Did Sonia Gandhi resign voluntarily or was she forced by circumstances to do so? And did the government try and sneak an ordinance past Parliament or has it been misunderstood and misrepresented? These were the key questions that Minister for Parliamentary Affairs Priyaranjan Dasmunsi answers in an interview with Karan Thapar on Devil's Advocate.
Karan Thapar: Hello and welcome to Devil's Advocate.
Mr Dasmunsi, let's start with Sonia Gandhi and then come to the government and ordinance a little later. Did Sonia Gandhi resign because she was holding an office of profit and it was the right thing to do or did she resign because an impression had been created by the Opposition that the government was finding ways of favouring her, which hurt her and so she stepped down because it was the proper thing to do? Which was it?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: I defend what Sonia Gandhi had stated in the press conference where she announced her resignation. She did it on her own and she felt an impression had been deliberately created by a section of the Opposition that something is coming to protect her.
Karan Thapar: Quite right. At her press conference, she said and I quote, "For the last two days, some people have been trying to create an atmosphere as if the government and Parliament are being used to favour me. This has hurt me very much." So, this clearly suggests that she stepped down because a false impression was being created that the government was trying to help her specifically.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Absolutely.
Karan Thapar: Now, tell me something. Was the government trying to help her specifically?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: No.
Karan Thapar: Absolutely not?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Absolutely not.
Karan Thapar: In which case, Sonia Gandhi fell into the trap of a false impression created by the Opposition?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Not a trap. In public perspective, in terms of political morality, if you try to make people believe which is not true, sometimes it becomes true in a sense. I saw many times in public life that an impression once created and created in a manner as if she alone is the beneficiary, whereas the rest are the beneficiary, then you are put into the trap.
Karan Thapar: But don't you see what this suggests? That all the Opposition has to do is successfully create a false impression and Sonia Gandhi will resign. They can almost demand her resignation by creating a situation that brings it about.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: No. You see, there are two things. Demanding resignation on an issue is one thing that one can politically contest.
Karan Thapar: But she has resigned on a false issue?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Creating a situation, halting the proceedings of Parliament, deliberately conveying a message that the Parliament is being used in off-season period just to protect a person time and again, and that too done by a responsible Leader of the Opposition, that possibly hurt her tremendously.
Karan Thapar: Let me quote to you your ally, the CPM. In an official politburo statement, dated 24th of March, it said: "Sonia Gandhi has resigned her Lok Sabha membership and as the Chairperson of National Advisory Council in response to the BJP and Opposition charge that she is holding an office of profit." They firmly believe that the Opposition created a situation and Sonia buckled under.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Absolutely not.
Karan Thapar: They said so.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: What the Left says that is their own conclusion. I am not bound to buy the Left argument. The whole thing is very simple. Even when the debate started - I shouldn't say they were debates - chaos started in Parliament, I was very much present in both the Houses. They could not come out clear as to what was happening. All through, they went on saying - even in Rashtrapati Bhawan - that the Parliament sine die will be used for her.
Karan Thapar: Let's go back to the reasons why you think she resigned. If it was the right think to do, why didn't she resign on the 6th of March when Mulayam Singh Yadav first alleged that she was holding an office of profit? Why didn't she resign on 17th of March when Jaya Bachchan was disqualified? Why did she wait till the 23rd, when a crisis was blown up?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: I will reply to your question. Very good question you put and very convincing question in that. First, when the Jaya Bachchan matter was before the Election Commission, at that point neither the Members of Parliament of any party did take this issue so seriously.
Karan Thapar: And they were complacent and ignorant?
PAGE_BREAK
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: I must candidly confess to you, till today, excepting a few leaders - an overwhelming majority of legislators and Parliament members are not sufficiently aware as to what exactly the office of profit means.
Karan Thapar: Forgive me, I am interrupting. What you are saying is that if people earlier had realised what in fact was happening, Sonia Gandhi would have resigned earlier? It's because they didn't know what was happening because they were either ignorant or complacent that she didn't resign earlier. That's what you are saying?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: No. That question didn't arise. Because nobody in Parliament, not even Mulayam Singh Yadav's party raised the issue that she was holding an office of profit.
