All bills passed after admission of no-trust motion constitutionally suspect: Cong's Manish Tewari
New Delhi (PTI): Congress MP Manish Tewari on Sunday claimed that all bills passed after the no-confidence motion was admitted in the Lok Sabha are "constitutionally suspect" and asserted that any substantive legislative business must succeed the outcome of the motion, not precede it.
The former Union minister also said the 10-day period for scheduling a discussion on the no-confidence motion tabled in the Lok Sabha cannot be used to "steamroll" bills.
The Lok Sabha MP's assertion comes as the bill to replace the Delhi services ordinance is set to come up in the House this week.
In an interview with PTI, Tewari said once the no-confidence motion has been tabled in the Lok Sabha, any legislation or material business brought before the House is "completely in violation of morality, propriety and parliamentary conventions".
He claimed the very legality of all the legislations which have been passed in the Lok Sabha or the Rajya Sabha after the no-confidence motion was admitted would have to be examined by a court of law as to whether they were legally passed or not.
All legislative business transacted after the no-confidence motion was tabled is "constitutionally suspect", he claimed.
On the BJP comparing the 2018 no-confidence motion against the Narendra Modi government and the massive mandate it got in the 2019 elections with the current scenario, Tewari said, "If history repeats itself once, it is a tragedy and if it does so twice, it is a farce."
A no-confidence motion by the Congress on behalf of the opposition alliance INDIA against the government was admitted in the Lok Sabha on Wednesday amid concerted efforts by the anti-BJP bloc to force Prime Minister Narendra Modi to speak on the contentious Manipur issue in Parliament.
Asked about the numbers not adding up for the Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance (INDIA) bloc for the no-confidence motion, Tewari said it was not a question of numbers but of morality.
"What has happened in Manipur and what is continuing to happen there is absolutely reprehensible. There is a BJP government in the state, there is a BJP government at the Centre. Therefore, somebody needs to take responsibility," Tewari told PTI.
He said the opposition expected the prime minister to make a suo motu statement in both Houses of Parliament on the "extremely critical situation" in Manipur and that statement would have been succeeded by a discussion.
But, unfortunately, the prime minister chose to make a very "cursory remark" just before the commencement of the Monsoon session. After that, adjournment motions tabled in both Houses of Parliament repeatedly were not admitted by the presiding officers, the Congress leader said.
"Thus the joint opposition was left with no option but to bring this no-confidence motion to enforce the principle of morality, probity and accountability in public life which must be the sine qua non of any governance," he asserted.
Asked about the expectations from Prime Minister Modi's response to the no-confidence motion, Tewari said the motion states that "this house expresses want of confidence in the council of ministers" and the reason for that want of confidence has publicly been articulated "ad nauseum" for the past one week.
"So under those circumstances, if the prime minister chooses not to respond to Manipur it would be a travesty," the MP from Punjab's Anandpur Sahib said.
On the BJP's contention that in the past instances of violence in the northeast, ministers have replied and not the prime minister, Tewari said the Modi government could have accepted adjournment motions submitted by opposition MPs.
"We had been tabling adjournment motions every day. The government could have accepted the adjournment motions which can be replied to by a minister. The government chose not to accept them," he said.
"Under these circumstances, if the prime minister could speak outside Parliament and say that the developments in Manipur have made our heads hang in collective shame then what was the hesitation and diffidence in coming and addressing Parliament on the same issue," Tewari argued.
Asked whether the bill to replace the Delhi services ordinance should be brought after the no-confidence motion is deliberated and voted upon, Tewari said, "Even (the book by) MN Kaul and SL Shakdher, which I had quoted, is explicit that once the no-confidence motion is accepted by the Speaker, no other business should be given precedence."
Tewari recalled that in July 1966 when a no-confidence motion was brought against the government, the then minister for parliamentary affairs, Satyendra Narayan Sinha, had accepted the fact that once such a motion is before the House, no other material business should be transacted.
Asked about the opposition's insistence on discussing the no-confidence motion immediately despite the rules talking of a 10-day period for scheduling, Tewari said it was for the simple reason that when there is want of confidence in the council of ministers, what is the locus that the government to bring legislations and get them passed in the House.
