Political
Diary
New
Delhi, 19 July 2022
Unparliamentary
Or Gag?
WHAT IS IN
A WORD?
By
Poonam I Kaushish
What’s in word? Everything when it comes to our polity. We
were treated to one such last week. Our Right Honourables re-discovered one new
parliamentary term: unparliamentary.
As Parliament’s monsoon session begins a row has erupted
over a 50-page words compilation unfit for use in
Parliament which would be expunged if used during debates or otherwise in
both Houses. Namely, jumlajeevi, baal-buddhi, Shakuni,
taanashah, taanashahi, nikamma, Jaichand, vinash purush, khoon se kheti, anarchist,
dictatorial, Khalistani, corrupt, ashamed, abused, betrayed, drama,
hypocrisy, Covid spreader, snoopgate and even common word ‘incompetent’ are now
unparliamentary.
Followed by Rajya Sabha notification that dharnas, demonstrations,
fast or religious ceremonies are not allowed in Parliament
precincts. Predictably, this double whammy stirred a hornet’s nest
with Opposition slamming Centre's attempt of “throttling” democracy
by trying to “gag” as terms used by it described “reality” of Government.
Trust
Lok Sabha Speaker Birla to douse flames clarifying dharna was
from 2009 order and no words had been banned. “No Government can ban words in
Parliament and Assemblies. Members are free to express views and no one can
snatch that right but it should be as per Parliament decorum.” Sic.
Worse,
he justified it by saying it was a tradition since 1954 and the latest list
merely compiles words found undignified in a specific context and expunged from
Parliament, various Assemblies records and Commonwealth countries Parliaments.
In fact, many words were considered unparliamentary during Congress’s UPA era
and only 62 words were added.
Interestingly, the Unparliamentary Expressions book,
first compiled in 1999 was last updated in 2009 resulting in many State
legislatures being guided by it.
In
1999 references were taken from debates and phrases declared unparliamentary by
pre-Independence Central Legislative Assembly, Constituent Assembly,
Provisional Parliament, first to the tenth Lok Sabhas and Rajya Sabha, State
legislatures and Commonwealth Parliaments like UK.
Importantly
Article 105(2) states, “no MP shall be liable to any proceedings in any court
in respect of anything said or any vote given by him in Parliament or any
committee thereof”. MPs do not enjoy the freedom to say whatever they want
inside the House. Whatever an MP says is subject to discipline of Parliament
Rules, Members “good sense,” and Speaker’s control of proceedings. These checks
ensure MPs cannot use “defamatory, indecent, undignified or unparliamentary
words” inside the House.
Rule
380 (“Expunction”) of Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha
states: “If Speaker is of opinion that words have been used in debate which are
defamatory or indecent, unparliamentary or undignified he may while exercising
discretion order such words be expunged from House proceedings.” Rule 381 says:
“The portion of House proceedings so expunged shall be marked by asterisks and
an explanatory foot-note shall be inserted in proceedings: “Expunged as ordered
by the Chair.”
Pertinently, the word ‘Godse’ was removed from
unparliamentary words list in 2015 after Shiv Sena MP Nashik Godse requested
removal wondering how an MP’s surname could be “unparliamentary.” Recall, it
was first expunged in 1958 when a MP equated Prime Minister Nehru to Godse,
Gandhi’s assassin on floor of the House and later again in 1962 when another
member equated Godse to Swami Viveknanda. But it is also contextual. A MP
cannot praise Godse, but he can say Godse assassinated Gandhi.
Questionably what happens if a MP uses these words?
Zilch. No action can be taken against anyone who uses these words, there
is no legal sanctity, Speaker has power to expunge any indecent, defamatory
expression, it is not restrictive but for exercising restrain as expressions
are more important than singular meaning of the word.
Does it mean ‘Jaichands’ who are
masquerading as “conscience of the nation” should now be addressed respectfully
as “Right Honourables”? Can we accept our netagan to
behave like true blue-blooded MPs? Will it add to piling garbage heard before
or meet similar fate as other diktats in 1999, 2009 etc: Still born.
Understandable,
in today’s digital age if governance is all about ‘feeling good’ then politics
is all about ‘sounding good’. Many MPs are highly skeptical. “In a country
where principles and politics are two ends of a spectrum, one fails to
comprehend how ‘unparliamentary words’ can stem the growing ‘rot of
moral decay in our polity.”
True,
at one level the row seems trivial as it has run for years without anyone
bothered. But it also points to breakdown of democratic compact between
Government and Opposition and trust loss. Increasingly bills are being passed
sans discussion or debate with electoral hostilities spilling over the House
floor.
Asserted
a senior Parliament watcher, “Parliament is the highest law-making institution
but such limited definition that is central to deliberative democracy would be
an act of vishwasghat of its lofty purpose despite
both Houses being filled with chamchas or ‘chors’ more
interested in ‘dramas’ and ‘abuse’ than addressing ‘corruption’. While
Opposition accuses Treasury Benches of ‘jumlajeevis’, they counter
with disruptive ‘anarchists’! At this rate MPs will be left with no other
option but to use sign language.
Undoubtedly,
harsh words are part and parcel of politics. Even Westminster, mother of all
Parliamentary discourses is not free from this. One notorious case is of
leading Labour right Nye Bevan who often crossed swords with Winston Churchill
describing Conservatives as gutter snipes and vermins. In Australian
Senate phrases “dumbo” and “liar” among others, are unparliamentary.
In our present all-pervasive decadence, interspersed with
growing public distaste there comes a moment of truth and reckoning: Are we
putting a premium on ‘hypocrisy’ of leaders which thanks to their Parliamentary
privilege grants them unassailable protection to free speech? Is it not merely
an excuse to create ‘drama?’
What is most worrying is our politicians are busy eroding
credibility and sanctity of Parliament by perfecting the art of cultivating low
morality and high greed according to their whims and fancies --- and need of
the hour which has been made a lot more malignant by our fragmented politics.
Wherein slander, sensation smear and sully are the new political dialogues
chanted by one and all Parties with each propounding its own recipe of harmony,
according to their own warped and selfish political needs.
None cares a damn for decency and decorum except for
scoring brownie points against each other. Ends matter not means as winning is
the name of the game. Clearly, any slur, slight and disrespect to Parliament
would deal a body blow to the credibility and authority of the State. Democracy
is not competition in Constitutional indecency and impropriety. ----INFA
(Copyright,
India News & Feature Alliance)
|