Parliament is failing the nation

It pains one to see agitating MPs standing symbolically beside the Gandhi statue outside parliament, shouting slogans when they should be inside engaged in dignified debates on matters of national consequence. Ugly scenes in parliament and continued disruption in both Houses revolt against our constant claims to being the largest democracy. Size is irrelevant as it is substance that matters.

It’s as well to remember that Gandhi had warned that the parliamentary system modelled on the British “would serve the (political) party and, therefore, whatever the stance taken by the party. The struggle will not be to provide people the best service, but to take the majority and be in power.” How accurate was that prediction! Parliament has been ignored over many sessions in recent years and the much-vaunted Constitution defied.

Also Read: Middle-path elusive in Rajya Sabha as govt says Manipur debate only on August 11

The Ambedkar-led Constitution has been a historic and comprehensive document which covered every aspect of the nation’s long-term interests. It worked superbly in the early years of free India, with course corrections being applied as and when an exigency demanded them. What we are regretfully compelled to realise today is that the practice of politics followed by the leaders and MPs then differed vastly from what we see today. In those not-too-distant years, the different political parties and leaders had different ideologies, but they had one common objective – the welfare of the nation and its people. The debates were impersonal, and Jawaharlal Nehru’s first cabinet reflected this common purpose in its composition. The outstanding example of this was the inclusion of Shyama Prasad Mukherjee of the Jan Sangh as a cabinet minister despite the ideological differences and the indirect connection his party had with Gandhi’s assassination. Every one of those ministers led by Nehru was a patriot regardless of party affiliation.

Parties today have ideologies, but only in their election manifestos. Once the MPs are elected, the race is to gather numbers with which to occupy positions of power. The traditional Left and Right ideologies seem to lose their direction and are chopped and changed to make up the requisite numbers. They could be allies in one state but sworn opponents in another.

The government vs Opposition chasm has never been wider than since the BJP swept to power at the Centre, now twice in a row. What seems to have been forgotten is that there are winners and losers in an election, but the Constitution ensures that the losers do not lose their rights to monitor the government. They are still forceful contributors to governance as “auditors”, with access to processes which enable them to perform. The parliament is where the government in power is expected to report periodically, and the Opposition is able to react to it. Both the government and the Opposition have to share the blame for failing in their respective roles and for de-activating parliament.

Also Read: Parliamentary panel suggests reducing of age to contest Lok Sabha, assembly polls

Issues such as the Manipur situation do not seem to matter and are subordinated to the egos of leaders. Instead of debating this matter without delay in parliament, the Opposition screams outside about the urgency, but insists on a government statement from the mouth of the PM and none else. So much for the urgency! The Prime Minister’s stout disregard for
justifiable demands for at least his presence in parliament is a matter that he needs to explain.

The government is as responsible, if not more, as the Opposition for the functioning of parliament, especially given that it has the majority number. Democracy is a game of numbers and majority rule, but in parliament and under the Constitution, their powers are not unfettered. They have to legislate in parliament and respond to the concerns raised by
the members.

The Prime Minister, as head of the government and leader of the House, is finally responsible for ensuring total compliance and ensuring that justice is done to all sides. It is not expected that the brute force of numbers is made into a weapon to enforce the government’s will.

The continued absence of Prime Minister Narendra Modi in parliament when it is in session is unfortunate. Every Prime Minister before him has given parliament his or her total respect and faced debates, however disadvantaged the government stand may have been. Modi’s absence is particularly conspicuous as his presence elsewhere is hugely publicised by the media. He and the Opposition should find a way of working together in parliament, as is expected constitutionally and as their duty to the nation. It is sad that his absence has been one of the main irritants in parliament, giving rise to ugly and unparliamentary scenes. The presiding officersare being challenged and restoration of order is an urgent necessity. Our political maturity is in question as the world watches.