Now the situation has reversed. External Affairs minister, Sushma Swaraj and Rajasthan Chief Minister Vasundhara Raje have got involved in what has come to be known as “Modi (Lalit) Gate”. Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan is allegedly entangled in Vyapam scam, said to be the biggest-ever scandal, involving crores of rupees. The Congress, which has now taken the place of the BJP in opposition benches, has been applying the same yardstick that the BJP had applied. It appears the whole monsoon session would be washed out as the BJP is refusing to obtain the resignation of Swaraj and the two chief ministers and the Congress is adamant on disrupting the proceedings.

The BJP, when it was in opposition, and the Congress which now sits in opposition benches, argue that disruption of Parliament is last the resort. When the party in power — the BJP or the Congress — accedes to the demand, say resignation of a union minister or a chief minister, the action may turn out to be politically harmful to the organisation. To come out of this imbroglio, some ground rules will have to laid down. First, it should be ascertained if there is prima facie a case. Action should follow immediately it is established that there is a case. Irrespective of which party is in power, a high court or Supreme Court judge should inquire the charges against the tainted minister. Pending the outcome of the inquiry, the minister concern should step down. There should be no compromise on this rule whether the Congress is in power or the BJP. A debate should then follow as per parliamentary rules.

Unfortunately, the practice of disrupting proceedings in Parliament and state assemblies was started by the BJP and other parties, particularly the socialist parties. It has now become the big menace and has to be stopped.

With precious days of Parliament wasted in shrieking and yelling, rushing to the well of house—not once or twice but session after session—time has come to evolve a system of deterrent measures. Members are supposed to appreciate the weight of the responsibility placed on them by their voters. It is expected of them to present their arguments with passions and, if need be, with force and eloquence, in the debates that form the substance of discussion and dissent within Parliament. But what one sees in just the opposite.

When members conduct themselves like ill-behaved, uncontrolled brats and when admonition and rebuke show no result, the serious deterrence is the only possible solution. A system of penalties should be worked out, at its broadest, embracing, rationally, the very prerequisites that MPs enjoy.

One way to deter improper behaviour in Parliament would be to cancel the daily allowance of MPs if Parliament has been disrupted for a day. The deterrents may grow in proportion to the scale of disruption, that is, repeated disruption would not only mean an equivalent loss of daily allowance, but also a proportional decrease in other prerequisites, such as free tickets for travel, and so on.

If disruption continues beyond certain stated limits, an MP could be debarred from contesting any election conducted under the Election Commission for a period of time, say, two years. Beyond and besides this, any political party identified as the chief of disruption for more than one session of Parliament could be treated in the same way, that is, debarred from contesting for a fixed period.

These are, of course, suggested solutions to what has, apparently, the ineffaceable evil in India’s political life. Deterrents can be evolved on any single principle, the aim always being to create real pressure on errant people’s representatives to behave.

Recall May 2002 when the Indian Parliament competed its fifty years, the LokSabha secretariat deemed it fit to commemorate the occasion by bringing out a handsomely produced book, FIFTY YEARS OF INDIAN PARLIAMENT. Atal Bihari Vajpayee was the prime minister at that time and he contributed a very thoughtful chapter for this book. His chapter was aptly entitled, “Making Parliamentary Democracy Deliver on its Promise”.

Vajpayee wrote: “While constructive opposition is the essence of democracy, opposition for the sake of opposition weakens both democracy and good governance. Any attempt to destabilise a duly elected government disturbs the healthy development of democracy in India.” These are words of wisdom, acquired over half a century of public life by one of the most respected and admired political leaders in India. For the Opposition to stall Parliament day after day can only contribute to the collapse of the very institution, which is at the very heart of the Indian democracy. (IPA Service)