"Those 10 days are there because if the presiding officer in his wisdom wants to adjourn the House and take it up at a later point in time within 10 days, that flexibility has been given to the presiding officer to schedule the vote of confidence," he said.
It is not a period that can be utilised to "steamroll" legislations or substantive policy matters through the House without any discussion, the Congress leader asserted.
Asked whether the constituents of the INDIA alliance would take part in the debate if the bill to replace Delhi ordinance is taken up for consideration before the no-confidence motion or will they oppose its introduction and boycott it till the motion is taken up, Tewari said that would be a call which the INDIA alliance has to take.
There is a general sense that the ordinance is a "serious assault on federalism", he said.
"According to me, every legislation, important or unimportant, should succeed the outcome of a no-confidence motion and not precede it," the Congress MP said.
On disruption rather than debate becoming the norm, Tewari said while disruption is a legitimate parliamentary tactic, the responsibility of running Parliament rests squarely on the shoulders of the government.
The doctrine of disruption being a legitimate parliamentary tactic was not coined by the Congress but by the BJP's Arun Jaitely when he was the leader of the opposition in the Lok Sabha, he said.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Trump returns from China; terms meeting with Xi as 'G-2'
Washington (PTI): US President Donald Trump returned from a visit to China, describing his discussions with President Xi Jinping as a meeting of leaders of "two great countries".
Trump landed at the Joint Base Andrews in Maryland on the outskirts of the US capital on Friday evening, claiming to have struck important trade deals, including one for China's purchase of 200 aircraft from Boeing, with a promise for another 750, as well as agreements benefiting the American agriculture sector.
The US President reached here after a brief refuelling stop at Anchorage in Alaska.
“It’s the two great countries. I call it the G-2. This is the G-2. I think it’ll go down as a very important moment in history,” Trump told Fox News in an interview after meeting Xi on Thursday.
The Washington Post reported that Trump’s remarks put China on an equal footing with the US, exactly what Xi had aimed to achieve with the visit.
“Over two days of meetings here, the carefully choreographed pageantry and the reciprocal gestures of friendship and respect between the world’s two most powerful men displayed a geopolitical dynamic that the Chinese have long craved and Americans had resisted," the Post said.
Trump told Fox News that the relationship with Xi was important and suggested that China may not resort to any aggressive moves over Taiwan, at least till he is in office.
“It’s not a takeover. They just don’t want to see this place — we’ll call it a place because nobody knows how to define it — but they don’t want to see it go independent,” Trump said.
“I don’t think they’ll do anything when I’m here. When I’m not here. I think they might, to be honest with you,” Trump said.
"I want them to cool down. I want China to cool down," he said.
"We're not looking to have wars, and if you kept it the way it is, I think China's going to be OK with that," he added.
The US President said he had invited Xi for a visit to Washington in September.
“Xi has done something Chinese leaders have been working toward for decades — bringing an American president to Beijing as an undisputed peer,” said Julian Gewirtz, who served as China director on the National Security Council under President Joe Biden.
“Xi used the opulent optics of the visit to make clear to the world that China and the United States are the two dominant, equally matched superpowers. There is no going back.”
Trump’s friendly statements toward Xi and the Chinese people were being amplified in China’s state-controlled media, sending the message that “we’re getting along better with the Americans,” John Delury, a senior Fellow at the Asia Society, was quoted as saying by The New York Times.
It was understandable that Trump wanted to be polite to Xi, but that the American president’s gushing approach “weakens Trump and the US”, R. Nicholas Burns, the ambassador to China during the Biden administration, was quoted as saying in The New York Times.
“Xi did not hesitate to warn Trump over Taiwan. Trump should not hesitate to be frank about our concerns, too,” he said.
Trump and Xi are expected to meet at least three times this year.
The US President has invited Xi to the White House in September.
Trump may travel to Shenzhen in China for the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation meeting in November. And Xi could come to the G-20 summit in December in Miami.
“This is a summit again that was heavier on symbolism than it was on substance — focus on managing problems, not on solving the problems that exist between the US and China,” said Rush Doshi, former National Security Council deputy senior director for China and Taiwan in the Biden administration.
“The way that both leaders talked about the future indicates that this is going to be part of a process that will play out this year,” said Kurt Campbell, former deputy secretary of State in the Biden administration.
