Will the Rajya Sabha Resolve the SIR Debate Amidst Tensions?
Synopsis
Key Takeaways
- Rajya Sabha Debates: Tension over electoral roll revisions.
- Opposition's Concerns: Claims of voter disenfranchisement and suicides.
- Government's Position: Prioritizing Vande Mataram's commemoration.
- Parliament Dynamics: Importance of procedural priorities amidst urgent issues.
- Future Discussions: Potential for comprehensive electoral reform dialogue.
New Delhi, Dec 2 (NationPress) The Rajya Sabha found itself embroiled in a tense confrontation on Tuesday, as opposition figures, spearheaded by Congress stalwart Mallikarjun Kharge, demanded an immediate discussion regarding the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. They claimed that this process has led to tragic outcomes, including suicides and voter disenfranchisement affecting 12 states and union territories.
In contrast, the government acknowledged the concern but refrained from facilitating an immediate debate on the SIR.
The clash erupted shortly after 2:00 p.m., as proceedings resumed, with the opposition advocating for urgent measures while the government insisted on prioritizing a commemorative dialogue on the 150th anniversary of Vande Mataram.
Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju's calm yet resolute rebuttal did little to quell the agitation, leading to points of order, reprimands from the Chair, and an eventual shift to legislative discussions, reflecting the widening divisions on the second day of the Winter Session.
As the session recommenced at 2 p.m., Chairman C.P. Radhakrishnan, amidst ongoing tensions from disruptions the previous day, granted the floor to Minister Rijiju.
Rijiju reaffirmed the government's willingness, stating, "We are prepared for an all-encompassing discussion on electoral reforms, including SIR. However, addressing Vande Mataram, a symbol that galvanized our freedom struggle and millions, first, is essential. This isn't the first time I've assured you; no need for overreactions, as it benefits no one."
He referenced the inaugural Business Advisory Committee (BAC) meeting, where the government suggested the Vande Mataram discussion slot, allocating time for listed items such as the Manipur Goods and Services Tax (Amendment) Bill. "In the all-party meeting yesterday, we engaged thoroughly. The opposition proposed commencing tomorrow at 2:00 p.m. to conclude by Thursday -- a reasonable suggestion. We'll finalize a date in consultation with leaders and the Chair. But please, no conditions on timelines. All issues matter: Vande Mataram honors our heritage; reforms assure our democracy's future," he conveyed.
Trinamool Congress' Derek O’Brien, invoking Rule 176, underscored the human stakes involved, stating, "Over 14 parties demand this due to the lives at stake. BLOs are buckling under pressure."
Chairman Radhakrishnan swiftly dismissed the point, replying, "You sought the minister's response; he has articulated it. Repeatedly raising the same issue disrupts the House."
Mallikarjun Kharge then addressed the matter, stating, "What our Parliamentary Affairs Minister mentioned is that whatever the agenda is placed before the House should receive priority. However, Rule 267 stipulates that all other issues should be set aside, giving precedence to the 267 discussion, which is why we issued notice; otherwise, it was unnecessary to submit a 267 notice... The government must prioritize discussion under 267, as it is critical. Grant us permission to initiate a discussion under 267."
DMK's Tiruchi Siva echoed this request, asserting, "We never opposed proceeding with Vande Mataram first. Sunday's all-party meeting initiated this; three days have passed. Our request for a two-day debate starting tomorrow is equitable -- how can it be dismissed?"
However, Speaker Radhakrishnan, stressing procedural integrity, declined any further indulgence. "The House must operate as agreed upon," he declared, shifting focus to the discussion on the Manipur GST (Amendment) Bill.