No dharnas in Parliament, really?

As the nation girds up to celebrate an extraordinary moment in its glorious history-the 75th year of Independence, there are some things one can do without and one of them is a move by Lok Sabha officials to check the use of words they consider inappropriate for an august house like Parliament.

Though Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla has subsequently clarified that no word has been banned from use in the House, the move has certainly had a jarring effect on parliamentarians who would not like to have their repertoire of expressions curtailed for the sake of the ruling party’s sense of propriety. But even before the curtains could come down on the ‘word war’ if one can call it that, the Rajya Sabha secretariat has triggered another row by stating that Parliament House can’t be used for dharnas, protests, fasts or religious ceremonies.

The Opposition no doubt, is livid with NCP supremo Sharad Pawar stating that leaders of all parties will meet to discuss their course of action on these curbs. General Secretary of the CPM, Sitaram Yechury has described the curbs as a move to muzzle the voice of democracy. The Rajya Sabha secretariat has meanwhile rushed to justify its decision claiming that such circulars are issued normally ahead of every session.

Parliament has no doubt seen many an ‘unparliamentary act’ over the decades since Independence which have left citizens wondering if they do any good to the image of the country. But they have also been interpreted as acts of defiance by parliamentarians against government decisions or neglect of their constituencies and are inevitably given a go-by.

That such acts have happened in the past does not mean any government has the right to impose its own set of rules to stamp out protests and ensure ‘discipline’ if one may call it that. Will such curbs do any good to a nation where millons repose their faith in parliamentarians every five years to bring good to their lives and make them a happier lot?

Such policy decisions, whether they are tough or easy, are never made without full-fledged debates in the House. And if members feel that the government of the day has not been responding appropriately to their arguments and decide to stage a protest in the House, can anyone blame them for this? Are these dharnas not an inherent part of every democracy where the ruling party and Opposition spar on important issues so that the nation benefits in the best way from the final decision? Does anything happen in a country of a thousand million without ‘pyrotechnics’ which also serve to bring up unknown facets of an issue?

That the ruling party has the numbers to get through any legislation in Parliament is pretty well known to everyone. So why try to prevent the Opposition from even holding token protests to register their voice of dissent which goes to prove the healthy trends in our democracy? The coming days are sure to see a fiery debate on these curbs.

Parliamentarians and legislators are mature enogh not to cross the bounds of decency while engaging in protests in the Houses to which they have been elected for they know the people are watching their every move. So why try to fetter the dynamics inside the House by imposing such rules which will in the long run, do no good to our democracy?