Karan Thapar: Mulayam Singh did raise the issue on the 6th of March.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: No. That was not in Parliament. Publicly, so many people issued so many statements and we found it was not true. An advisory committee is not an office of profit.
Karan Thapar: All right. If she resigned because she was hurt by the false impression created by the press and by the Opposition, then why didn't she resign on the 22nd morning, the day The Indian Express published the ordinance story? Why didn't she resign on the 22nd evening, the day Parliament was adjourned, proving to people that the story was correct?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: From 22nd morning to next day afternoon, if you calculate the time...
Karan Thapar: 36 hours.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: No, Karan. 22nd was the day to debate on an important issue of the country, the Scorpene deal. And the entire government was prepared to answer that question. It suddenly came after the Question Hour. You might have observed that the honorable Speaker didn't come to the Chair for once.
Karan Thapar: What's more important is on the 22nd morning, in a banner headline The Indian Express claimed that the government was going to pass an ordinance to help one member, Sonia Gandhi. If it upset her so much that she resigned 36 hours later, why didn't she resign in the morning itself?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: I don't think she was upset for the writing in The Indian Express.
Karan Thapar: She said so: "This has hurt me very much."
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Just a minute. It was not particularly about The Indian Express writing.
Karan Thapar: That's where it started.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: The kind of language used in the Parliament on this particular issue, any self-respecting man and women, if they have some moral conscience, will respond to it. She is the head of the UPA.
Karan Thapar: You are saying that self-respect drove her to resign?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Not only that.
Karan Thapar: That's exactly what you are saying.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: No. I am saying, any men and women having some self-respect will feel naturally that all these things are being orchestrated as if something behind the scene is being worked out to protect a lady. Naturally.
Karan Thapar: If it was self-respect that made her resign, then answer this. Why did she resign only after the Opposition had met the President and asked him not to agree to an ordinance? Why did she resign only after the Election Commission had made it clear that the law would apply equally to everybody? Why did she resign only after the Left parties - your allies without whom you can't form a government - had said that an ordinance was not the right way of handling this matter?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: The question is Karan, from The Indian Express to the statement of the Opposition, all were carried by a false impression that the definitely the House will be adjourned sine die just to protect someone with a law.
Karan Thapar: And that evening, the House was adjourned sine die.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: No, it was adjourned before her resignation.
Karan Thapar: It was adjourned on the evening of 22nd, the day The Indian Express carried the article.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Absolutely.
Karan Thapar: So, when the article claimed in the morning it will be adjourned in the evening, that's what happened.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: No, again you are wrong. We said the House will be adjourned sine die in the morning itself. It is inconsequential what appeared in The Indian Express. Never make a mistake. Sometimes some newspapers, some journalists have an inner false ego that 'what I write should have to be proved so that my credibility is preserved'. That's the wrong impression. Sometimes, they do write, sometimes they carry some wrong impressions.
PAGE_BREAK
Karan Thapar: Let's leave the inner false egos of individual journalists out of this because we don't know what the truth is about there. What I am putting to you is a simple matter. The facts make it absolutely crystal clear that Sonia Gandhi's resignation was tactical and strategic and it was not a moral act.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: I think I personally differ with you in the sense that she made it very clear in her own statement, neither was she advised by the party to do so nor the government.
Karan Thapar: It was still strategic and it was not moral regardless of what she said in her statement.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: She made it absolutely clear in her statement that what had happened in the last two days not only hurt her, an impression was given to the people that the government machinery was working to protect one individual wrongly, out of the world.
Karan Thapar: Quite right. A false impression and she became a victim of it. But leave that aside because we have already discussed that. But if it was the right thing to do for Sonia Gandhi, then why is not the right thing for other Congress MPs in a similar situation? Why were they denied permission to resign?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Question is only three MPs' names figured from the Opposition bench on that day. In the RS...
Karan Thapar: So, until your name figures, you don't have to resign?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: No, no question of that.
Karan Thapar: Unless you are caught out, it doesn't become a problem?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: No question of that. Simply resigning doesn't make any sense. Unless someone is seriously perturbed that ‘something is being worked out to protect me’.
Karan Thapar: Perturbed? If you can get away without it, than you don't have to resign. But if you are caught as Sonia Gandhi was, then you have to resign?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: I don't agree with it, Karan. It is not correct. Why should several other MPs resign, who neither were questioned, nor debated, nor was put a blame on. You must know, the entire campaign right from Day One was waiting for different moments how to target Sonia Gandhi.
