Bid to break deadlock fails, Parliament adjourned again

By Our Special Correspondent

NEW DELHI, DEC. 11. The two Houses of Parliament plunged into chaos today and were adjourned yet again within minutes after an all- party meeting called by the Lok Sabha Speaker, Mr. G. M. C. Balayogi, failed to end the deadlock.

The question uppermost on everybody's mind was whether the deadlock would end tomorrow, but the uncertainty persisted till evening as the Congress was unwilling to change its strategy. All it planned to do was change the wording of its censure motion in the hope that it would be found in order and within the framework of the rules.

Even before Parliament assembled, it became clear that the rules did not permit the Speaker to accept the Congress censure motion seeking resignation of the three Cabinet ministers chargesheeted in the Babri Masjid demolition case.

The result was that as soon as the Houses met, Congressmen rushed into the well of the House, both in the Rajya Sabha and in the Lok Sabha (where the Samajwadi Party MPs also met their presence felt).

With agitated members of several Opposition parties shouting simultaneously, nothing could be heard. The Rajya Sabha was adjourned within a minute after the Congress and BJP leaders used their lung power. In the Lok Sabha, pandemonium prevailed for several minutes while Mr. Balayogi read out his ruling, but everybody seemed to be shouting and nothing could be heard. While Congress and SP MPs rushed into the well of the House, MPs of the RJD, the AIADMK, the Left, the BSP were on their feet speaking simultaneously.

In his ruling (the text was made available later), the Speaker said he had received notices for a censure motion under Rule 184 against three Cabinet Ministers seeking their removal from office because charges had been framed against them in a criminal court. Those who had given notices included Mr. S. Jaipal Reddy (Congress), Mr. Somnath Chatterjee (CPM), and Mr. Raghuvansh Prasad Singh (RJD).

The notices could not be admitted because the matter was sub judice, the charges against the ministers were not recent, and a motion seeking a minister's removal could not be brought as the Council of Ministers was collectively responsible to the Lok Sabha.

The Speaker, however, agreed to reconsider if fresh notices were brought in an ``appropriate form,'' admissible under the rules, or the House itself, supreme in procedural matters, could decide to set aside the rules and discuss the issue.

The Opposition remained dissatisfied, knowing that the House decision would naturally be with the majority treasury benches.

At the all-party meeting convened by Mr. Balayogi earlier, several Opposition parties insisted on a discussion on the resignation issue under Rule 184, which is a censure motion. However, there were others who felt that the Prime Minister's controversial statements could be discussed, and the resignation issue could be brought in. The Speaker made it known that he was duty bound to follow the rules and could not admit the motion.

The differences in the Opposition seemed to be more on what form the motion should take - should resignations be the focus or the Prime Minister's Ayodhya statements. These have not yet been resolved.

One way out of the impasse, and some were hinting that this may happen, is that some of the NDA allies may agree to vote for a discussion on the resignations. Thus the House could decide to set aside the rules of procedures. The Speaker has already ruled that this would be acceptable to him. The other scenario, which the allies would prefer, is a discussion on Mr. Vajpayee's statement.

Differences in NDA

The differences within the ruling front have also been exposed despite the ``unanimous'' resolution of the NDA yesterday. The Trinamool Congress feels the resignation issue is a matter between the Prime Minister and his ministers, it is loath to rush to their defence. The Telugu Desam Party's stand is the law should take its own course and demanding resignations was the prerogative of the Prime Minister. Both these allies, and some others too, did not approve of the Prime Minister giving his ministers a certificate of innocence when the matter was yet to be tried and decided in court.

The allies want the impasse in Parliament to be resolved and the Prime Minister given an opportunity to affirm his commitment to the NDA's secular agenda. For, they would like to put behind them, as soon as possible, the unpleasant odour left by his remarks that they said have created ``confusion'' and even ``communal disharmony''.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Front Page
Next     : 2 killed in Kashmir blasts