Resolution against LS Speaker to save Constitution, dignity of House: Cong's Gogoi
New Delhi (PTI): Congress MP Gaurav Gogoi on Tuesday said the opposition was compelled to bring a resolution for Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla's removal to "save the Constitution", as he accused Birla of partisan behaviour.
Initiating the debate on the resolution for the removal of Birla from the Speaker's post, Gogoi claimed that the environment of Parliament has become such that the LoP is not allowed to speak in the House during the debate on the motion of thanks to the President's address in February because the leadership of the country is "weak".
Giving reasons as to why the opposition was compelled to bring the resolution, the MP from Assam's Jorhat said, "We stated that in February, when the LoP wanted to speak on the motion of thanks to the President's address, he was interrupted 20 times by the Speaker, members of the chairpersons' panel, senior members of the treasury benches. He was interrupted in a premeditated manner."
"The Speaker did not allow the LoP to speak. The LoP was repeatedly interrupted while attempting to place a few critical issues mandatory to be known to the House and the people of the country," Gogoi said.
ALSO READ: Will follow all legal processes, says Sisodia on Delhi HC notice over CBI plea in excise policy case
He pointed out that Gandhi wanted to speak about former army chief MM Naravane's remarks in his unreleased book, in which he reportedly talked about taking direction from the political leadership and the country's "mukhiya" told him "'Jo uchit samjho wahi karo" (Do what you feel is right).
At this point, Jagdambika Pal, who was in the chair, urged Gogoi to stick to the reasons for bringing the resolution against Birla.
Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju intervened, saying this was a discussion on the Speaker, and if the opposition is talking of other issues, they should not interrupt when "we reply".
Gogoi claimed that if a research of transcripts was done, Rijiju would be found to interrupt opposition members most often.
Home Minister Amit Shah then quipped that it is true that Rijiju has interrupted the most, but there has never been an opposition like the current one.
After several interruptions, Gogoi resumed his speech and said that Rahul Gandhi, in February, wanted to raise the issue of the ongoing investigation in the US against a businessman, which also mentions a minister, but was not allowed.
Gandhi also wanted to talk about the trade deals between the EU and the US with India. "He (Gandhi) asked what made India rush into a deal (with the US) and make concessions to the US that would be detrimental to our farmers," Gogoi said.
"When the leader of the opposition wanted to bring critical issues to light, the Speaker demanded authentication, and the LoP agreed to do so. However, treasury benches repeatedly opposed it and did not allow the LoP to speak," Gogoi said.
Earlier, the Congress MP cited the case of Nabam Rebia versus the deputy speaker, to state that the Supreme Court had said that the Speaker is expected to have a "sense of elevated independence, impeccable objectivity, irreproachable fairness and above all absolute impartiality".
"I want to ask, the Speaker set up the panel of chairpersons. But who decided who would preside over the proceedings on the resolution for the removal of the Speaker? Who appointed Jagdambika Pal ji to preside?" Gogoi asked.
He said all members have good relations with Birla on a personal level, and that is why the opposition members are saddened that they had to bring the resolution. "But it is our responsibility to protect the dignity of the House and save the Constitution. It is to protect the faith of the people in democracy," he said.
The Congress' K Suresh, Mallu Ravi and Mohammad Jawed moved the resolution against the Speaker, after which over 50 members stood up in support, and the resolution was admitted.
The speaker can be removed from office if a resolution is passed by the House by a simple majority. Article 94C of the Constitution has provisions for such a move. Article 96 allows the speaker to defend himself or herself in the House.
The language of the proposed resolution is usually examined by the deputy speaker, but since the present Lok Sabha does not have a deputy speaker, it may be examined by the senior-most member of the panel of chairpersons.
The panel helps run the House in the speaker’s absence.
The opposition resolution has alleged that Speaker Birla acted in a "blatantly partisan" manner in conducting the business of the House and "abused" the constitutional office he occupies.
Three Lok Sabha speakers - G V Mavlankar (1954), Hukam Singh (1966) and Balram Jakhar (1987) - faced no-confidence motions in the past, which were all negatived.
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.
Speaker Khader dismisses BJP's charges of 'delay' in swearing-in of Jeevaraj as MLA
Bengaluru (PTI): Karnataka Assembly Speaker U T Khader on Wednesday rejected opposition BJP's allegations of delaying the swearing-in of D N Jeevaraj as MLA, asserting that the process was being handled strictly in accordance with constitutional provisions and rules.
BJP candidate Jeevaraj, who had lost the 2023 Sringeri Assembly election to Congress leader T D Raje Gowda, was declared elected late Sunday night after reverification and recounting of postal ballots in compliance with a High Court order.
The recount reduced 255 votes from Gowda's tally, overturning his earlier victory margin of 201 votes and reversing the result.
The recount followed an election petition filed by Jeevaraj.
Addressing reporters, Khader maintained that there was no delay in administering the oath to Jeevaraj, who was declared elected from the Sringeri Assembly constituency after a High Court-ordered recount of postal ballots.
“Where have we delayed? The application was submitted at 11 am. If an application is given in the morning and by evening someone says it’s delayed — how is that a delay?” he said, dismissing the allegations.
The Speaker said the matter involved 'technical issues' that required examination before fixing a date for oath-taking.
“When such a matter comes, we also need to examine it and take a decision as per rules. If an application is given in the morning, at least 24 hours must be given,” he said.
Khader stressed that his role was bound by the Constitution and not influenced by political considerations.
“When an elected MLA asks for time, we must give it under the Constitution and law. Can we refuse? No, we have to give it,” he said, rejecting suggestions that he was acting under party pressure.
He also underlined the need for trust in democratic institutions amid the controversy.
“A democracy and parliamentary system must function on trust. Without that, how can democracy be strengthened? Trust is essential,” he said, cautioning against creating suspicion around constitutional positions.
On claims that the delay was linked to the ongoing political and legal dispute over the recount, Khader said the issue did not fall within his purview.
“My responsibility is to act as per the Constitution and rules. I will ensure that whatever is due to them is done as soon as possible,” the Speaker explained.
He said he had already communicated his position when contacted and would formally inform the concerned parties. “There is no delay, nor any intention to delay. I will discharge my duties as per the Constitution,” he said.
Khader also pointed to possible legal complications in hastily administering the oath.
“If I give the oath to one person and tomorrow the court declares someone else the winner, what happens then? Will it automatically cancel? Will confusion arise?” he asked, indicating the need for due diligence.
On concerns that Jeevaraj had lost over two years of tenure, the Speaker said representation was linked to that constituency rather than an individual.
“Whoever becomes the MLA represents the constituency. Benefits are not given to an individual,” he said, adding that issues of alleged irregularities should be examined by the Election Commission.
The remarks come after the Leader of Opposition BJP in the Karnataka Assembly, R Ashoka on Wednesday accused the Speaker of 'deliberately' delaying the oath and approached Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot seeking intervention, even suggesting that the Governor administer the oath if required.
Chief Minister Siddaramaiah termed the process 'Vote Dacoity' by Jeevaraj and said an FIR has been registered against the newly elected Sringeri MLA.
Defending the recount process, Jeevaraj denied allegations of tampering, while the High Court has stayed an FIR filed against him in connection with the postal ballot issue.