Karan Thapar: Are there different moral standards for Sonia Gandhi and the rest of the Congress Party? Is something right for her, but not right for everyone else?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: No, I think Karan Singh did resign instantly on the same night.
Karan Thapar: Let me point something else to you. Sonia Gandhi's resignation - and again this is crystal clear from the fact - was not voluntary. She was forced into it by circumstances.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: You see sometimes what happens in Indian democracy and Indian politics, even if someone does something good, someone tried to find many things in between the lines. You see that is a characteristic pattern of Indian democracy. You can't help it. Even when Gandhi used to go on a fast, the British used to say you should improve your health.
Karan Thapar: I think it's not appropriate that we should be comparing Sonia Gandhi to Mahatma Gandhi.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: In Indian democratic standard, even if somebody does a good work, even then somebody tries to find something in between the lines. That is permissible in democracy. You can't help it.
Karan Thapar: One can do good work under compulsion, rather than voluntarily or willingly.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: When she willingly said I will not become Prime Minister, even then somebody questioned - is she capable? Therefore, these are not the matters.
Karan Thapar: I am pointing out Mr Dasmunsi that Sonia Gandhi's resignation not only was forced upon her, but it was a victory for the Opposition. It's a victory for The Indian Express. It is not a victory for either Sonia or Congress.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: I think it is a reputed newspaper. They were victorious on many occasions. I wish The Indian Express circulation goes up on this count. But I can also tell you Karan, Mrs Gandhi resigned on her own, not due to any influence of the press.
Karan Thapar: Let me quote to you what your ally Buddhadeb Bhattacharya said last week to us. He said Sonia Gandhi's resignation was a desperate attempt to salvage the reputation of her party and to salvage her own image.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: I think if Buddha feels like that, Buddha should have advised his own colleagues also. But he didn't.
PAGE_BREAK
Karan Thapar: His colleagues withstood the pressure of the BJP, Sonia Gandhi couldn't. She buckled under.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: I don't agree with Buddhadeb. I may agree with Buddha, but in this matter I tell you nothing was done to salvage the Congress party, nothing to salvage the government. She genuinely felt what she felt and she expressed. Had it been a pressure of party, had it been a drive from the government, I could understand that we are in an very wrong situation. Even I didn't know when she resigned. I am the Information Minister, which is the core of the media.
Karan Thapar: Let's then look at another aspect of the whole issue. How do you explain the fact that for 22 months, no one had realised that the Chairmanship of the National Advisory Council can be deemed an office of profit and needed to be exempted from disqualification. How do you explain that?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Karan, I just tell you the NAC Chief's position was created with great deliberation to implement the National Common Minimum Programme.
Karan Thapar: And no one realised that it could fall into the office of profit category?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: You can argue that point certainly. The argument is very valid and justified. But we still hold the view and still believe that any work in advisory capacity is not an office of profit.
Karan Thapar: Except that the Election Commission in the Jaya Bachchan judgment made it clear that even advisory offices can fall under the office of profit category. Therefore, there is every likelihood that Sonia Gandhi's office, advisory or not, falls under it.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: I will request you since you are one of the eminent anchors in the country, please read the several judgments of the Supreme Court in this matter. There are many grey areas. Sometimes, the Supreme Court came out there may not be money, may not be office, even a patronage.
Karan Thapar: Mr Dasmunsi, if there are grey areas, all the more reasons for you to be concerned and get the office exempted from disqualification. Let me make a further point, The Home Secretary, V K Duggal, rang up Shyam Benegal, a nominated member of the Rajya Sabha, to find out whether he holds any office of profit in case that disqualifies him. How come the same care weren't taken with Sonia Gandhi?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Such checks are there for any nomination to Parliament.
Karan Thapar: But why was there no check in Sonia Gandhi's case? Why did the government fail to protect her?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: I will just tell you. You can certainly accuse the government on this count.
Karan Thapar: Do you accept it?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: The government is still under the impression and convincingly so based on the several interpretation of the Supreme Court judgments that advisory capacity work doesn't come under this category.
