Govt indulging in ‘petty politics’: Cong

The Congress on Saturday accused the government of indulging in “petty politics” rather than bothering about constitutional principles and good governance by not admitting the Opposition motion against Justice Yashwant Varma in Rajya Sabha.
Addressing a press conference, Congress senior spokesperson Abhishek Singhvi further alleged that the government was adopting “double standards” on the issue of judicial accountability by acting against Justice Varma but ignoring the motion against Justice Shekhar Yadav of Allahabad High Court. Singhvi also described former vice president Jagdeep Dhankhar’s ouster as a “political exit camouflaged as a constitutional lie”. He said the Congress is “very concerned” about the “selective outrage and selective silence” on the issue of two judges – Justice Varma and Justice Yadav. “This is typical of BJP’s double standards and yet another example of BJP’s and the Modi Sarkar’s ‘theatre of the absurd’. The BJP’s game of motions is less about law and more about optics. A desperate dance to distract and dominate. And, how petty a dance to distract and dominate — Our house Lok Sabha first and not Rajya Sabha and out you go Mr Vice President.
“On judicial propriety, on anti-corruption movement and on judicial accountability, the BJP’s mantra is — ‘Talk the talk, never walk the talk, Keep talking the talk’. It is the worst example of doublespeak and hypocrisy on this entire episode,” he told reporters.
On Dhankhar’s sudden resignation, Singhvi said, “It appears that Mr Dhankhar’s showing of some minimal independence possibly belatedly was his real mistake. No other mistake.” “In this climate of selective outrage and politicised morality, we must also ask this question from both former Vice President Dhankhar and the Government of India, as to this continuing eloquent silence on Justice Yadav,” he asked. The Congress leader alleged that the government was so particularised about Lok Sabha versus Rajya Sabha, but maintained this remarkably eloquent silence on Justice Yadav, a person whose comments as a sitting judge, he alleged “read more like manifestos of a political party than any legal reasoning”. Singhvi recalled that on July 21, Congress and other parties moved a decisive constitutional motion in Rajya Sabha for various improprieties by Justice Varma and, in particular, for the creation of a statutory inquiry committee as required by the statute. This motion had the signatures of 63 Rajya Sabha members, it is cross party. Additionally, another motion had the signatures of 152 Lok Sabha members also cross-party, he said. “The statement is crystal clear. Was Mr Dhankhar and the whole house watching a movie, were they watching a shadow boxing or dance, drama. When the Vice president was speaking, he was talking of a motion, physical thing in his hand and numerical requirement being satisfied,” he said, noting that it as as per the Act of Parliament that if there are two motions in the houses, then the two have to be both joined to form a statutory committee.
When the former chairman of Rajya Sabha asked the law minister whether the second motion had been moved in Lok Sabha, Meghwal replied in the affirmative. But yesterday, he said, a former Law Minister Kiren Rijiju, “was dispensing wisdom”, claiming that no motion had been admitted in the Rajya Sabha at all.
“Did not the chairman Dhankhar clearly make by his words this issue the property of the house. If he was not doing this, then why did he ask Mr Meghwal about the same day introduction in Lok Sabha,” he asked.
Singhvi said there is no doubt in anyone familiar with parliamentary affairs that Dhankhar intended to make the motion the property of the House that day and clearly proceed further with it in collaboration with Lok Sabha.
“Today, all this drama is being staged for what? The Modi government is insecure because it can’t control the narrative,” he noted.
“It shows many facets of this government, the way it works, the way it think and this ruling party. The first is that it ignores the clear cooperation, collegiality, the togetherness of both the houses intended by the proviso to section 3 of the act of Parliament,” he said.
“Here, this government and this ruling party’s talking of competition, a race as to who declares and announces first, was this the statutory intent,” Singhvi asked. “Today, all this dance and drama is being done for what. so that your insecurity in not having control of the narrative is established. You are insecure. You are embarrassed? Why should the opposition in the Congress have a motion at all? Is that not petty, is that not childish, is that not silly,” he said.