India News Online » News Analysis » Indian Politics » 

Parliament session : Opposition trains its guns on NDA

	November 26, 2001

The NDA government found itself in the line of fire at the start of the winter session of Parliament as the opposition mounted an offensive on issues ranging from the anti-terrorism ordinance and the entry of VHP activists into the Ayodhya complex to the reinduction of George Fernandes as Defence Minister. Even as the government was struggling to save its face on the issue of POTO, a fresh controversy on the deletion of some passages in history books for school children, considered offensive to the Hindutva ideology, threatened to disrupt proceedings next week.

The Prime Minister was working on a strategy how best to make the Congress see reason on the need for the law on checking terrorism, when to his surprise he found that quite a few of the allies in the NDA too had reservations and wanted that adequate safeguards should be provided, especially for the Press. The lack of consensus within the NDA was a clear signal that it will be quite a task to get POTO approved by Parliament. It led to the cancellation of the all-party meeting that the Prime Minister was planning. The Bill on the subject may now be only introduced, if at all, in December before the adjournment of Parliament. As the opposition demand for dilution of the POTO provisions is not acceptable to the hawks in the BJP, a consensus seems unlikely. In that case, a re-promulgation of the ordinance after the end of the session is likely.

After the initial embarrassment over the booing of George Fernandes when he was introduced in Parliament, the Prime Minister has brought the issue to a close with the argument that no one can question his prerogative of inducting into the Cabinet the person of his choice. Home Minister L.K. Advani defused the uproar over the VHP entry into the makeshift temple complex by criticising the action and assuring the House that the government stood by its commitment to secularism and adhering to court directives in the matter.

After the Prime Minister’s tacit support for the rewriting of history books meant for schoolchildren, a fresh battle is likely in Parliament as the opposition parties see in the move the Talibanisation of education.



Govt climbdown on POTO

With the opposition signalling emphatically that it will not allow the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance to be passed in the present form in Parliament and even some of the BJP allies in the NDA expressing reservations, the Government is exploring how to save its face. By sticking to its strong attack on the provisions of POTO, the opposition has forced the Government to postpone even the introduction of the Bill on the subject. Now it is not even clear whether it will be taken up in this session or put off to the Budget session. All options are being discussed in Government circles. But Prime Minister Vajpayee has ruled out holding a joint session of Parliament to get the controversial terrorism ordinance passed. He has said there was no need for it. Home Minister L.K.Advani had also said that he saw no need for a joint session of Parliament - an idea that other NDA ministers have been mooting.

Vajpayee was also not forthcoming whether POTO will be sent to a select committee of Parliament, as is being demanded by the Congress. The BJP is still hoping that the Congress will either come around and support the Bill after a few amendments or it will walk out in protest. This too would facilitate the passage of the Bill. The Government’s approach towards POTO’s passage shows that it is pursuing two distinct lines of thought, not unlike the Congress which too has two schools of thought on the subject. Vajpayee would like to pass the anti-terrorist legislation by consensus and demonstrate to the world that the political community is behind him in his resolve to combat terrorism. But the Home Minister reportedly feels that the Government should go ahead and try to pass the Bill with minor amendments. And, if the Congress votes against it, the Government should let it be defeated in the Rajya Sabha.

Following this, the UP Government can go ahead and bring a state ordinance on the subject. Chief Minister Rajnath Singh had a meeting with Advani in Delhi last week. It is not surprising that most state Governments are in favour of POTO. Even Budhadev Bhattacharya is for introducing such a law in West Bengal. Till their meeting with Sonia Gandhi, the Congress chief ministers too were in favour of POTO. Karnataka and Maharashtra are already having similar laws in place. It is the parties in the opposition in the states, including BJP’s allies at the Centre - the Trinamool Congress and the DMK - which fear that the law would be used against them by the Governments in power. The DMK fears that the AIADMK would use POTO against it in Tamil Nadu. The Trinamool harbours similar apprehensions about the misuse of the anti-terrorist law by the Left Front against its cadre in West Bengal.

Under increasing pressure from the Opposition and even its own allies, the Government has indicated that it would be prepared to drop the “offending provisions” relating to the press in POTO. Advani has indicated that the Government “could be open” to dropping those clauses-Section 3 (8)-under which citizens-and this includes journalists-have to disclose any information they have related to terrorism or face imprisonment up to a year. Section 14 of the Ordinance, however, is far more draconian. Under this, a citizen can be imprisoned for up to three years for refusing to give information to police. These provisions could possibly be deleted, Advani has indicated, adding a rider: “terrorist activity” could be included in Section 39 of the CrP.C and Section 187 of the IPC which put such a responsibility on a citizen in relation to various crimes. This is relatively less harsh given that there is no bar on bail under the ordinary law.

