His remarks expunged, Mallikarjun Kharge protests: Criticism of govt doesn’t lower House dignity

In his letter to the Rajya Sabha Chairman, Kharge pointed out that Article 105 of the Constitution guarantees freedom of speech for MPs in the House and there is no convention or provision of authentication of points made in a speech on the floor of the House.

“The institution of Parliament of India is a platform to fix the accountability of the Executive. This necessitates that the policies and the decisions of the government are discussed, dissected and debated on the floor of the House. Any criticism of policies and decisions of the government and their fallouts cannot be construed as an allegation against any individual Member of the House,” Kharge said.

He noted that the Chair had directed him to authenticate his six observations. “Rule 238A of Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the Council of States stipulates that ‘the Chairman may at any time prohibit any Member from making any such allegation if he is of the opinion that such allegation is derogatory to the dignity of the Council or that no public interest is served by making such allegation’. Further, read with Rule 238, the term allegation refers to a matter of fact on which a judicial decision is pending; or refers to making a personal charge against a member,” he said.

But the criticism of the government, its policies and their impact, Kharge said, “can never be equated with (lowering) the ‘dignity of the Council’.”

He said “it is difficult to fathom that in a parliamentary democracy, no public interest is served by criticism of policies and their consequences”.

“Article 105 of the Constitution of India guarantees freedom of speech for the Members of Parliament. In consonance with this constitutional guarantee and rules of the House, a member is only required to authenticate any document that he lays on the table of the House. There is no convention or provision of authentication of points made in a speech on the floor of the House. Any direction or rule of the House cannot subvert the constitutional guarantee of the freedom of speech,” he said.

Kharge also said “there was no personal charge in any of my submissions, as defined by the rules and conventions of the House”.

“Also, it would be an inversion of the system of governance, if the opposition members are expected to carry out complete investigation, gather evidence and then raise the matter on the floor of the House. The arrangement, as I understand, is that the opposition member, or any private member, raises issues on the basis of inputs from media, reports in public domain, or even confidential personal information. The member, after due diligence, draws the attention of the House to such issues and it is incumbent upon the Government to investigate the matter and take appropriate action in consonance with the law of the land,” he said.

He urged the Chairman to “look into the provisions of rules and conventions of the House and defend Members’ rights and privileges on the floor of the House”.

In his speech Wednesday, Kharge, taking aim at the ruling BJP, had also expressed concern over the spread of hatred in the country.

Dhankhar’s decision to expunge certain remarks made by Kharge came a day after Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla expunged several remarks made by Congress MP Rahul Gandhi during his speech in the Lower House.