279 PM's Statement re. [ RAJYA SABHA ] against families of 280 Inquiry Commission Minister and Former Home Minister [Shri Lai K. Advani] been agreement. But here there has been a formal discussion and a formal decision by the Business Advisory Committee in which representatives of all parties were there. Apart from that, according to rule 12 of the Rules of Procedure, the Council shall sit on such days as the Chairman, having regard to the state of business of the Council, may, from time to time, direct. So, it is the state of business of the House on the basis of which the Chairman will direct. Now, Sir, so far as the Government is concerned, the Government has not been amiss at all. It is only after the Bill is passed by the other House, that we can take it up for consideration. We cannot take it up fox consideration before that. Therefore, there has been no lapse on the part of the Government. STATEMENT BY PRIME MINISTER RE. RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY RAJYA SABHA FOR APPOINTMENT OF A COMMITTEE OR ALTERNATIVELY TWO SEPARATE COMMISSIONS OF INQUIRY TO INQUIRE INTO ALLEGATIONS OF CORRUPTION MADE AGAINST MEMBERS OF FAMILIES OF THE PRIME MINISTER AND THE FORMER HOME MINISTER— continued SHRI ERA SEZHIYAN (Tamil Nadu): Sir, just now we have hear-d the Leader of the Opposition saying that this House is supreme. That way, is it not supreme in other respects also? That is where, Sir, we differ. This House is supreme in the functions allotted to it by the Constitution. This House is supreme in arranging its own business. This House is the master of its own business. Nobody can inter- fere in its business. Even the courts cannot say when this House sit or should not sit or what this House should do or what it cannot do. But, at the same time, Sir, this House is 281 P.M's Statement re. [ 24 AUG. 1978 ] against families of 282 Inquiry Commission Prime Minister and former Home Minister not supreme in executive matters. This House very brief and I will not repeat the points is not supreme in judicial matters. That is why already covered. I think Mr. Kulkarni rightly we say the Resolution is only pointed out that the Chairman does not come recommendatory in character and that it is for into the picture at all with regard to this the Government to take the recommendation Resolution. It is because this Resolution and give its own consent. recommends to the Government, as rightly given by you, Sir, in your ruling to seek Sir, why is the hon. Member standing forthwith the guidance and advice from a when somebody is speaking? committee of 15 Members to be appointed by the Chairman, or alternatively, to appoint a THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (SHRI SHYAM commission of inquiry. Therefore, the entire LAL YADAV): Mr. Kalp Nath Rai, please thing is upon the Government, whether they take your seat. want to seek the guidance or advice of the committee or they want to appoint the SHRI ERA SEZHIYAN: Sir, when the hon. commission of inquiry. If they do not want to Members spoke about parliamentary seek the guidance of the committee, then the democracy, about the sanctity of this House, question of appointment of a committee does about the supremacy of this House, I felt not arise. The Chairman is not in the picture. It elated. is for the Government to decide. If this House had wanted, if those who moved this motion [Mr. Chairman in the Chair] had wanted, if those who moved the amendment had wanted, they could have called upon the House or they could have For twenty long months these things were forgotten by them very conveniently. They had called upon the Chairman to appoint a forgotten that there was a parliamentary committee. Then, having appointed the democracy in this country, that there is a committee, they should have asked the Gov- Constitution, that there were two Houses of ernment to be guided by that committee. But Parliament. The supremacy of these things was their first appeal was to the Government to conveniently forgotten by many Members seek the guidance. Once the Government does there. At least now they have begun to realise not want the guidance of a committee, the that such a thing as called parliamentary question of appointment of a committee does democracy is there and that respect should be not arise. given to the decision taken by the House in its own sphere. Mr. Pranab Mukherjee was very Mr. Goswami raised the point that it is not a eloquent when he said that instead of referring Resolution and this is a motion. Sir, he has it to a judge, it should be referred to a com- been in the Parliament and I believe he knows mission of inquiry. I hope, Sir, he shows some the difference between a motion and a courtesy to the commission of inquiry already Resolution. Anything that is moved by the appointed by the Government... hon. Members in this House is a motion and after consideration by the House, when it is SHRI PRANAB MUKHERJEE: I showed accepted, it becomes a Resolution. We may courtesy, Mr. Sezhiyan. 1 appeared the first even take the case of a private Member's day before that commission and I raised Resolution. We can go through the certain technical issues. Therefore, do not proceedings of the past where it is mentioned: bring in this matter. I showed courtesy and "Motion negatived" or 'Motion adopted". That went there and appeared on the first day. means, when the House is approached, it is a These things are on record. motion. There is even this No-Day-Yet SHRI ERA SEZHIYAN: Sir, coming to the Resolution as such, I would be 283 PM's) Statement re. [RAJYA SABHA] against families of 284 Inquiry Commission Prime Minister and former Kf>me Minister [Shri Era Sezhiyan] Named-Motion. If the need be no confrontation between the House hon. Members go through the past history, and the Chairman between this House and the they will know. Therefore, I do not want to go Executive. You can advise, you can into that. What Mr. Kulkarni said, is the recommend, you can pass a resolution, but it correct position. This Resolution or the is a political question, which the people will motion,—whatever you call it—makes a decide, the people will judge. Now they want recommendation to the Government. This is to go on technicalities and in order to avoid a not a recommendation to the Chairman. This political confrontation the Prime Minister has is a recommendation made to the come forward with this one. Government, to be guided by a committee to be appointed. The Government does not Lastly, Sir, Mr. Kulkarni said that the propose to seek the guidance of a committee Janata Party, the Janata Government lacks and, therefore, the Chairman does not come political maturity. I may accept the plea that into the picture. we lack political maturity, but I can say to this SHRI ANANT PRASAD SHARMA: Why House that we do not have the political im- are you twisting the whole thing? morality, political sycophancy, political subservience, political authoritarianism. We SHRI KALP NATH RAI: You are may make errors, we may make mistakes, distorting the whole thing. but... SHRI ERA SEZHIYAN: I am not SHRI BUDDHA PRIYA MAURYA: But distorting it... question mark. MR. CHAIRMAN; You may go on. If you start replying to other points, there will be no SHRI ERA SEZHIYAN: Yes, Mr. Maurya, end to it. I know you entire political career has been a question mark. I know that. I was the Member SHRI ERA SEZHIYAN: Sir, whenever any of the other House and I know when you hon. Member stands up, I understand that he spoke against the Government in so many wants to say something. Therefore, Sir, this terms. Therefore please do not raise this. motion is addressed to the Government, and Therefore, Sir, here is a political question. I not to the Chairman. Mr. Kulkarni also raised admit it but it has been dealt with politically. a point... (Interruptions). Just because there is a majority here you SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA: It is quite clear should not have met it like this. from the speech you are making that there has been a lot of laxity in thinking on this matter. One thing I want the leaSers of the Congress and the Congress (I) to ponder over. SHRI ERA SEZHIYAN: This is for the Suppose, the other House takes on itself and first time that this point is being raised. When passes a resolution for appointment of a there was the Maruti case, when there was the committee to go into many of the charges Nagorwala scandal, so many questions were which should naturally go to a judicial forum, asked in tne House but they had the majority and suppose it had arrogated to itself all the here and the majority in the other House. At functions of the judiciary and the executive, that time, they never brought in this point. what would happen? Here, the Government has come forward to refer the matter to the Chief Justice if an hon. Therefore ,in all political maturity with Member can give a specific case. I do not which Mr. Kulkarni said, I want the same want a confrontation; I think somebody political maturity to come to the other side correctly put it that there also and ponder over these things because we want many things to be done.