Karan Thapar: But you were running a risk, because you were neither 100 per cent certain - and you cannot be 100 per cent certain. The sensible thing to do was to protect the lady. What I am pointing at is that for 22 months, you knowingly ran a risk. You failed to protect her. You ended up embarrassing her as a result. And is no one a little regretful and sorry about it?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: No. I can only say the resignation of the Mrs Gandhi is not only a great disappointment to many in the country, those who are active in politics. But at the same time I will tell you even today we hold the view - myself very strongly and Kapil (Sibal), my colleague - that advisory work in many ways ...
Karan Thapar: You are still repeating yourself. I am asking you a different question. Does the government not feel that it left Sonia Gandhi unprotected?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: The government, on the other hand, feels till today that Mrs Gandhi's resignation was not due to the lapses of 'A' or 'B' quarters.
Karan Thapar: So, you have no regret? There is no sense of embarrassment?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: No. We all in the government are disappointed. We are all hurt.
Karan Thapar: I am not talking of disappointment. I am talking of embarrassment.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: No, I can only tell you we should have examined not only Mrs Gandhi's position, every position in state and Centre, which are in the confusion areas and grey areas.
Karan Thapar: So this is a lapse?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: You can articulate it as a lapse. We can say we could have walked away easily by providing answers if certain things have happened.
PAGE_BREAK
Karan Thapar: Tell me something. Who is responsible for not examining this? For not covering the grey areas, whose blame is it?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Well, I don't try to go and blame anybody because a comprehensive assessment of the overall office of profit law has not been made for the last so many years, excepting in case of the Leader of the Opposition and Deputy Chairman of Planning Commission.
Karan Thapar: So, Sonia Gandhi is forced into an embarrassing position. She is humiliated, she is hurt. And no one in her government - remember it is her government - no one in the government feels embarrassed enough to resign?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Well, it's a very tough question. I have always said who will stay in government and who will not stay in government depends on individuals. And certainly individual is very important in terms of their conscience.
Karan Thapar: Do you then say individuals should have accepted responsibility and resigned?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Well, I can tell you governments function collectively. If any department is failing, that his task was there, it is up to him to respond.
Karan Thapar: Individual in government should have considered resigning?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: I don't like to blame any individual. Collectively, I feel the government collectively - not only our government, the government in the past also - did not go through in depth. The ultimate impact of the grey areas of the office of profit ...
Karan Thapar:And that you accept was a lapse?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Well, you can say it could be a lack of wisdom, lack of understanding, But lapse is a word which has a very serious repercussion, I can tell you. I can say right from Indira Government to our government, nobody has given office of profit to command jurisdiction within Parliament. And the jurisdiction of Election Commission and the grey areas of office of profit.
Karan Thapar: All right. On one hand, you came close to almost suggesting that you made a mistake, on the other you defend yourself. Let's leave it there.
Now, let's come to the government's handling of the office of profit issue. Given that this is a matter that affects MPs right across Parliament from all parties and given that they all would have supported you, why did you seek to resolve the matter by a surreptitious ordinance rather than a bill on the floor of the House?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: I am against amazingly watching your observation. At no point of time, there was any ordinance.
Karan Thapar: You are absolutely sure of that?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Not only absolutely sure, I say it candidly, I have said it many times in many forums. No route of ordinance was there at any point of time.
Karan Thapar: Except for the fact that you tell me there was never an ordinance, but when The Indian Express came out with the story, no minister in Parliament denied the story or refuted it. You didn't deny it. None of your colleagues denied it.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Absolutely wrong, Karan.
Karan Thapar: I have checked the records of both Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha. I have specifically checked them and there was no denial from any minister.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: On that day, the question didn't arise at all.
Karan Thapar: That was the day to answer it. The hangama happened in Parliament. You should have denied it in Parliament.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: The hangama, in the din and bustle, nobody allowed anybody to talk or speak, excepting shouting and acrimony.
Karan Thapar: All right. You had a press conference that day.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: In the press conference, I made it abundantly clear, categorically. You can check my press statement.
Karan Thapar: I am afraid I have that with me.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: In the press conference, I was posed this question. I categorically denied it.
