Omkar Dattatray
It is very disturbing that in our Parliamentary democracy everything is politicized. At present the political parties are playing politics over the inauguration of new parliament building. The building of new temple of democracy is complete and is ready to be used by the august parliamentarians. The new parliament house was inaugurated by the honourable Prime Minister Narindra Modi on 28th of May and inauguration stands politicized and the opposition parties have boycotted the inauguration function.
Opposition parties are of the view that what was the necessity of construction of new parliament building? The opposition parties are also of the opinion that the new parliament building should be inaugurated by the first citizen -the president of the Indian republic. The speaker of the Lok Sabha Om Birla has given invitation to all the parliamentarians and all the ex speakers about inauguration of new parliament house. But there is much unneeded politics over the inauguration of the new parliament building as many opposition parties have boycotted the inauguration ceremony of the new parliament and this is very unfortunate.
Opposition parties say that it is the dishonor of the president that the new parliament house was inaugurated by the PM Modi instead of president of India. Twenty two opposition political parties have not only declared that they will boycott the inauguration ceremony of the new parliament building but have in fact boycotted the inauguration of the new parliament house. It is very sad that the temple of democracy itself has been made the subject and object of politics of boycott. The Home Minister Amit Shah said that the new parliament building is the result of the broad mind of the PM Modi. Historic Sceptre, ‘Sengol ‘was placed in new parliament building. This sceptre was handed over to the country’s first prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru to mark the transfer of power from British to Indians.
The inauguration of the new parliament building this Sunday also saw PM Modi install a historic golden scepter near the speakers seat, union Home Minister Amit Shah said. This sceptre is called “Sengol” which derives from the Tamil word ”Semmai” meaning righteousness. The installation of the spectre in the new parliament building is an attempt to link our cultural traditions with modernity. The plan to install the sengol in the new parliament building also reflects the farsightedness of the PM Narendra Modi, said Amit Shah.
The Sengol is now at a museum in Allahabad from where it will be brought to the new address-the parliament. Prime Minister Narendra Modi had on May 28 inaugurated the new parliament building-the seat of Indian democratic system. The government has sent invitation for the event to leaders across the country, however, a huge controversy has broken out amid demands that president Droupadi Murmu should inaugurate the new parliament. Leaders of several parties have decided to boycott the event over the issue. The Prime minister laid the foundation stone of the triangular shaped building in December, 2022. Calling it ‘milestone in India’s democratic history’. He also recalled the time when he entered the parliament for the first time in 2014 as an MP, bowing his head before the temple of democracy.
The day of inauguration happens to be the birth anniversary of Hindutva ideologue Vinayak Damoder Savarkar who has been a part of ongoing war of words between the ruling BJP and Congress. May 28 is the 140th birth anniversary of Veer Savakar and many political observers believe that could be one of the reasons for objections by some political parties to the event. This apart ,the inception and construction of the new building remained mired in several controversies, including the time when PM Modi unveiled the National Emblem cast on the roof of the new building in July 2022.
The allegation was that it was not a faithful replica of the Sarnath original. Questions were raised whether India could afford to spend huge amounts of money on a project that was really not needed. A large part of the work was carried out when COVID-19 was at its peak and there was criticism over construction work being carried during lockdown. Opposition parties are habitual of politicizing every issue and even non issue and the politics over the inauguration of the new building is really a non issue and as such should not have been raised. The opposition parties are making a mountain out of the mole head which is very disturbing development indeed. Congress, NCP, AAP, SP, RJD, TMC, JDU, Shiv Sena Uddhav Thackerey, CPIM and some other parties have boycotted the inauguration ceremony of the new parliament building. However Akali Dal has disassociated itself from the boycott and so there seems to be division in the opposition camp as it has participated in the inaugural function. J&K National Conference which is the main mainstream party and traditional political party and its vice president has showered heaps of praises on new parliament building.
Meanwhile AIMIM chief Owasi has said that speaker should inaugurate the new parliament building and the inauguration by the PM goes against the theory of separation of powers and he further said that parliament is supreme institution and such supremacy of parliament should be maintained. BJP leader Prahalad Joshi has requested these opposition parties to revisit their decision of boycott but there is no response to it. Parliament building is not important and what is important is the conducting of the proceedings of the parliament and carrying of the business of parliament without disruption. Therefore emphasis should have been given to transacting the business of the parliament without the ruckus and without unwanted disruptions. What is needed is the conducting the business of both houses of parliament with utmost discipline and decorum and so new parliament building was not needed. The focus of the government should be on carrying the business of the houses of parliament smoothly and without pandemonium but it is hardly seen and hundreds of the man days of parliament are lost and the holding and carrying of the parliament should be the emphasis of the government as well as the opposition parties. The money expended on the construction of the new building of parliament should have been saved and put to use on more important things, but this is not done in this country. The politics of boycott does not serve any worthwhile purpose. The opposition parties are very important in a democracy and they should shun the policy of opposing the government for the sake of opposition and should not indulge in blind opposition but practice constructive opposition. Therefore the opposition parties should see the reason and stop to do issueless politics. Better sense should prevail on the opposition leaders and they should not go ahead with the negative politics of boycott over the inauguration ceremony but cooperate with the BJP’s government and participate in the inaugural function of the new parliament building. Finally this has not happened and by an large the opposition parties have boycotted the inauguration function of the new parliament building. This is very unfortunate, unbecoming and disturbing development and does not ague well for the country’s parliamentary democracy. There should be consensus and cooperation between the treasury benches and the opposition parties on all important matters and issues ,but unfortunately it was no so in the case of the inauguration of the new parliament building as the opposition parties were at loggerheads with the ruling party so far as the question of inauguration of the new parliament building is concerned. In short there is no place for the politics of boycott over the issue of the inauguration of the new parliament building and on all important issues and the opposition should learn the art of constructive and positive politics and should have cooperated with the government/ruling party in inauguration of the parliament. But it was not so as the majority of the opposition parties have boycotted the inauguration ceremony of the new parliament.
(The author is a columnist, social and KP activist).
