investigated: whether these cameras were installed against rules, without permission, why they were installed. Why is the government scared of an investigation? It is a very big issue. And if the Speaker himself was listening then he should answer why he was doing this.

* What is your take on the anti-conversion Bill?

As per the government itself, in response to Assembly questions by BJP MLAs Phool Singh Meena and Lalit Meena, there were zero love jihad cases and 13 conversion cases in the last five years.

So, when there are barely any cases, what was the need to bring this Bill? And if they are saying that there is illegal conversion and the BJP governments are bringing laws against it in Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Uttarakhand and now Rajasthan, why not make a law for the whole country since they are in power at the Centre?

Rajasthan has ‘Sarva Dharma Sambhava (equal respect for all religions)’, which they want to pollute and hence have brought this Bill.

* Why do you think the government diluted the coaching centres’ Bill?

The government has been under pressure from coaching centres. Some MLAs were speaking the language of coaching centres and that is why they diluted the law.

Be it the High Court or the Supreme Court, the coaching centres have been criticised for pressuring students, charging a hefty fee, etc. So, this Bill should have been strengthened (as compared to the earlier version), but what happened was the opposite. All the relief was provided only to the coaching centres: The penalty was reduced and the criteria was changed from 50 students to 100 students.

And it also ignores Centre’s own guidelines regarding coaching centres, especially the one specifying 16 years as the minimum age for enrolment.

* It was expected that the Congress would participate in the Assembly debate on various issues, including on the anti-conversion Bill.

We were ready for a debate. At 11.30 am, on the day the conversion Bill came, they did not permit me to ask my supplementary question (during Question Hour), which they can’t do, it is my right. And then we went inside to discuss the camera issue (with the Speaker) but we didn’t get any answer. If they had nothing to hide, we would have received an answer.

* On the Bill to regulate coaching centres, the Congress didn’t put forward its opinion as strongly as it did on its earlier version.

A few of our MLAs were yet to speak but the Speaker came and abruptly initiated the process to pass the Bill. Why were our MLAs not allowed to speak? At that stage, anyone can speak on the issue, whether of the ruling party or Opposition. The level of the Assembly is deteriorating; if the Speaker is not allowing us to speak on a Bill, then what is left?

* The BJP alleges that the Congress itself doesn’t want to participate in debates.

That’s what they will say. But run the House impartially. You are not allowing us to speak, go through the Assembly proceedings.

In the Assembly, BJP MLA Gopal Sharma made comments against Congress MLAs Rafeek Khan and Amin Kagzi (asking them to return to their ‘original religion’). We have moved a breach of privilege motion against Sharma for his comments on our MLAs during the debate on the anti-conversion Bill.

* Why has Congress state president Govind Singh Dotasra not attended the Assembly for a long time?

If there is an allegation against a member, they are given a notice first; things are not said in their absence. But an entire debate was held on him, in his absence, and allegations were levelled against him. And specifically, the Speaker said that you don’t deserve to be an MLA; this was wrong and that is what Dotasra ji’s objection is and that’s why he isn’t coming. It is an insult to the people who chose him and elected him to represent them.

* There is speculation that some Opposition MPs from Rajasthan cross-voted in the recent Vice-Presidential elections.

No, I am not aware of it.