Karan Thapar: Well, you say you categorically denied it. But PTI, the most reputed agency in the country bar none, carried a story to the effect that in fact you had confirmed that there could be an ordinance. Let me quote to you what PTI put out: "Government may bring forward an ordinance to take some posts out of the purview of office of profit. An indication to this effect was given by Parliamentary Affairs Minister Priyaranjan Dasmunsi." That's on the 22nd, the very press conference where you claimed you denied it.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Absolutely wrong. I denied. My press secretary called the PTI man, who said 'I didn't write the story'. Because my press conference was covered by television.
Karan Thapar: This was put out by PTI. It's available.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: I request you, my press conference was put out on a hundred televisions at the same time.
Karan Thapar: So, you are saying PTI is wrong.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Absolutely. Totally wrong. I called the PTI chap the very next day.
Karan Thapar: How come they never carried a denial and the correction?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: I don't know why.
PAGE_BREAK
Karan Thapar: Because PTI always carries correction.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: This is what you call the freedom of press in India!
Karan Thapar: All right.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: I put this question to you. You tell me I said so to a hundred television, why did no television show it?
Karan Thapar: Because no one in the country can recall hearing either on the floor of the House, where the matter should have been explained, or on television. You made the point after Sonia Gandhi's resignation?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: No, on 22nd.
Karan Thapar: No one recalls you saying this.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: No on 22nd. My press conference was on 22nd at 5.30 pm. You check the records. You are a television man. Why did not you check with any one of the television.
Karan Thapar: I checked PTI.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: I say with responsibility, PTI bluff.
Karan Thapar: Why don't you insist on a correction?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Yes, I insisted and they didn't.
Karan Thapar: Why?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Maybe, it's something called extraordinary freedom of the press. And I said on television.
Karan Thapar: Blame the press when you are wrong?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: No. Don't think that all are holy cow. Don't think all the politicians are liars and you are a holy cow?
Karan Thapar: Ok. I am not saying I am a holy cow. And it would not ever occur to me to call you a liar. Not even using euphemism for that. Let me make the point in this way. If the government wasn't planning an ordinance, then why did you adjourned the Parliament sine die without consulting any of the political parties and in total breach of the agreed schedule of the Budget session? Why did you do that?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Absolutely wrong. Again you are wrong in your stock and record.
Karan Thapar: Did you consult the parties?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: You just listen. You put three questions. Question one: did you consult the political parties. In the history of Indian Parliament Budget session, the moment it pauses, it's declared sine die. It does not require consultation with any party. Two, you have to inform the Speaker and the Chair and they have to agree. And three, in case they want a reason, you have to give the reason in writing. We gave in writing that Budget business is over. We want it adjourned sine die. And the next phase will begin in exact schedule.
Karan Thapar: Except for the fact that you own ally Gurudas Dasgupta of the CPI - without whose support your government would not be in power even for a day - your own ally wrote to the PM on March 24, and this is what he said: "The statement of the Leader of the House that the House had no business, therefore, it was adjourned is totally untrue."
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: No. We didn't discuss. Why should we? It's the prerogative of the government.
Karan Thapar: No, I am talking of your claim that your business had been finished and that's why you adjourned the House. Gurudas Dasgupta said it's totally untrue.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: What business was there? Financial business?
Karan Thapar: I will tell you.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Gurudas Dasgupta sometimes claims to be a revolutionary, which he is not. I say on record. He may be my ally. I say on record that on the 21st, our financial business got disposed. If Gurudas Dasgupta doesn't understand what is the meaning of government's official business of Budget and non-official business, I am sorry. I just feel pity for him.
Karan Thapar: Maybe, your financial business, and the stress is on the word financial, got disposed.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Budget means that.
Karan Thapar: But the Communal Violence Bill was supposed to have been cleared in this session. It's a major element of your Common Minimum Programme.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: No, not at all.
Karan Thapar: The Banking Reforms Bill?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: No, not at all. If Gurudas Dasgupta can prove that these two bills were approved by the business advisory committee to dispose in the House, I will resign from Parliament.
Karan Thapar: In an interview to Aaj Tak, Finance Minister in January had indicated he wanted a Pension Reforms Bill in the Budget Session. He wanted a Banking Reforms Bill, none of that happened.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Your mistake is you should know first the parliamentary procedures. Any business that is cleared by the Cabinet are not necessarily brought in the House unless that is agreed by the business advisory committee.
