Front Page

Sayeed admits censure motion, voting on April 30

By Neena Vyas and Javed M. Ansari

NEW DELHI APRIL 23. The Lok Sabha will discuss the Gujarat situation on April 30 under Rule 184 which entails a mandatory vote through a resolution which expresses "grave concern'' over the "failure of the administration in ensuring the security of the minority community'' and calls upon the Government to initiate "effective steps'' to restore their confidence and protect them.

The resolution will be moved by the Samajwadi Party MP, Ramjilal Suman, whose notice for the discussion was one among 86 received by the Chair.

As soon as the House assembled this morning, the Deputy Speaker and presiding officer of the Lok Sabha, P.M.Sayeed, gave his ruling in favour of a discussion under a substantive motion, on which the Opposition parties had been insisting. Later, the Business Advisory Committee of the Lok Sabha met and fixed April 30 as the date for the discussion, after urgent financial business, including the Finance Bill, are dealt with on April 26 and 29.

Thus ended the political impasse in the Lok Sabha, although in the Rajya Sabha, which was again adjourned today, the problem has not yet been resolved. The decision brought cheer to the Opposition benches but the treasury benches too were not unhappy. Since the BAC had later decided that the Finance Bill would be passed a day earlier, the Government was comfortable that it would be as good as a vote of confidence. And even on Gujarat, the Bharatiya Janata Party is quite sure that it will be able to get past the majority mark in the vote that will follow the discussion. The Trinamool Congress MP, Nitish Sengupta, said his party would vote with the Government, which is also sure of the Bahujan Samaj Party's 13 votes. The Telugu Desam Party, is keeping its cards close to its chest. "We will discuss (the issue) in the party and decide (on the vote),'' the party leader, K. Yerran Naidu, said, even as the Government indicated that it had "counted the TDP out.''

`Not a State problem'

Mr. Sayeed justified his ruling bydismissing the objections raised by the treasury benches. What had happened in Gujarat and was still happening — hundreds killed, thousands in relief camps and crores of rupees worth property damaged — could not be seen as a simple law and order problem related only to the State. He reminded all the MPs the Centre had a responsibility under Article 355 of the Constitution "to protect the State against internal disturbance and ensure that the Government of every State is carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution.''

The gravity of the situation was also "self-evident'' from the fact that the army had been called out to help the civil authority. Besides, the National Human Rights Commission, the Minorities Commission and several independent women activists had commented on the grave situation in Gujarat which could not be seen as an ordinary law and order matter.

Implied in his ruling was that in fact the Centre cannot get away from its responsibility for what had happened in Gujarat, and that Parliament is the correct forum to discuss this. This was in response to one of the several arguments extended by the treasury benches that the Opposition was trying to discuss a "State subject'' and "it would set a bad precedent'' if discussed under a substantive motion. Mr. Sayeed pointed out that in 1997, an adjournment motion relating to the events in Bihar had been converted into a discussion under Rule 184 in the Lok Sabha. (Although he did not spell this out, it was the BJP which had moved the motion). The other objection by the treasury benches was that Gujarat had already been discussed in this session, but Mr. Sayeed brushed this aside saying: "it is not the position of the Government that the matter should not be discussed again'' and "serious incidents of violence'' had taken place "subsequent to the earlier discussion.''

Even before the House assembled, the Parliamentary Affairs Minister, Pramod Mahajan, and the Congress whip, Priyaranjan Das Munshi, were asking their MPs not to treat the Chair's ruling as a political victory or defeat but to accept it with all respect. And that is what happened. The impasse was over and the Lok Sabha went on with its business.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Front Page

News: Front Page | National | Southern States | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary |

Stories in this Section

• Sayeed admits censure motion, voting on April 30
• BJP clarifies on controversial questions
• It's not Parliament's job: PM
• 3,000 child marriages in Chhatisgarh
• `Poor governance to blame for corruption'
• CISF to guard Taj Mahal
• Bill Gates in court
• Panel to probe graft charges

Copyright © 2002, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu