Taking strong objection to the manner in which the ruling party resorted to numerous interventions from the beginning of the speech of the Leader of the Opposition Thalapathi M.K.Stalin in the Assembly in the debate of the motion of thanks for Governor’s address on Jun 22, DMK President Kalaignar on Jun 23 said that democracy was the casualty in Tamil Nadu Assembly and wondered whether only such scenes would continue to be enacted and whether there was any way for the rejuvenation of democracy struggling of life.
In his epistle to party cadre on the day, Kalaignar said that after the elections Governor K. Rosaiah read out the address on behalf of the ADMK regime on Jun 16. In 2006 also after the DMK assumed office the then Governor S.S.Barnala read out the address and the Speaker R. Avudaayppan read out the Tamil version of the address. But prior to 2006 the ADMK regime had dispensed with the practice of reading out the Tamil version of the Governor’s address which was renewed by the DMK in 2006. Fortunately the ADMK which came to power in 2011 continued with the practice.
After the House was adjourned following the Governor’s address the meeting of the Business Advisory Committee (BAC) meeting would be held in the Speaker’s chamber in which members of all parties participated and spoke about many issues. During DMK rules, he (Kalaignar) used to participate in every BAC meeting but Jayalalitha did not seem to have participated in any such meetings, possibly because it was below her stature. If any important decision had to be taken in such meetings the Ministers would rush to the CM’s chamber to know her opinion and came back to inform it. Till then other members of the committee had to wait. “This was an example for how democracy is preserved in the Assembly in ADMK regime”, he said.
On 30.5.2006 as the then Chief Minister he replied to the debate on Governor’s address, Kalaignar said adding that on the same day G.K. Mani (PMK) and D. Sudarsanam (Cong) also spoke and he only spoke after them not insisting that only he as the CM should speak.
In 2007, the Governor delivered his address on 20.1.2007 when the ADMK members rose up, shouted in uncivilized manner and walked out. On 27.1.2007 he replied to the debate after G.K. Mani (PMK) and D. Sudarsanam (Cong) spoke. In 2008, Governor Barnala spoke on 23.1.2008 and he replied to the debate on 1.2.2008. In 2009 Governor Barnala spoke on 21.1.2009 and as he was admitted in hospital following back pain Local Administration Minister M.K.Stalin replied to the debate.
In 2010, the Governor’s address was read out on 6.1.2010 and after G.K. Mani (PMK), Peter Alphonse (Cong) and Jayalalitha (ADMK) spoke, the then Deputy Chief Minister replied to the debate on 11.1.2010, when he (Kalaignar) was also present in the House. He said that he was recollecting all these details only to show the convention that the Chief Minister would reply to the debate on Governor’s address on the last day only after the Leader of the Opposition spoke. This convention was followed for long. But this had been changed and the Leader of the Opposition was asked to speak on the previous day to the reply of the CM. “This is how conventions are being preserved now”, Kalaignar said.
Though the DMK has unprecedented strength of 89 members as opposition party, Stalin said it would not conduct itself as rival party and placed some demands, the first of which was seating arrangement facilitating his (Kalaignar’s) attendance and participation in the proceedings in consideration of his health condition. But they allocated seat in the second row into which the wheel chair could not enter. The second was opportunity for three member of the DMK to speak every day in consideration of its strength, there were not many parties in the opposition and the fact 90 minutes for Question Hour was unspent. But neither the ruling party nor the Speaker had the magnanimity to accept it and only two members from the parry were allowed to speak. “This is also a tight one-way path democracy of the ADMK”, Kalaignar said.
The next demand was opportunity for the Leader of the Opposition to speak on the same day the Chief Minister replied to the debate for the continuation of the longstanding convention. But that democratic right was also refused.
If the circumstances warranted a Minister next to the Chief Minister had to reply due the health of the Chief Minister, he/she should remain in the House when opposition members spoke, take notes, prepare reply and come to the House for replying. If possible the CM should reply to the points raised by those in opposition rows. But now Jayalalitha was present in the House on only one day for one or one and a half hour only to blame him for Katchatheevu imbroglio and left the House. Then she had come only on the last day for replying to the debate. She did not come when the Leader of the Opposition M.K.Stalin and others in opposition rows spoke in the debate. Than showing to what extent she honoured the House and opposition members, this made clear to what extent she trampled upon democracy to be preserved, Kalaignar said.
The Speaker was the presiding officer for ruling and opposition parties and to be respected by all. But in Tamil Nadu, the Speaker carrying a huge bouquet bowed down to the Chief Minister to present it to welcome her to the House. Where such atrocious democracy could be witnessed?
Next, last time now in the Assembly, it was atrocious that Ministers intervened when members of the opposition spoke and the Speaker ordering the member concerned to resume his seat as the time allotted to him was over. The clarifications offered by Ministers mostly were ‘Amma’ puranas! If the questions were such that they could not reply the Speaker would come to their rescue and expunge what was spoken. “This is the legislative democracy followed by the ADMK” he said.
In particular, from the moment Leader of the Opposition M.K.Stalin started speaking there were lot of interventions but without giving in he spoke on many issues of the State. In between when he tried to speak on the confiscation of Rs 370 crore in containers, the raid in the places of one Anbunathan near Karur, close to the Ministers, the government lawyer giving letter to the judge to relieve him as the police was not cooperating in the case against the younger brother of the Finance Minister- he was not permitted to speak. “If this issue should not be spoken in the House which was uncivilized and below dignity word that should not be uttered in the House? Does not democracy in the Assembly permit seeking clarification to people? It there was honesty and fairness on the side of the ruling party they should have come forward to clarify. Why they are running away from democratic approach? Is this Tamil Nadu Assembly? Will only such anti-democratic scenes continue to be enacted? Is there any way for democracy already struggling for life to get rejuvenated?” Kalaignar asked.
In his epistle to party cadre on the day, Kalaignar said that after the elections Governor K. Rosaiah read out the address on behalf of the ADMK regime on Jun 16. In 2006 also after the DMK assumed office the then Governor S.S.Barnala read out the address and the Speaker R. Avudaayppan read out the Tamil version of the address. But prior to 2006 the ADMK regime had dispensed with the practice of reading out the Tamil version of the Governor’s address which was renewed by the DMK in 2006. Fortunately the ADMK which came to power in 2011 continued with the practice.
After the House was adjourned following the Governor’s address the meeting of the Business Advisory Committee (BAC) meeting would be held in the Speaker’s chamber in which members of all parties participated and spoke about many issues. During DMK rules, he (Kalaignar) used to participate in every BAC meeting but Jayalalitha did not seem to have participated in any such meetings, possibly because it was below her stature. If any important decision had to be taken in such meetings the Ministers would rush to the CM’s chamber to know her opinion and came back to inform it. Till then other members of the committee had to wait. “This was an example for how democracy is preserved in the Assembly in ADMK regime”, he said.
On 30.5.2006 as the then Chief Minister he replied to the debate on Governor’s address, Kalaignar said adding that on the same day G.K. Mani (PMK) and D. Sudarsanam (Cong) also spoke and he only spoke after them not insisting that only he as the CM should speak.
In 2007, the Governor delivered his address on 20.1.2007 when the ADMK members rose up, shouted in uncivilized manner and walked out. On 27.1.2007 he replied to the debate after G.K. Mani (PMK) and D. Sudarsanam (Cong) spoke. In 2008, Governor Barnala spoke on 23.1.2008 and he replied to the debate on 1.2.2008. In 2009 Governor Barnala spoke on 21.1.2009 and as he was admitted in hospital following back pain Local Administration Minister M.K.Stalin replied to the debate.
In 2010, the Governor’s address was read out on 6.1.2010 and after G.K. Mani (PMK), Peter Alphonse (Cong) and Jayalalitha (ADMK) spoke, the then Deputy Chief Minister replied to the debate on 11.1.2010, when he (Kalaignar) was also present in the House. He said that he was recollecting all these details only to show the convention that the Chief Minister would reply to the debate on Governor’s address on the last day only after the Leader of the Opposition spoke. This convention was followed for long. But this had been changed and the Leader of the Opposition was asked to speak on the previous day to the reply of the CM. “This is how conventions are being preserved now”, Kalaignar said.
Though the DMK has unprecedented strength of 89 members as opposition party, Stalin said it would not conduct itself as rival party and placed some demands, the first of which was seating arrangement facilitating his (Kalaignar’s) attendance and participation in the proceedings in consideration of his health condition. But they allocated seat in the second row into which the wheel chair could not enter. The second was opportunity for three member of the DMK to speak every day in consideration of its strength, there were not many parties in the opposition and the fact 90 minutes for Question Hour was unspent. But neither the ruling party nor the Speaker had the magnanimity to accept it and only two members from the parry were allowed to speak. “This is also a tight one-way path democracy of the ADMK”, Kalaignar said.
The next demand was opportunity for the Leader of the Opposition to speak on the same day the Chief Minister replied to the debate for the continuation of the longstanding convention. But that democratic right was also refused.
If the circumstances warranted a Minister next to the Chief Minister had to reply due the health of the Chief Minister, he/she should remain in the House when opposition members spoke, take notes, prepare reply and come to the House for replying. If possible the CM should reply to the points raised by those in opposition rows. But now Jayalalitha was present in the House on only one day for one or one and a half hour only to blame him for Katchatheevu imbroglio and left the House. Then she had come only on the last day for replying to the debate. She did not come when the Leader of the Opposition M.K.Stalin and others in opposition rows spoke in the debate. Than showing to what extent she honoured the House and opposition members, this made clear to what extent she trampled upon democracy to be preserved, Kalaignar said.
The Speaker was the presiding officer for ruling and opposition parties and to be respected by all. But in Tamil Nadu, the Speaker carrying a huge bouquet bowed down to the Chief Minister to present it to welcome her to the House. Where such atrocious democracy could be witnessed?
Next, last time now in the Assembly, it was atrocious that Ministers intervened when members of the opposition spoke and the Speaker ordering the member concerned to resume his seat as the time allotted to him was over. The clarifications offered by Ministers mostly were ‘Amma’ puranas! If the questions were such that they could not reply the Speaker would come to their rescue and expunge what was spoken. “This is the legislative democracy followed by the ADMK” he said.
In particular, from the moment Leader of the Opposition M.K.Stalin started speaking there were lot of interventions but without giving in he spoke on many issues of the State. In between when he tried to speak on the confiscation of Rs 370 crore in containers, the raid in the places of one Anbunathan near Karur, close to the Ministers, the government lawyer giving letter to the judge to relieve him as the police was not cooperating in the case against the younger brother of the Finance Minister- he was not permitted to speak. “If this issue should not be spoken in the House which was uncivilized and below dignity word that should not be uttered in the House? Does not democracy in the Assembly permit seeking clarification to people? It there was honesty and fairness on the side of the ruling party they should have come forward to clarify. Why they are running away from democratic approach? Is this Tamil Nadu Assembly? Will only such anti-democratic scenes continue to be enacted? Is there any way for democracy already struggling for life to get rejuvenated?” Kalaignar asked.
No comments:
Post a Comment