PAGE_BREAK
Karan Thapar: So your ally Gurudas Dasgupta, you are saying, is not just wrong, you are saying, he is making a false allegation?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Absolutely. These two bills were never discussed in the business advisory committee. It is a wrong allegation. Karan, you do so much home work. Why don't you bring the business lists of 21st and 22nd. I hope you have gone through that.
Karan Thapar: I am relying on your ally.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Why should you rely on me?
Karan Thapar: I am relying on your ally, not on you.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: I thought you are one of the eminent anchors. You should have gone through the business lists of 21st and 22nd. Whether in the lists of business, the Communal Violence Bill, Banking Reforms Bill, Pensions Bill was there?
Karan Thapar: They don't have to be on the list of 21st and 22nd or 23rd. They may have been intended for later. But you adjourned the Parliament sine die. Why?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: No, not at all. My business is over. What do I do?
Karan Thapar: Except your allies don't believe you. That's the problem. Gurudas Dasgupta said this is totally untrue. He wrote to the PM.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: I always give Gurudas an extra bonus for his self-revolution.
Karan Thapar: Let me point out to what the country thinks. The country says that the Congress government and the Congress party were so worried that Sonia Gandhi would be disqualified that they panicked and they did not know what they will do? They blundered as a result.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: I think you put a very important question for which I must answer to the nation. Sine die has no relevance with Mrs Gandhi's issue of office of profit.
Karan Thapar: But everyone thinks it does.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: No. It may, I can't question that. First of all, let me make it clear each ordinance is an unconstitutional route.
Karan Thapar: No. But it would have been an improper route. I would have been a way of circumventing the Parliament. It would have been considered improper, unconstitutional.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: I can cite hundred cases where ordinance route has been followed by several governments, including the NDA ... for Pota also.
Karan Thapar: Except when the Parliament is in session and it is available to you to pass a bill, an ordinance would have been improper.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: When Parliament is not in session, then you can't legislate without having the House adjourned sine die.
Karan Thapar: Can I quote to you Buddhadeb Bhattacharya. Last week he told us that this whole handling of Parliament and the ordinance issue was a very serious mistake. He added that it was reminiscent of the Emergency. Your own ally, on whose support you depend, is deeply critical.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: I don't think Buddhadeb said that ordinance route or parliament handling was reminiscent of Emergency.
Karan Thapar: He did, he said on television. He said it to me. He said it to me last week in this programme.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Who said what to whom in private I don't know. But if he had said so, that is an indication of Emergency, I have sympathy for Buddhadeb.
Karan Thapar:You know what the country says? The country says that the Congress party and this government today look both incompetent and they look as if they don't care about democratic proprieties and constitutional conventions.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: I categorically deny it. If any government has even performed more transparently, maintaining the constitutional tradition and the norms, it's the UPA government now.
Karan Thapar: This is not the first time that the country has alleged that this particular government has cut constitutional corners. It happened in Bihar, it happened in Jharkhand, it happened in Goa, it has happened again. People say Congress doesn't care about doing the right thing the right way.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: I don't like to question the competence of the Supreme Court. But I can only tell you what has been done, in not a single case, did we do anything which is against the constitution.
Karan Thapar: Do you as a Parliamentary Affairs Minister feel at all embarrassed by this whole ordinance fiasco?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: There is no ordinance. If suddenly you create a bogey of ordinance, I can't help it.
Karan Thapar: So, the papers are worng? The Indian Express is wrong?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Absolutely wrong.
Karan Thapar: The Times of India is wrong?
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Absolutely wrong.
Karan Thapar: Even your allies are wrong because they ...
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Allies are not wrong. Because allies always feel unless they give a critical note, they will be obviously accused of being in total support of the government. To maintain their credentials, sometimes they have to do it and we feel it's proper.
Karan Thapar: My last question to you. You are an honorable man. Put your hand in your heart and tell you have absolutely no conscience or regret about the handling of this matter.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Well, I can only say to you that had there been a total cooperation of the Opposition, on the last day, we could have clarified the position. Since they could not do so, we could not clarify the position from the treasury bench. I tried to get up twice, but I didn't get the chance.
Karan Thapar: Mr Dasmunsi, for answering all those questions, thank you very much indeed.
Priyaranjan Dasmunsi: Thank you.
Comments
0 comment