Shashi Tharoor: ‘No more serious issue in the country than Manipur. How can PM be silent?’

The Lok Sabha faced an unprecedented situation on Wednesday, when the Speaker remained absent from the House, expressing his anguish over the logjam.

Tharoor: We felt distressed by the fact that the Speaker was offended by the behaviour of the MPs. Unfortunately, this kind of thing has been part of our accepted culture of our parliamentary democracy. It started with the BJP when the Congress was in power, when they used to resort to disruptions regularly. Personally, I am not a fan of disruption. But you must understand why the Opposition is behaving like this. There is a colossal issue facing our country — Manipur, where there have been a large number of deaths, 60,000 people were displaced, homes and churches were destroyed, even a minister’s house was burnt down… What could be a more serious issue in our country than this? How can the Prime Minister be silent? What the Opposition has been saying is this: let the PM come and tell us what’s happening. There are precedents, including then Prime Minister Vajpayee addressing the House on the Gujarat riots in 2002. It’s a reasonable demand.

Secondly, when the no-confidence motion was moved for the purpose of getting the Prime Minister to speak, two unprecedented things happened — the government pushed the debate to the very end of the session. It is extremely unusual, because the rule says you have 10 days to schedule it, which they have chosen to interpret as 10 working days, which is not what is said. They have taken full advantage of what, to my mind, is unethical. The debate should have happened before August 5, which means 10 normal days. It should have begun tomorrow. But the Speaker’s ruling is final and he has ruled in favour of the government. What compounds the problem is that they have chosen to pass Bill after Bill in the din, which is a complete violation of parliamentary practices and procedures. The Gita or the Bible for parliamentary rules in India is M N Kaul and S L Shakdher’s Practice and Procedure of Parliament. If you go to page 772, it clearly says that no substantial policy decisions can be taken — and legislation is obviously a substantial policy — while no-confidence motion is pending. This principle was respected during 27 no-confidence motions since Independence. This BJP government passed two Bills in 2018 like this, and now they have passed eight or nine Bills.

I would plead to the government that it is their responsibility to run the House, they should reach out to the Opposition and make compromises with them to see that the House functions.

The government says it has given enough options to end the logjam, but the Opposition has been changing goalposts and insisting on a statement by the PM?

Tharoor: Our stand has not changed. Since the very first day, the Opposition’s position has been that the PM must come. Arguably, there is no more serious issue in this country today. It has ramifications for that state and the country. There are international ramifications too. We are frankly shocked that the Prime Minister did not find it serious enough to make a statement in Parliament.

The Opposition blamed the government for Wednesday’s disruptions, when the former was ready for discussion on the NCT (Amendment) Bill.

Tharoor: This was a classic example of a government-sponsored disruption of a government Bill, which is bizarre by every standard. Whatever be the reason, it appeared inconvenient for the Home Minister and his Ministers of State to come to the House that time. None of them were there. It was clear they were not prepared to discuss the Bill, despite it being listed. We were prepared to have a discussion and the government was aware that we were willing.

You were part of the process of the Digital Personal Data Protection Bill. Do you think the government is keen to see it passed in this session, and is reluctant to send it to another parliamentary panel?

Tharoor: Yes, I was part of the demand for a Bill as a part of the IT Committee. They took it away from me and gave it to a Select Committee, then they removed me as Chairman of the IT Committee. The government was not particularly interested in my views on it. Now it seems that with the Opposition’s strategy, we may not have a chance of presenting our views on record. It will be most unfortunate, because this Bill is something that has extremely profound implications for the people of this country, especially in that it essentially changes the nature of the RTI Act. Plus, it is also going to be facilitating government intrusion into the privacy of Indian citizens.

That’s exactly what the government’s strategy is. They have passed a number of Bills that way. They just do not believe in the Opposition presenting its views or in having a constructive discussion. All they are interested in is getting their legislation passed according to their convenience, and moving on. That I find is an unhealthy attitude for a parliamentary democracy. I am not saying disruption is healthy, but the Opposition is resorting to disruption because it feels it is completely boxed into a corner. There is no give, no compromise nor reaching out on the part of the government, as is the norm.