would go to the Standing Committee and when the House would take it up for discussion, it could decide the issue. Shri Mukherjee said the then NDA government failed to pass the Lokpal Bill even though the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home had presented its report on the Bill.
Smt. Kumar had received notices of adjournment motion from two members regarding the reported agitation by Shri Hazare on 16 August. The Speaker disallowed the notices of adjournment motion observing that the matter, though important enough, did not warrant interruption of business of the House for the day. The Speaker had also received notices of suspension of Question Hour from some Members regarding the fast by Shri Hazare and corruption in the country. She disallowed the demand as there was no provision in the Rules of Procedure under which members could make a demand for suspension of the Question Hour. The Speaker, however, allowed the members who had given notices to very briefly touch upon the subject. The House was, however, adjourned due to interruptions. On 17 August, the Prime
Minister, Dr Manmohan Singh made a statement regarding setting up of Lokpal and certain events including the arrest of Shri Hazare that took place on 16 August in New Delhi. He said notwithstanding the introduction of the Bill, Shri Hazare and his supporters had persisted with their demand that the Jan Lokpal Bill drafted by Shri Hazare should be introduced in Parliament and passed it.
While agreeing that a Lokpal Bill must be passed as early as possible, the Prime Minister said it was for the Executive to
INDIA
draft a Bill and place it before Parliament. It was the Parliament that was to debate and adopt the Bill with amendments, if necessary. In the process of adoption of the Lokpal Bill, there would be opportunities for Shri Hazare and others to present their views to the Standing Committee to which this Bill had been referred by the Speaker. The Prime Minister said he was not aware of any constitutional philosophy or principle that allowed any one to question the sole prerogative of Parliament to make a law. In making a law on Lokpal, the government had faithfully adhered to the well-settled principles and Shri Hazare was questioning these principles and claimed a right to impose his Jan Lokpal Bill upon Parliament. The path chosen by Shri Hazare to impose his draft of a Bill upon Parliament was totally misconceived and fraught with grave consequences for the parliamentary democracy. He assured the House that the government was determined to provide a government that was transparent, accountable and
appealed to all sections of the House to ensure that the government and its processes,
Smt. Sushma Swaraj
and the Parliament and its processes functioned smoothly and effectively.
As soon as the Speaker asked the Leader of the Opposition to initiate the discussion, the Leader of the Opposition requested the presence of Dr Singh as it was he who had made the statement. The discussion started when the Lok Sabha reassembled at 12 noon. Many opposition members criticized the government for arresting Shri Hazare and shifting the responsibility to the Delhi Police. Raising a discussion on the Prime Minister’s statement, Smt. Swaraj said the government was trying to muzzle the voice of the opposition both outside and inside the House. The country would never forgive the government for the treatment of Shri Hazare.
Dr Manmohan Singh, MP
responsive at all times and determined to fight corruption. The elected representatives of the people in Parliament must be allowed to do the job that they were elected for. He
342 | The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four
When the Chair called the Minister of Home Affairs to reply to the discussion, Shri Dasgupta (CPI) raised a point of order. He said since the statement was made by the Prime Minister, as per convention, he should reply to the discussion.
Replying to the debate, the Minister of Home Affairs, Shri P. Chidambaram said there
was a general appreciation that Shri Hazare had taken up a cause that has been neglected by Parliament for very long. The government genuinely felt that it must engage civil society on this subject. The government invited some members of the civil society and discussed the drafting of the Bill with them. It was done with the genuine and sincere intention of arriving at a Bill that would have the widest consensus. The Minister said that Shri Hazare had an undoubted right to protest at an appropriate place which was agreed to by the Police having regard to the situation. If there was an apprehension that there would be a breach of peace, and if there was an
apprehension that there would be disturbance to tranquility, the police could take action and the Police had acted in their best judgment. Parliament alone could make law and if civil society wished to have a role in the making of the law, the government would try to find a way in which civil society could have a role in making the law. Accepting the argument of Shri Hazare that a strong and effective Lokpal bill must be passed, the Minister rejected the argument that only the Jan Lokpal Bill must be passed. An All Party Meeting held on 24 August to discuss the matter, a resolution was passed unanimously appealing Shri Hazare to end his fast. The resolution called for giving due consideration to the Jan Lokpal Bill so that the final draft of the Bill provided for a strong and effective Lokpal, supported by broad national consensus. Several opposition parties urged the government to withdraw the Bill already introduced and bring an effective one. Replying to a debate on corruption in the Lok Sabha on 25 August, the Prime Minister announced that the