Karnataka power tussle: Kharge says issue will be resolved after discussions with Sonia, Rahul
New Delhi (PTI): Amid speculation over leadership change in Karnataka, Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge on Wednesday said the issue will be resolved after discussions with senior leaders Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi, while Chief Minister Siddaramaiah and his deputy D K Shivakumar claimed there is unity in the party.
As the Congress government in Karnataka completed the halfway mark of its five-year tenure on November 20, the power tussle within the party has intensified over a possible change of guard in the state, with a section claiming an alleged "power-sharing" agreement between Siddaramaiah and Shivakumar in 2023.
"The high command -- myself, Rahul ji and Sonia ji will together take a decision on the issue and resolve it," Kharge told PTI, when asked about the issue of leadership change in Karnataka.
As talk of a leadership tussle in the Congress government in Karnataka intensified and MLAs started seeking meetings with the leadership, Siddaramaiah put the onus on the party high command to put a "full stop to the confusion".
Karnataka minister Satish Jarkiholi seemed to back Siddaramaiah, saying he has asked the high command to clear the air at the earliest on the issue of leadership.
"There is no discussion about leadership change in the party. Once it comes up, then we will discuss but there is no discussion about it in the party right now," the minister said.
Jarkiholi said he will seek time and meet Kharge to discuss this issue and to tell him his opinion.
Shivakumar, however, claimed that the party is united and is focused on the 2028 assembly and 2029 Lok Sabha elections.
He had earlier claimed that there is a "secret deal between five-six of us" in the party on the issue of the power-sharing formula evolved two-and-a-half years ago.
Reluctant to comment on the alleged power-sharing agreement, he said he does not wish to speak about anything. "Whatever is there, party issues, we will discuss within four walls. I will not discuss any political issues in the media."
Denying any confusion or existence of factions, Shivakumar said, "... no one should demand anything. There are no groups in the party; there is only one group, that is the Congress. Our group has 140 MLAs."
Accusing the opposition BJP of "trying to create confusion", he said, "They are making comments unnecessarily. All 140 of us are together. No one can shake us. I don't want anyone's offer... I'm a Congressman by birth."
On reports that Rahul Gandhi had sent a personal message to him, Shivakumar replied, "What Rahul Gandhi has communicated to me is not a matter to be discussed before the media."
"Our goal is to win Karnataka in 2028 and to win at the national level in 2029, and to make Rahul Gandhi the prime minister. We will work towards this goal," he asserted.
Shivakumar asserted that he believed in collective leadership as he has worked as party president for six years.
"I believe in collective leadership. I believe in party worship, not personality worship," he said.
BJP state president B Y Vijayendra said Siddaramaiah should resign and declare an election if his party is not able to put an end to the ongoing power tussle.
Addressing reporters here, Vijayendra said the ruling Congress should come to Belagavi for the legislative session starting from December 8 with more clarity as to who should be the chief minister of the state. "Let them postpone the session or if they are unable to handle the situation, resign and declare the election," he said.
Meanwhile, on Home Minister G Parameshwara’s claim that he should also be made the chief minister, Jarkiholi, the Public Works Minister, said Parameshwara had served as party president for five years.
He said, "We (Congress) will require CM Siddaramaiah's leadership, his service and guidance even after he retires from active politics."
Responding to a question about legislators backing Shivakumar's travelling to Delhi, Siddaramaiah had said on Tuesday, "Let them go. MLAs have freedom. Let's see what opinion they give. Ultimately, the high command has to make the decision. We will abide by what the high command says."
On a section of legislators appealing to the high command to put the matter to rest, he said, "Whatever they (legislators) want to say, let them say to the high command. Ultimately, to put a full stop to this confusion, the high command has to make the decision."
Another Karnataka minister Priyank Kharge sought to play down reports that he has held discussions with Rahul Gandhi on the issue, saying he discussed KEO (Knowledge-driven, Economical, Open-source), an AI-ready personal computer, launched recently during the Bengaluru tech summit, and to discuss "vote chori" cases in the state.
Priyank Kharge is believed to have conveyed Rahul Gandhi's message to both Siddaramaiah and Shivakumar, and that they are likely to be called to New Delhi soon for a meeting with the intention of sorting out the issue.
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.
Govt comes out with set of FAQs on women's reservation bill
New Delhi (PTI): The government on Sunday came out with a set of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) related to the reservation for women in legislatures following the defeat of a Constitution Amendment Bill in the Lok Sabha that seeks to provide 33 per cent quota for women in the Lower House and state assemblies.
The FAQs came amid the Opposition's claim that in the name of women quota, the government was trying to carry out delimitation on its own will based on 2011 census.