It would be an “oddity,” Advani claimed, for the ordinary law of the land to place such a responsibility on people but for the anti-terrorist law to negate it. Two specific amendments had been mooted by the BJP’s allies, Chandrababu Naidu and Vaiko. One related to the Press, and the other to the recording of confessions and it had been suggested by Vaiko that the time permitted for recording confessions before a Chief Judicial Magistrate be reduced from 48 hours to 24 hours. The NDA was in favour of effecting these changes but deferred the decision.

Advani too did not see the necessity for a joint session of Parliament to ratify POTO. But a section in the Government has floated this idea if the Bill is defeated in the Rajya Sabha. Although this is being considered an academic question, it’s also seen as a warning to the Congress. The NDA would have a clear majority if a joint session of Parliament were to be called. The NDA and the TDP strength in both Houses of Parliament is 407, and this would increase to 433 with the support of the AIADMK and the NCP. The total strength of the opposition parties is 375 and without the NCP and the AIADMK, 344. A joint sitting of Parliament was called on May 6-9, 1961, to clear the Dowry Prohibition Bill 1959. Later, a joint sitting of Parliament was called on May 16, 1978 to clear the Banking Service Commission (Repeal) Bill, 1977. On both the occasions, it was a Congress Government that sought the joint sitting. Article 108 of the Constitution provides for calling of a joint sitting of Parliament, if a legislation rejected by the Rajya Sabha.

But the Prime Minister has still not given up hope on reaching a consensus on POTO. He will convene an all-party meeting to thrash out the issue. Vajpayee told the BJP parliamentary party meeting that the Government will continue with its efforts to evolve a consensus on the issue notwithstanding the politically-motivated objections raised by the Opposition. He said the Opposition was seeking to capitalise on POTO with an eye on the upcoming Assembly elections. Some parties, he claimed, had already made it an election issue. According to BJP parliamentary party secretary Vijay Kumar Malhotra later the Government was ready to remove any provision in POTO which could be misused. But the political parties should cite the specific clauses they object to and suggest safeguards. Till now, the Opposition’s criticism had been general rather than specific. Malhotra said that during the meeting the PM asked the BJP members to prepare themselves to face the Opposition over POTO in Parliament. When Malhotra’s attention was drawn to objections raised by the NHRC, the BJP leader retorted that the Commission’s was not the last word on human rights. Pramod Mahajan has said he expects the anti-terrorism Bill to be introduced in Parliament in the second week of December. Other senior BJP leaders also feel that a joint sitting may not be required at all. They feel that after its initial rejection of POTO, the Congress has now realised the political danger of blocking the new anti-terrorism law. The party is in power in eleven states where its own Governments would implement the law. Also, the central leadership of the party has come under pressure from its state Governments for a POTO-like law. As far as the proposed law is concerned - Prime Minister Vajpayee’s and NDA convener George Fernandes’ talk about willingness to “remove apprehensions” notwithstanding - senior Government sources rule out any dilution of POTO’s provisions in the immediate future.

The delay in bringing the Bill in Parliament is thus mainly to provide time to the Congress to give more thought to the issue. The Business Advisory Committee of the Lok Sabha has decided that the Lok Sabha would discuss farmers’ issues, followed by focus on discussing the Prime Minister’s foreign visit and related issues. The Government does not expect any support from the Samajwadis or the Left parties. The Prime Minister is believed to be opposed to steamrolling the anti-terrorism law through Parliament and would like the Opposition to carry along with the Government in passing the Bill. But in case consensus eludes the anti-terrorism law, the Government is more likely to go in for re-promulgation of the ordinance, Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (POTO), rather than take the option of calling a joint sitting of Parliament and get the Bill passed.

According to political observers the Prime Minister’s call for building consensus did not mean he was indicating the Government’s willingness to water down the POTO to make it toothless. There is also a realisation in the BJP camp that it had been tactless for the party leaders to try and make political capital out of the issue. This has made it more difficult for the Government to build up a national consensus issue on an issue that the Government considers beyond political boundaries and in national interest.

The declaration by V.K. Malhotra during the Amritsar session of the BJP national executive that in case POTO failed to get parliament clearance, the BJP would be in a way fortunate to make political capital out of it in the Uttar Pradesh elections. Such a statement is being seen as acting as a hurdle to consensus building as they present the ordinance not as something needed in national interest but guided by political considerations. The so called win-win situation is ironically now turning out to be a lose-lose scenario. If POTO is defeated in Parliament, it will be a slap in the face for the NDA. On the other hand, if the Government were to dilute or delete some provisions, it would be considered again a victory for the opposition.

