Manipur crisis: Longer debate demand divides opinion in Oppn camp, Centre gets upper hand in RS

“We are playing a match where our rival and the referee have joined hands to frustrate our game,” a senior Rajya Sabha MP from the Opposition’s INDIA coalition told The Federal, on Monday (July 31), as yet another day of Parliament’s proceedings saw no end to the Manipur stalemate between the Treasury and Opposition benches.

The MP’s pithy analogy wasn’t just a summation of what transpired in the Rajya Sabha on Monday – or what both Houses of Parliament have witnessed since the start of the Monsoon Session on July 20. It was as much a projection of his frustration at the “misplaced optimism” of his colleagues in the INDIA bloc who he felt were either “expecting fair play in a fixed match” or were simply refusing to “switch strategy midway through a game to convert certain defeat into a possible victory”.

Since the start of the Monsoon Session, the Centre has stridently refused to accept the Opposition’s demand for a statement by the Prime Minister in both Houses of Parliament on the complete collapse of law and order in Manipur.

Also read: Opposition disturbs Modi when he speaks in Parliament: BJP’s swipe on Manipur issue

In the Rajya Sabha, demands by MPs of the INDIA coalition for a discussion on the Manipur situation under Rule 267 (debate following suspension of the day’s listed business), preceded by a statement by Narendra Modi, have been rejected daily by Rajya Sabha Chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar, who had, on July 20, given his consent for a Rule 176 (short duration discussion) on the issue in line with the government’s wishes.

In the Lok Sabha, though a motion for no confidence moved by the Opposition against the Council of Ministers has been accepted by Speaker Om Birla, no decision has been taken yet on when the motion would be discussed.

Stalemate in Parliament

The resultant stalemate has already washed out half of the 17 scheduled sittings of the monsoon session, though the Centre has succeeded in getting some Bills passed in either or both Houses of Parliament.

However, Monday’s (July 31) proceedings in the Rajya Sabha were different. Evidently acting in tandem, the Rajya Sabha Chairman and the Leader of the House, BJP’s Piyush Goyal, caught the Opposition off-guard when Dhankhar declared that a Rule 176 (short duration) discussion on the Manipur situation would commence at 2 pm. Goyal lost no time in asserting the government was prepared for it.

In between protests, adjournments, and an impromptu meeting of Leader of Opposition, Mallikarjun Kharge and Parliamentary Affairs Minister Pralhad Joshi called by Dhankhar “to find a way out”, MPs of the INDIA coalition persisted with their demands for Modi’s statement and a discussion under Rule 267. The net result was Dhankhar adjourning the House proceedings for the day shortly after 3.30 pm.

Dhankhar, Birla accused of partisan behaviour

The Opposition MPs walked out of Parliament breathing fire at Modi for his continued silence on a “burning” Manipur. They reiterated accusations about the Centre evading a detailed discussion on the ethnic violence, rapes, and murders that have engulfed the north eastern state since May. There were insinuations aplenty about Dhankhar and Birla conducting Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha proceedings, respectively, in a partisan manner.

The spectacle of a united Opposition unwilling to yield an inch despite the odds being stacked heavily against it was a convincing one. However, beneath all that fire and brimstone, sources say there are now smouldering embers of doubt, fatigue, and frustration.

Also read: Biren Singh blames immigrants, drug menace for Manipur riots; here’s a factcheck

“We have been handed a fait accompli by the (Rajya Sabha) Chairman and the government. It is clear that our demand for a discussion under Rule 267 will not be accepted and that Modi will not speak in the House,” another Opposition MP from a regional constituent of the INDIA bloc told The Federal, adding that Dhankhar’s decision to formally announce a short duration discussion has now handed an “obvious advantage” to the Centre.

“Until now, we had the upper hand. We had been demanding the PM’s statement and a debate on an issue that has attracted global attention; our MPs have returned from their visit to Manipur armed with first-hand accounts of how the BJP let Manipur burn for nearly 90 days… but the Chairman’s decision to allow a short duration discussion on Manipur has given the BJP an upper hand,” this MP said.

He added, “BJP has the simpler narrative now – we were ready to debate but the Opposition was not – while we are still comparing Rule 267 and Rule 176; how many people know the difference or are bothered about it? For the common man, a debate is a debate and the impression now is that we are stalling it.”

Sources said subsequent to Dhankhar’s decision for initiating the Rule 176 discussion, several leaders within the INDIA bloc were of the opinion that the Opposition must give up its insistence for a Rule 267 discussion and get down to selecting its best speakers and arming them with enough material to “expose the BJP’s false claims”.

CJI’s observations on Manipur

There were also some in the Opposition’s ranks who believed that stern observations made by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud vis-à-vis the violence in Manipur gave the INDIA coalition a solid foundation for laying out the BJP’s failures in the strife-torn state.

On Monday, while hearing a batch of petitions connected with the instances of violence and sexual assault on women in Manipur, the CJI had unequivocally de-lineated the genocidal impact of the violence in Manipur from the individual instances of atrocities against women in Opposition-ruled states such as Bengal. “We are dealing with something on unprecedented magnitude of violence against women… It cannot be gainsaid that crimes are happening against women in Bengal also; here the case is different… we cannot justify what happened in Manipur by saying this happened elsewhere,” Chandrachud had said.

Also read: Manipur violence: State govt to act tough against those peddling fake news

This eloquent articulation by the CJI, a third Opposition leader told The Federal, “demolished the whataboutery that Modi and the BJP have been peddling to evade answering about their failures in Manipur… it gives us a solid argument to put forth when the BJP draws false equivalence between happenings in Manipur and the incidents in Bengal, Chhattisgarh, or Rajasthan.”

Oppn MPs weigh on short duration discussion offer

This view that the INDIA coalition must now back down from its demand for suspending business of the Rajya Sabha to discuss Manipur and instead confront the BJP “head-on” in the short duration discussion isn’t specific to individual constituents of the 26-party Opposition coalition.

“It would be wrong to call it a difference of opinion among our INDIA allies because even within individual parties, MPs have taken divergent views with one set of leaders saying we must persist with our demand for a Rule 267 discussion and another set insisting we should use the short duration discussion to expose the government. We will discuss the two viewpoints again tomorrow (August 1) at our floor coordination meeting in the LoP’s chamber before the start of the day’s session and we will go by whatever is the consensus” a Congress MP said.

It is learnt that while the Congress has MPs individually pushing both these viewpoints, the Trinamool Congress and the Aam Aadmi Party are adamant on the demand for a Rule 267 debate. The RJD, JD (U), NCP, and the Left parties are almost unanimously in favour of participating in the two and a half hour short duration discussion.

Also read: Manipur: Odds stacked against Opposition while BJP looks for brownie points

Some MPs cutting across party lines are also of the view that the government’s ready acceptance of a short duration discussion on Manipur is a definite sign that Modi will not be speaking in the Rajya Sabha on the subject though he may still respond to the no-confidence motion moved in the Lower House.

“In all likelihood, it would be (Union home minister) Amit Shah and not Modi who will reply in the Rajya Sabha. If indeed this happens, then rather than insist on Modi’s statement, we should use the opportunity to push our narrative of the PM running away from the debate… the Opposition can say what it wants to on the matter and then demand for the PM’s reply following which we can walk out. Since it’s a short duration discussion, there is no question of a vote at the end of it, so the Opposition won’t be losing out on anything. This seems to be the only reasonable way out to even the odds for us,” said an Opposition MP.