NEW DELHI: Both houses of Parliament were stalled on Thursday for the third straight day amid protests by Opposition members demanding a discussion on the US indictment of Gautam Adani and Sambhal violence.
As soon as the Lok Sabha met, Priyanka Gandhi Vadra, newly elected MP from Wayanad, took oath holding a copy of the Constitution. Congress’ Ravindra Vasantrao Chavan, who won Nanded in Maharashtra, also took oath.
Before Speaker Om Birla adjourned the House for the day, it passed a motion moved by Waqf JPC chairman Jagdambika Pal, seeking an extension of the tenure of the panel to submit the report until the last date of the Budget session in 2025.
The Rajya Sabha proceedings were disrupted within minutes after it met at noon, following one adjournment shortly after 11 am. In a strongly worded message, Chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar warned the members that parliamentary disruption was not a remedy but a malady which weakened the foundation of India’s democracy.
“The chamber is more than just a house of debate. It is from where our national spirit has to echo,” he said. “Parliamentary disruption is not a remedy but a malady that weakens the very foundation of our democracy. It slides Parliament into irrelevance. The sanctity of this House demands debate, not discord; dialogue, not disruption,” Dhankhar said as the opposition members continued to shout slogans.
Recalling that Wednesday marked a historic milestone — the beginning of the final quarter-century before India’s Constitution turned 100 -- Dhankhar said the House members missed the opportunity to engage in productive dialogue.
“This was a moment for our House of Elders, guided by the spirit of nationalism, to send a powerful message of hope to 1.4 billion Indians, reaffirming our commitment to their dreams and journey towards Viksit Bharat at 2047,” he said.
Responding to a query by Congress MP Jairam Ramesh on “how to persuade the chair” to allow their notices, Dhankar said, “We persuade the chair historically only by exhibiting the highest standard of conformance to the rules…the ruling of the chair must evoke deference and not a challenge.”