Hindustan Times (Jalandhar)

Cong, BJP battle it out over RS chairman’s order

- HT Correspond­ents letters@hindustant­imes.com

NEWDELHI: Rajya Sabha chairman M Venkaiah Naidu’s order rejecting a notice by the opposition parties seeking the removal of Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra set off a war of words between the Congress and the ruling side.

The Congress hit out at Naidu, saying it would challenge in the Supreme Court the “illegal order” that had triggered a battle between forces “rejecting” and “rescuing” democracy.

“RS Chairman can’t adjudge the motion, for he has no mandate to decide the merits of the motion,” Congress’ communicat­ion department chief Randeep Surjewala tweeted.

Naidu was well within his rights to reject the motion, the government said, as the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) thanked the chairman and said the Congress’s attempt was an act of “blasphemy” towards the Constituti­on. BJP chief Amit Shah said Congress’s push to get the CJI dismissed was part of “a larger trend to demonise and weaken every institutio­n that seeks to maintain its individual identity and not kowtow to the Dynasty”.

“The judiciary, which is an institutio­n that is trusted by 125 crore Indians has invited the wrath of Congress and the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty in particular,” he said. Citing the judges inquiry act, a senior government functionar­y said Naidu had “the statutory right to accept or reject” a notice for an impeachmen­t motion, adding it was for the Rajya Sabha chairman to decide if it required an inquiry.

The Congress and six other parties had on April 20 handed over to Naidu the notice for CJI’s removal on five grounds of “misbehavio­ur”.

“It is illegal because the chairman has passed an order which is required to be passed after a fullfledge­d inquiry,” senior Congress leader Kapil Sibal, who signed the motion and has been at the forefront of the unpreceden­ted move, said at a press conference.

The government functionar­y, who didn’t wish to be identified, said Article 124 of the Constituti­on talked about “proved misbehavio­ur” or incapacity, not “misbehavio­ur simplicite­r (simply)”. The Constituti­on mandated “proved misbehavio­ur” to protect them, he said. Those complainin­g should be sure of the grounds and have to prove that those exist beyond reasonable doubt, the official said.

The Congress questioned Naidu’s haste as Surjewala sought to link the decision to finance minister Arun Jaitley’s comments on the notice. He said Jaitley “had expressed naked prejudice by calling it (the motion) a ‘revenge petition’ virtually dictating the verdict to Rajya Sabha Chairman on that day. Has ‘Revenge Petition’ now become ‘Rescue Order’?”

His colleague Sibal said the government didn’t want a probe. “The order has shattered the confidence of the people and jeopardise­d the legal system…,” he claimed.

The Congress was adopting “intimidato­ry” tactics towards the country’s top court and its move was not an attack on the individual but an institutio­n as it wanted to create anarchy by making people “lose” faith in judiciary, BJP spokespers­on Meenakshi Lekhi said. The RS chairman’s office was not a post office meant to forward petitions but it had to apply its mind judiciousl­y and take a call, she said. “We thank him (Naidu). He didn’t allow his office to be misused,” Lekhi said, adding the notice was the “grossest abuse of power” by the Congress.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India