New Delhi: The Opposition Wednesday quoted former Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar’s 2023 ruling as Rajya Sabha chairman—that Parliament can discuss any issue except the conduct of Supreme Court and High Court judges not facing removal—to counter the government’s claim that the House cannot debate the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in Bihar due to the matter being sub-judice.
Rajya Sabha Leader of Opposition Mallikarjun Kharge wrote to Deputy Chairman of the Upper House, Harivansh, that it was clear from Dhankhar’s ruling that the House is entitled to discuss the SIR, “which is of fundamental importance in our democracy”.
“You will undoubtedly appreciate that the Chair is a continuing entity. You yourself have quoted rulings given by the Chair over the past many years in support of some of your decisions. It is clear from this ruling of the Chair that the Rajya Sabha is entitled to discuss the issue of revision of electoral rolls,” Kharge wrote.
Rajya Sabha records of 21 July 2023 show that Dhankhar, responding to then TRS MP K. Keshava Rao’s question on whether the House can take up a sub-judice matter for discussion, had stated that there was no restriction preventing the Rajya Sabha from doing so. “I am seeking a clarification from the Chairman over the subject that the House is taking up. The clarification is: If a Court takes up the issue which the House is discussing, do we allow it? I am leaving it to you,” Rao had said.
In his response, Dhankhar said, “The concept of sub-judice is totally misconceived”.
He said that Article 121 which states—”No discussions shall take place in Parliament with respect to the conduct of any Judge of the Supreme Court or of a High Court in the discharge of his duties except upon a motion for presenting an address to the President praying for the removal of the Judge”—was the only restriction that the House needs to follow.
“I had the occasion to give my ruling on a point of order that this House is entitled to discuss everything under the planet with one restriction… and that is Article 121. It is for this House to generate light all around; it is for this House to clear the confusion and to clear the cloudy weather… Am I clear? So, the only restriction generated in the Parliament has been given to us by our founding fathers,” Dhankhar had said, show Rajya Sabha official records.
Even on 6 August, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju told reporters that Parliament cannot take up the SIR for discussion as the matter is under consideration of the Supreme court and “as such it is sub-judice, hence a discussion cannot be held on the subject”. Rijiju also said that matters under the domain of the Election Commission of India also cannot be discussed in Parliament.
The Congress also countered this claim, with the party’s Deputy Leader in the Lok Sabha, Gaurav Gogoi, pointing out that discussions on electoral reforms, election rules and election laws have taken place in both Houses of the Parliament over the decades, including as recently as 2019.
Gogoi said the Rajya Sabha had debated amendments to the Conduct of Elections Rules in 1961 and in 1981, Congress MP Manubhai Patel had moved a resolution to set up a parliamentary committee to review election laws. In 1991, the Upper House debated the urgent need to amend existing election laws, he said.
“In 2015, a Calling Attention Motion was moved by Rajya Sabha LoP Ghulam Nabi Azad on proxy and e-postal voting for NRIs. Law Minister D.V. Sadananda Gowda accepted the Opposition’s demand to consider their views. And as recently as 2019, a Short Duration Discussion on electoral reforms saw participation from the then Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad. There is ample precedent. The government must not delay the long overdue and essential discussion on electoral reforms. Let us discuss electoral reforms in Parliament,” Gogoi posted on X.
Congress Rajya Sabha MP Jairam Ramesh said that in 1986, the Rajya Sabha had witnessed a short duration discussion on the “need to introduce comprehensive electoral reforms and to undertake a fresh delimitation of Parliamentary and Assembly Constituencies”.
(Edited by Viny Mishra)
Also read: Congress flags a ‘mysteriously withdrawn’ question posed to Modi govt in Lok Sabha, by 2 BJP MPs
