Parliament Devalued and Manipur MPs' Rights Violated by their Muzzling
This article was first published on The India Cable – a premium newsletter from The Wire & Galileo Ideas – and has been republished here. To subscribe to The India Cable, click here.
The people’s mandate for an elected representative to represent a constituency is badly devalued when she/he is advised by the powers that be not to speak on behalf of those constituents on the floor of the legislature. Therefore, the right of an MP to represent his or her constituency in Parliament and the right of the electorate to be so represented in the apex legislature is considered sacrosanct. So when legislators are disqualified as MLAs or MPs after they are convicted and sentenced to two years’ imprisonment, the judiciary has often stayed the conviction and the sentence so that their right to represent people and the right of the electorate to be represented in the legislature is restored.
The recent example of the Supreme Court staying the conviction of Rahul Gandhi in a criminal defamation case is very instructive. The right of an MP to represent his constituency and the right of the electorate to be represented in Parliament should mean, among other things, to speak in Parliament regarding the problems of constituents and urge the government to find remedies.
Two Manipur MPs asked not to speak on no-confidence motion
It is tragic that two MPs of Manipur, of the BJP and the Naga People’s Front, supporting the Modi government at the Centre, were informally advised by the BJP leadership to refrain from speaking on the Manipur violence during the debate on the no-confidence motion in the Lok Sabha.
They were told that since Union home minister Amit Shah was speaking on the issue at length, they should keep away from the discussion. In other words, the right to represent people and speak on their behalf, considered to be sacrosanct, could not be exercised by them when the parliamentary device of no-confidence motion was employed by the Opposition against the Modi Regime to ensure, among other things, that the PM, who had been silent on Manipur, should come to the Lok Sabha and speak on violence and bloodshed in the State for more than three months.
Lorho S. Pfoze. Photo: Facebook.
Naga People’s Front MP Lorho S Pfoze, who supports the BJP-led NDA government at the Centre, told The Hindu that BJP leaders advised him not to speak on the ethnic violence in Manipur during the debate on the no-confidence motion.
Pfoze represents the Outer Manipur constituency, which was badly hit by the violence. Speaking with Barkha Dutt and MojoStory, he said that a few BJP leaders had asked him not to speak. He added, “The government should have first asked me to speak even if I didn’t make a formal request. I wanted to speak on behalf of my people.”
Peace in Manipur would be elusive if its MPs are not allowed to speak in Parliament
When Dutt asked if he felt angry and dejected because as an MP from Manipur and ally of the BJP, he was not allowed to speak in the debate about his own people, he stated that the government should have asked him to speak because he is an alliance partner and represents Kukis, Meiteis and Nagas of his constituency, all victims of the havoc wrought on Manipur.
He asserted that the deprivation of that opportunity to express himself in the Lok Sabha on behalf of his constituents made him dejected, sad and angry. However, out of respect for the government, he did not put forth his request to speak. He also asked if the plea of the government for peace to be restored would sound convincing if he is not allowed to speak and appeal for calm and peace in his state.
Earlier, he told The Hindu that his constituents, Kukis, Meiteis and Nagas, were very gravely impacted by the terrible violence. He was keen to participate in the discussion on the no-confidence motion. He would have flagged the point that the violence, largely targeting the Kuki-Zo community, should have been stopped. The nation could have appreciated the magnitude of the unprecedented problem they confronted.
He further added that because MPs of Manipur represent the people of the state in Parliament, they should have been asked to speak. “That would have built confidence in my people because elections are coming and it is needful for our people to know that the government is serious about dealing with the issues confronting Manipur’s people.”
Pfoze also told The Hindu that the only other Lok Sabha MP from Manipur, BJP’s R.K. Ranjan Singh, who is Minister of State for External Affairs, was also informally advised not to speak during the debate on the no-trust motion. He did not request the Speaker of Lok Sabha for permission to speak on the issue as he was sure that it would be rejected.
Manipur MP’s questions on violence in the state were not picked up in Parliament
It is quite shocking to learn, from his interactions with Dutt, that fifty of his questions on Manipur were not picked up in any of the discussions, except one on education. It is a serious matter because the parliamentary device of asking questions is very critical. It holds the Government to account on the floor of the legislature.
Manipur MP’s remarks expunged in Rajya Sabha
Even in the Rajya Sabha, when Mizoram MP K Vanlavena contradicted Home Minister Amit Shah’s statement that tribal people in Manipur came from Myanmar, Rajya Sabha chair Jagdeep Dhankar ordered it to be expunged. Vanlalvena, the only Rajya Sabha MP from the Mizo National Front, is part of the BJP-led NDA and his remarks came in response to Amit Shah’s observations in the Lok Sabha.
Devaluation of Parliament
The right of a Member to speak about his/her constituents was violated when they were advised not to speak on the Manipur violence, which has been described in many circles as an ethnic conflict and a civil war. While moving the no-confidence motion, Saurabh Gogoi of the Congress had charged that even the BJP MPs representing Manipur were not allowed to speak on the sufferings inflicted on their constituents.
Parliament must be used to erase communal distemper
When the Constituent Assembly of India started functioning in December 1946, terrible communal violence and massive loss of life following Partition had raised serious concerns regarding its unity and integrity. Mahatma Gandhi had famously stated that the Assembly would provide solutions to the communal distemper. It did this by framing a Constitution and providing a secular frame of governance and establishing a Republic neutral to all faiths.
Now, when the country is witnessing a replay of pre-Partition communal discord, our MPs representing the mandate of their constituents must be allowed to speak for the restoration of peace, unity and sanity, so that the idea of India as a union of states is defended.
Depriving the right of an MP to speak amounts to devaluation of Parliament itself. We need to arrest the trend so that the Parliament can provide solutions to the communal distemper which is badly tarnishing the image of India and endangering our unity and integrity.
S.N. Sahu served as Officer on Special Duty to President of India K.R. Narayanan.
This article went live on August twenty-ninth, two thousand twenty three, at forty minutes past seven in the evening.The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
