Parliamentary proceedings in a country shouldn't be used to make allegations and counter allegations against the parliament of another country, Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla said.
Mr. Birla made these remarks in the context of a lawmaker in Maldives trying to move resolution against India in the Maldivian parliament over the controversy surrounding a BJP functionary's statement on Prophet Muhammad.
"This issue doesn't strictly concern the functioning of Parliament. Rather, it's about relations between nations. Everyone has the right to speak about issues in their own country. But it is our expectation that the parliamentary proceedings of any country should not get reduced to making allegations and counter allegations about another country. You can surely discuss events, but Parliament should not be used pass resolutions concerning another country," Mr Birla said.
Asked about a Congress delegation meeting to complain about Delhi Police misbehaving with their MPs in the past few days, the Lok Sabha Speaker said there are well defined rules to deal with such issues.
"This complaint too would be examined within those rules and action will be taken,"Mr Birla said.
In an interview with The Hindu on the occasion of completing three years in office, the Lok Sabha Speaker also shared his views on Parliament functioning under COVID protocol.
"During the pandemic the duration of sittings was reduced but if you look at the figures, Lok Sabha clocked 167% productivity, this is a record high. Our allotted time during the truncated sessions was between 4pm-9pm and members made full use of the time,"he noted.
Responding to the charge by Facebook whistleblower Sophie Zhang that she is not being allowed to depose before the parliamentary committee on Information Technology, Mr Birla said there are no rules that allow a foreign national to depose.
Excerpts from the interview
‘It’s the government that decides to send Bills to Standing Committees’
We are trying to emerge from two years of the pandemic, through which Parliament also found ways of functioning. How was Parliament affected by the pandemic?
During the pandemic the duration of sittings was reduced but if you look at the figures, Lok Sabha clocked 167% productivity, this is a record high. Our allotted time during the truncated sessions was between 4 p.m. and 9 p.m. and members made full use of the time. If you look at attendance of members also, it was higher than in non-pandemic periods; around 337 MPs on an average were present in Parliament. So, the working of the Parliament was not affected much. In terms of what issues members raised, more speakers raised Zero Hour mentions and we started, in this 17th Lok Sabha, the practice of trying to get a response to matters mentioned then. In the demands for grants debate, four hours were allotted but the House debated it for 15 hours. In terms of democratic dialogue, it has been a rich experience.
There are frequent complaints by opposition parties that not enough Bills are being sent to parliamentary committees for scrutiny. Also, that Ministries circulate Bills just before debate on them is being taken up, not giving enough time to prepare.
Government, in the 8th session of the 17th Lok Sabha sent nearly 60% of the Bills to the Standing Committees. Governments bring Bills for the welfare of citizens and [with regard to] some Bills, government may feel that to delay may lead to a loss to the people. So they may want to debate in the House, maybe more than the allotted time but not be so much in favour of sending the Bill to the Standing Committee. It’s the government that makes the decision whether Bills are sent to the committee or not, and takes the mandate of the House. As for circulation of Bills minutes before being debated, I have raised the issue with the Parliamentary Affairs Ministry and said that Bills should be circulated well in advance of debate, so that members have an adequate time period to prepare for debate.
You have been proactive in encouraging those who have never spoken in the House to speak.
My aim is that the largest number of new and women members speak in the House. There was for example a first time woman member, who, because she didn’t know either English or Hindi, only her local language, felt inhibited in raising issues in the House. I called the translator for her language and helped her formulate a speech, now she often speaks in the House. In fact, that is why I ask that the House run beyond its time, late into the night. In the first session that I chaired as Speaker, a record breaking 1,066 members raised Zero Hour mentions, and we also have, for the 17th Lok Sabha, the all time record of 182 people raising issues during Zero Hour.
Facebook whistleblower Sophie Zhang has been saying repeatedly that she wants to depose before the Standing Committee on Information Technology, but that you are not allowing that to happen.
As Speaker of the Lok Sabha, in case a particular parliamentary committee wants to summon witnesses to depose before them, and if these people are employed with State governments or under their jurisdictions, then the Speaker can, at the request of the committee ask that they present themselves. There is no rule, no procedure for asking people outside the boundaries of this country to be summoned at the will of the Speaker. I am being tagged everyday on Twitter for this, but I must clarify that as Speaker there are no rules under which I can summon people from abroad. Country representatives of various companies have represented them before the committee.
Certain remarks about Prophet Muhammed triggered quite a controversy internationally. A member of the Parliament of Maldives had moved a resolution against India but it was eventually defeated. Several other West Asian countries condemned those remarks while a report in the United States questioned religious freedom in India. As the custodian of the people’s House of the world’s largest democracy, how do you view these developments?
This issue doesn’t strictly concern the functioning of Parliament. Rather, it’s about relations between nations. Everyone has the right to speak about issues in their own country. But it is our expectation that the parliamentary proceedings of any country should not get reduced to making allegations and counter-allegations about another country. You can surely discuss events, but Parliament should not be used pass resolutions concerning another country. Say when we discussed the Ukraine war, we restricted ourselves to the impact on India. Similarly, when we pass a Bill here [Lok Sabha)], another Parliament shouldn’t be commenting on it until it directly impacts them.
A delegation of the Congress met you to complain about the Delhi police misbehaving with their MPs during a protest against the Enforcement Directorate. Lok Sabha member S. Jothimani has also written to you about breach of her privilege. Would you act on their complaint?
Yes, a delegation had met and apprised me of the developments that took place in the past few days. Subsequently, a representation was made in writing as well. There are well-defined rules to deal with and dispose of such issues. This complaint too would be examined within those rules and action will be taken.
You had said that the Winter Session of this year will be held in the new Parliament building. So, are we on track?
The way construction work is progressing, right now we are six days behind schedule. But the pace of construction is quite good and we hope to hold the Winter Session in the new building.