Here are the FAQs:-
1. Which Bills were introduced by the central government in the Lok Sabha on April 16, 2026?
A:- On April 16, the central government introduced three key Bills in the Lok Sabha: The Constitution (One Hundred and Thirty-First Amendment) Bill, 2026, The Delimitation Bill, 2026 and The Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2026.
2. Why were these three Bills brought at this point in time?
A:- The 'Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam', commonly known as the Women Reservation Act, provides that reservation for women will be implemented based on delimitation after the Census conducted post-2026.
If the government had waited for the Census and subsequent delimitation, women would not have been able to benefit from 33 per cent reservation even in the 2029 general elections as the Census and subsequent delimitation period takes time.
Therefore, to ensure timely benefits to half the population, it was considered necessary to delink implementation of the Act from this condition.
3. What would have been the benefits if these Bills had been passed?
A:- If passed and approved, these Bills would have enabled women to receive 33 per cent reservation in the Lok Sabha as early as the 2029 general elections.
4. Why was delimitation linked with the Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam, and why was there a proposal to increase seats?
A:- Delimitation means finalising the boundary of a constituency. It is essential for implementing women's reservation. The limit on seats in the Lok Sabha was set at 550 in 1976. In 1971, the population of India was 54 crore. Today it is 140 crore. Therefore, it is important to increase seats to 850 in the Lok Sabha. This would enable fair representation of people in Parliament.
5. Was there any attempt to modify the Delimitation Commission Act for political advantage? Would ongoing state elections be affected?
A:- No changes were proposed to the Delimitation Commission Act. The existing legal framework remains intact, and any recommendations of the commission would require parliamentary approval and Presidential assent.
Ongoing elections, including those in states like Tamil Nadu or West Bengal, would not be affected, as elections up to 2029 will be conducted under the current system.
6. What was the rationale behind increasing Lok Sabha seats to 850?
A:- The proposal was based on a proportional expansion approach. A uniform 50 per cent increase in seats would maintain the proportion for all states and UTs. Applying this principle to the current 543 seats would lead to approximately 815 seats. Therefore, the upper limit on seats was increased from current cap of 550 seats in Lok Sabha to 850 seats.
7. Would southern or smaller states have been adversely affected by the new delimitation proposal?
A:- No. All states would see uniform 50 per cent increase in seats. Southern states would not face any reduction in representation; rather, their overall share would remain stable. For example, Tamil Nadu's seats would increase proportionally, ensuring no disadvantage. The southern states currently have 23.76 per cent seats in Lok Sabha. This would have become 23.87 per cent after the passage of the Bills.
Lok Sabha seats in Karnataka would have increased to 42 from present 28; in Andhra Pradesh, the seats would have been 38 from the present 25; in Telangana, the total seats would have been 26 from the present 17; in Tamil Nadu, it would have been 59 seats from the present 39 and in Keralam, it would have been 30 from the present 20 seats.
Total seats in the five southern states would have been increased to 195 from the present 129.
This is 543 seats to 816 seats - 50 per cent increase model.
8. Would states that have controlled population growth face any disadvantage?
A:- No, as the increase in seats was proposed uniformly across states, their proportional representation would remain unchanged or slightly improve.
9. Would the representation of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes be affected?
A:- No, the process of delimitation ensures proportional reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. With an expanded House, the number of reserved seats would increase significantly, thereby strengthening their representation.
10. Was this Constitutional Amendment Bill introduced to delay caste census?
A:- No, the government has already started a time-bound programme for caste census. The process includes detailed enumeration, and caste-related data will be recorded during the population count phase.
11. Why was there no separate quota for Muslim women within the reservation framework?
A:- The Constitution of India does not provide for reservation based on religion. Reservation policies are based on social and economic backwardness, as laid out in the Constitution.
12. Why was women's reservation not implemented in the 2024 general elections itself?
A:- Implementing reservation requires delimitation of seats. Delimitation is an extensive consultative process. It takes about two years to complete delimitation. Therefore, these Bills (including Delimitation Bill) were brought in Parliament for implementing women's reservation.
13. Why was the Women's Reservation Bill introduced in 2023 if it was not to be implemented immediately?
A:- The Bill was introduced and passed in 2023 to establish the legal and constitutional framework for women's reservation. Its unanimous passage reflected broad political support at the time, enabling the enactment of the Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam.
14. Why was a separate Union Territories Bill required?
A:- Legislative Assemblies in Union Territories such as Jammu and Kashmir, Delhi and Puducherry are governed by separate legal provisions. Therefore, specific amendments were required to implement women's reservation in these regions, necessitating a separate Bill.