If the Bill to replace POTO comes up in Parliament only in the later part of December, hardly eight working days would be available for POTO to be debated in the two Houses and passed. There are two possibilities after the introduction of the Bill. If the Congress insists, it could be sent to a joint select committee, or the standing committee on Home for deeper discussion. The Congress may not favour the Bill in the current session and may like to take it up only in the Budget session, after the UP Assembly elections were over. The repromulgation of the ordinance is the option that may be exercised by the Government rather than the calling of a joint session as the Government would like a national consensus behind an anti-terrorism Act to develop, even if it takes time. The willingness to wait for a consensus also indicates that the Government may not be in a mood to water down the provisions of POTO in order to placate the opposition, much less the allies.



NDA allies for safeguards

The allies have not only cleared POTO through their representatives in the Union Cabinet, they have also supported the need for POTO at the steering committee meeting but pointed out that safeguards against misuse of POTO should be included. The NDA meeting , which was essentially called to endorse the ordinance, in the end passed a resolution which “unanimously supported the ordinance on POTO” and yet “at the same time” requested the Government to “take necessary steps to remove any apprehensions that it can be misused against the Press, political opponents and any specific community.”

The Akali Dal did not attend the NDA meeting. The Akali Dal faces state Assembly elections early next year and its constituency, the Jat Sikhs have bad memories of TADA. Moreover, G S Tohra will not let go of an opportunity to pushing rival Prakash Singh Badal against the wall. Though the BJP is a junior partner in the alliance in Punjab, it has high stakes there in the forthcoming elections. Besides, the Akali Dal, the other party which did not attend the NDA meet was the Trinamool Congress. In recent days, Mamata Banerjee has criticised the ordinance and said in Kolkata that her party would oppose the proposed Bill on the prevention of organised crime that the Left Front Government plans to bring in the West Bengal Assembly shortly. Despite two Cabinet expansions, Mamata has not yet been reinducted into the Union Cabinet.

The TDP has also expressed its reservations, though the party is not a member of the NDA. Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu had sought an amendment in Sections 14 and 3(8a) of the ordinance which relate to the media at the Chief Ministers’ conference. Those who expressed apprehensions about the misuse of the law at the NDA meet included Murasoli Maran (DMK), Sharad Yadav (JD-U), Ram Vilas Paswan and S.D. Sharieq (NC). Maran recalled how the DMK’s support had been sought for the enactment of MISA with the assurance that it would not be misused but the DMK leaders were among the first to be arrested under it. Sharieq is believed to have related experiences on the misuse of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act. The DMK feels the rival AIADMK led by Jayalalithaa may exploit provisions in POTO for political reasons and try to crush the DMK further. Haryana Chief Minister Om Prakash Chautala reportedly flayed POTO, though the INLD representative did not say much at the NDA meet. The Prime Minister has been depending on Chautala, who accompanied Vajpayee in his plane to Amritsar.

The current exercise in the Government is to redefine terrorism so that the law cannot be misdirected against anyone other than terrorists. At present confession before the police is not easily accepted by law. There are enough reasons for it. The Government has not been able to explain convincingly why such confessions, which could be the result of torture, should be acceptable in a court of law. The media’s main objection is the apparent bid to curb their freedom. So unless, the safeguards in POTO are strengthened and clearly defined, it will be difficult for the Government to get Parliament’s approval for POTO.



Sonia pledges cooperation for a diluted POTO

There were signs that Congress chief Sonia Gandhi, who had a separate meeting with the Prime Minister to get clarifications on the offending provisions of POTO, may be ready to cooperate if the anti-terrorist legislation is made democratic. She made it clear that the Congress was totally opposed to POTO in its present form. Addressing a meeting of the Congress Parliamentary Party, she lashed out at the BJP for trying to portray the Congress as being soft on terrorism. “The nation knows the price the Congress has paid in its fight against terrorism. It does not need a certificate from a Government that escorted three hijackers in a VIP-like manner to Kandahar,” she said referring to the hijack of the Indian Airlines plane.

The Congress has decided to keep the heat on the Government on issues like the “saffronisation of education”, Doha Declaration of the WTO and its implications for the country, besides the reinduction of George Fernandes as Defence Minister and the VHP’s flouting of Supreme Court orders at Ayodhya. Sonia also referred to the irony of the mounting grain stock and persistent malnutrition and declining PDS offtake. Recalling she had written to the Prime Minister about this during the last Parliament session, Sonia regretted that nothing had been done on her suggestions.

She pointed out that farmers had not yet received the minimum support price either for grain or cash crops. And the economy is in the doldrums and growth has plummeted. “The Centre cannot hide behind the excuse of a global slowdown. Its policy failures are to blame for our predicament,” she said.