Opposition Creates Confusion & Leaves House: Rijiju in Rajya Sabha
The Waqf (Amendment) Bill was being discussed in the Rajya Sabha recently, and as expected, the opposition members had a lot to say about it. Union Minister Kiren Rijiju, who was present in the House, couldn’t help but express his frustration with the senior members of the opposition for creating confusion and then leaving without listening to the replies.
During the debate, MP Kapil Sibal was heard comparing the properties of Waqf bodies with those of other religious bodies. Rijiju took strong exception to this and called out Sibal for creating confusion without providing any concrete evidence to back his claims.
“Sibal ji, you are creating confusion. You are comparing apples and oranges. You are comparing Waqf properties with other religious properties. You are creating confusion in the House,” Rijiju said, according to sources.
But what really got Rijiju’s goat was the fact that Sibal and other opposition members were leaving the House even before the minister could respond to their queries. This, Rijiju felt, was not only unparliamentary but also a clear display of disrespect towards the House and its proceedings.
“It’s not just Sibal ji, it’s many senior members of the opposition who are doing this. They are creating confusion, they are raising issues, but they are not willing to stay back and listen to the replies. This is not how democracy works,” Rijiju said.
Rijiju’s remarks have sparked a debate about the role of opposition in the House and the importance of maintaining decorum during debates. While some have lauded Rijiju for speaking his mind, others have criticized him for being too harsh on the opposition.
But Rijiju is not the first politician to express frustration with the opposition’s tactics. In recent times, there have been several instances where opposition members have been accused of creating confusion and then leaving the House without listening to the replies.
For instance, during the debate on the citizenship amendment bill, Congress leader Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury was heard making inflammatory statements about the bill. However, when the minister tried to respond to his queries, Chowdhury was nowhere to be found.
Similarly, during the debate on the triple talaq bill, several opposition members were heard making emotional appeals to the House. However, when the minister tried to respond to their queries, they were either absent or had left the House.
It’s not just the opposition members who are guilty of this behavior. Sometimes, even government members have been accused of creating confusion and then leaving the House.
For instance, during the debate on the reservation bill, several government members were heard making passionate speeches about the importance of reservation. However, when the opposition tried to respond to their queries, they were either absent or had left the House.
So, is Rijiju’s criticism of the opposition justified? Or is he just trying to deflect attention from the government’s own shortcomings?
One thing is clear – creating confusion and then leaving the House without listening to the replies is not a healthy sign for democracy. It’s essential for all members of the House to maintain decorum and respect for each other’s opinions, even if they disagree.
In conclusion, Rijiju’s criticism of the opposition may have sparked a debate, but it’s essential for all of us to remember that democracy is all about respecting each other’s opinions and maintaining decorum in the House.
