267 Or 176: On Manipur, Opposition vs Centre Over Parliament Rules

New Delhi:

A day after a huge ruckus over a horrific video of two women being paraded naked on a road by a group of men in Manipur cut short proceedings in both houses of the Parliament, the Centre is facing yet another political storm on the second day of the Monsoon session. Opposition parties yesterday demanded all other business be suspended for the day to take up the Manipur issue, but the government agreed only to a “Short Duration Discussion”. The Rajya Sabha was today adjourned till 2:30 pm and the Lok Sabha for the entire day after loud protests from the Opposition on the same issue.

As soon as the Lok Sabha met, the members of the opposition parties were on their feet. The members, including those from the Congress, DMK and Left, raised slogans and told Speaker Om Birla that “Manipur is bleeding”. The speaker told opposition members that sloganeering will not bring any solution to the problem but only dialogues and discussions can. “This is not good. Solution can be found only through discussions,” he said.

In the Rajya Sabha, Chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar adjourned proceedings till 2:30 pm as Trinamool congress MP Derek O’Brien sought to raise a point of order over the expunging of certain words from the House proceedings on Thursday.

The Opposition is demanding a longer discussion under rule 267, while the Centre yesterday said it was “keen and agreeable” only to a shorter discussion under rule 176.

However, Junior Parliamentary Affairs Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal today claimed the Opposition deliberately does not want a discussion on Manipur. They are changing their stand again and again, and referring to the rules, he said, adding that the Centre is ready to discuss Manipur. “Home Minister will reply on this,” he said.

“Their (Opposition) MPs had submitted notices under rule 176 as well. The Chairman was reading them out when they jumped in saying they want a discussion only under rule 267. The Chairman explained he was just reading out notices in a sequence and would come to 267 as well, but they didn’t listen to him. Then they started demanding that the PM come to the Parliament and give a statement. They keep changing their stand,” Mr Meghwal said, appealing to the Opposition to not indulge in politics on it as it’s a “sensitive issue”.

Parliamentary Affairs Minister Pralhad Joshi also said the government was “completely ready” for a discussion. Defence Minister Rajnath Singh too said they want a discussion.

#WATCH | Defence Minister Rajnath Singh on the Manipur violence says, “I feel the opposition is not serious about the discussion on the Manipur issue. The government wants to discuss the Manipur issue. PM Modi himself said that the country is ashamed of whatever has happened in… pic.twitter.com/GlTZ3sj9uM

— ANI (@ANI) July 21, 2023

Leader of the Opposition Mallikarjun Kharge had yesterday said, “We have also given notices under 267…..you have to suspend all other business and take up this…not half an hour.”

Rule 267 gives a Rajya Sabha MP special power to suspend the pre-decided agenda of the House, with the approval of the Chairman. 

The Rajya Sabha rule book defines “Rule 267” under “suspension of rules” as an instance where “any Member, may, with the consent of the Chairman, move that any rule may be suspended in its application to a motion related to the business listed before the council of that day and if the motion is carried, the rule in question shall be suspended for the time-being.”

However, motions moved under this rule, which Chairman Jagdeep Dhankar last year said “has become a known mechanism of causing disruption”, have rarely been accepted in recent history.

Parliamentary records show that there were 11 instances between 1990 up till 2016 that this rule was invoked for various discussions. The last instance was in 2016 when then Chairman Hamid Ansari allowed for a debate on the “demonetisation of currency”.

Mr Dhankhar had earlier said that his predecessor Venkaiah Naidu had not accepted a single notice under the rule during his six-year term.

Rule 267 is not the only way for MPs to question the government and seek a response. They can ask questions related to any issue during the Question Hour in which the concerned minister has to provide oral or written answers. An MP can raise the issue during Zero Hour. Every day, 15 MPs are allowed to raise issues of their choice in the Zero Hour. An MP can even raise it during Special Mention. A Chairman can allow up to 7 Special Mentions daily.

The government’s insistence on rule 176 could be seen as a firefighting strategy to not let the Manipur issue, which has caused them a lot of public embarrassment, escalate further in the Parliament.

“Short duration discussion on Manipur issues has come to be demanded under Rule 176 by various members. Members are keen to engage in discussion on Manipur issues. These discussions have three stages, one, every member of the House is entitled to give a notice for short duration discussion. I have considered those notices but under the mandate of the rule, I have to consult the date and time from the Leader of the House,” Mr Dhankhar said yesterday.

Rule 176 allows for a short-duration discussion, not exceeding two-and-a-half hours, on a particular issue. It states that “any member desirous of raising discussion on a matter of urgent public importance may give notice in writing to the Secretary-General specifying clearly and precisely the matter to be raised: Provided that the notice shall be accompanied by an explanatory note stating reasons for raising discussion on the matter in question: Provided further that the notice shall be supported by the signatures of at least two other members.”

As per Rule 176, the matter can be taken up immediately, within a few hours or even the next day. The rule, however, is clear that no formal motion or voting shall be held under a short-duration discussion.

Congress’ MPs Mallikarjun Kharge, Pramod Tiwari, Ranjeet Ranjan, Syed Naseer Hussain, Imran Pratapgarhi along with Priyanka Chaturvedi of Shiv Sena (UBT), Derek O’Brien of Trinamool Congress (TMC), Sanjay Singh of Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), Tiruchi Siva of Dravida Munnetra Kazagham (DMK), Manoj Jha of Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), Elamaram Kareem of CPM and Binoy Viswam of CPI all submitted suspension of Business Notice under rule 267 in Rajya Sabha to discuss the “prime minister’s shocking silence on the ongoing violence in Manipur.”

The PM broke his silence on the Manipur violence yesterday, saying his heart was filled with anguish and anger over the horrific video.

“I want to assure the nation, no guilty will be spared. Action will be taken according to the law. What happened to the daughters of Manipur can never be forgiven,” PM Modi said in his remarks before the start of the monsoon session of parliament.

“As I stand next to this temple of democracy, my heart is filled with pain and anger. The Manipur incident is shameful for any civilised nation. The entire country has been shamed,” he said.

The PM also referred to incidents in Congress-ruled Rajasthan and Chhattisgarh and said: “I appeal to all Chief Ministers to strengthen law and order in their state”.

Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge slammed the PM for not making a statement inside the Parliament.

“If you were angry then instead of making false equivalence with Congress governed states, you could have first dismissed your Chief Minster of Manipur,” he tweeted.

.@narendramodi ji,

You did not make a statement inside the Parliament, yesterday.

If you were angry then instead of making false equivalence with Congress governed states, you could have first dismissed your Chief Minster of Manipur.

INDIA expects you to make an elaborate…

— Mallikarjun Kharge (@kharge) July 21, 2023

Mr Kharge said the Opposition alliance, INDIA, expects him to make an elaborate statement in the Parliament today, “not just on one incident, but on the 80-day violence that your government in the state and the centre has presided upon, looking absolutely helpless and remorseless.”