- 7 months ago
Opposition parties led by the Congress have submitted a no-confidence motion against Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla, signed by 118 MPs.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Hello and welcome you're with the news today your primetime destination news
00:07newsmakers talking points we are coming to you from Chennai where a big India
00:11today election roundtable will take place tomorrow tonight our focus is
00:16always is on our top stories and there is a big story the speaker of the Lok
00:21Sabha is facing a no-confidence motion have relations between the opposition
00:27and government reached the point of no return in Parliament also Hemant Abhiswa
00:32Sarma's controversial video has now reached the doors of the Supreme Court
00:37former Delhi LG Najeef Jang will say why he's filed a PIL against the Assam
00:43chief minister and the former Pakistan cricket board chairman Najam Sethi will
00:48explain Pakistan's u-turn lots of newsmakers and news tonight but first as
00:54always it's time for the nine headlines at nine
00:59weaker Om Vidla now recuses himself from Parliament amidst the opposition's no
01:05trust move sources say debate on this no trust motion confidence motion likely on
01:12the 9th of March opposition cites several instances including issue of not
01:17allowing Raul Gandhi to speak
01:22former army chief general Naraune breaks silence amidst a political showdown reposts
01:28penguin publishers statement on social media claiming book hasn't been published
01:33yet Raul Gandhi points out that general Naraune himself invited the readers to
01:39purchase the book from Amazon a big claim by Ajit Pawar's nephew and NCP Sharad Pawar leader Rohit Pawar
01:50over his uncle's death he alleges a conspiracy behind former Maharashtra deputy chief minister's plane
01:56crash demands a multi-agency probe into the matter
02:00as the battle for Assam heats up chief minister Hemanto Biswa Sarma files a 500 crore defamation
02:09see case against Congress MP and his rival Gaurav Gogoi
02:13Gogoi had claimed 12,000 vigas of land have been occupied by the Assam chief minister and his relatives
02:19Kanpur tobacco tycoon defends his son claims driver was behind the wheels of crash Lamborghini
02:29but police confirmed that it was shivam Mishra who was driving the car
02:36center titans grip on AI generated and deep fake content mandates for social media platforms to take down objectionable material
02:45within three months after being flagged by authorities or courts
02:51another actor on Vishnoyi gangs target Durandar star Ranveer Singh gets a death threat on whatsapp demanding crores of rupees
02:59security beefed up outside the actors home
03:05a US lawmaker introduces an exile act to abolish H-1B visas claims the program has been systematically misused by corporations
03:13to replace american workers with cheaper foreign labor
03:21and its official now india versus pakistan world cup match on february 15 to go on as scheduled
03:27move comes after icc decided to not penalize bangladesh after opting out of the world cup pakistan has backtracked now
03:43the story that we are breaking at the moment speaker om birla has stepped aside from his post amidst a
04:01no trust motion that has been moved by the opposition in the lok sabha speaker birla has said that this is
04:07a moral step amidst the log jam now we are told on the 9th of march that's when the second part of
04:13the budget session resumes a debate on this no trust no more notice moved by more than 120 opposition mps
04:20will be heard opposition mps moved this no trust motion earlier today remember all of this comes against
04:27the backdrop of the leader of the opposition raul gandhi being denied the opportunity to speak is what the
04:34opposition has said in its notice they've also cited other instances where they claim speaker om birla
04:40has not behaved like a neutral speaker that he is expected this budget session of parliament in a way
04:48has brought the lok sabha to the point of no return a hundred in 18 mps moving this no confidence
04:55more
05:00uh
05:06uh
05:08uh
05:16uh
05:18uh
05:20the opposition turns up the heat against Lok Sabha speaker on Bella submitting a notice to
05:31move a no-confidence motion against him the notice signed by 118 MPs levels for charges
05:40on February 2nd leader of opposition Rahul Gandhi was not allowed to complete his speech
05:46he was reading from a magazine article quoting General MM Naravani's unreleased book the notice
05:54claims speaker arbitrarily suspended eight opposition MPs for entire budget session the
06:02opposition alleges that the speaker allowed a BJP MP to make personal attacks on two former
06:07prime ministers without reprimanding him even once and finally the opposition accuses the
06:14speaker of falsely claiming that Congress MPs planned an untoward incident targeting Prime
06:20Minister the speaker had claimed the Prime Minister dropped his speech on his request
06:25from the memoir Rahul Gandhi has not signed to the notice the Congress claimed the leader of the
06:44opposition backing a motion against the speaker would breach parliamentary convention there are cracks
06:51within the opposition the Trinamul Congress has stayed away from the no-confidence motion
06:56amid mounting accusations parliamentary affairs minister Kiran Rijiju released fresh footage of the
07:04February 4th chaos claiming these images reveal the security threats
07:08the opposition dismisses the charges as deliberate diversion
07:14the opposition dismisses the charges as deliberate diversion
07:16parliamentary affairs minister why he is wants to prove honorable speaker wrong whatever the honorable speaker says he is the
07:22parliamentary affairs minister he wants to prove that the honorable speaker is wrong it's his first time it's been said that he is the
07:29the opposition dismisses the charges as deliberate diversion
07:34the opposition dismisses the charges as deliberate diversion
07:38parliamentary affairs minister why he is wants to prove honorable speaker wrong
07:43whatever the honorable speaker says he the parliamentary affairs minister is he wants to prove that the honorable speaker is wrong
07:51this is first time it is happening we are very much pain that the leader of opposition is not allowed to speak by the parliamentary affairs minister
07:57he forces the honorable speaker to deny the right of the opposition to speak
08:02as things stand a no-trust motion even if admitted is bound to fall as the NDA government has the numbers
08:11the move by the opposition however is to embarrass the speaker as no-confidence motions against the chair are a rare occurrence
08:18we are a report India today
08:22let's raise the big questions then tonight it is government versus opposition in the Lok Sabha
08:31have the relations reached the point of no return with this no-trust motion being moved against the Lok Sabha speaker
08:37has the opposition lost total faith in speaker Om Bin Laden has the speaker failed to be a neutral umpire
08:44what is the objective of this no-trust motion will this further vitiate government opposition tie
08:51joining me now JB Mathur she is a Rajya Sabha MP of the Congress Party
08:56Aparujita Sarangi is a senior MP of the BJP in the Lok Sabha
09:00Rajat Sethi a political analyst who's worked closely with the BJP
09:04and Ashutosh political analyst who was of course with Ahmad B party earlier
09:08I appreciate all of you joining us I want to get initial remarks from each and every one of you
09:13first to you JB Mathur
09:16why has the opposition chosen this moment to move a no-trust motion
09:22is it specifically because Rahul Gandhi was not allowed to speak or has it been building up over the last several months
09:29how long will we take this injustice
09:43how long will we suffer how long will we keep silent
09:47how long can we just take all the dictatorial attitude of the government
09:55the speaker who is supposed to be an umpire who is supposed to play a neutral role
10:01who is supposed to give opportunities to both sides both the opposition and the treasury benches
10:07if the speaker acts in a totally one-sided manner
10:11the mics are being off of the opposition where the uh treasury benches the ministers uh the uh home minister or any other minister
10:21they can speak for any time at any moment where and uh they get the opportunity
10:27but for serious national importance that matters to the country when Rahul Gandhiji the opposition leader tries to make an attempt
10:36no it's denied opportunity is denied mic is turned off then uh this has been going on for a while
10:43so a moment has come we have to take action and this is the moment
10:48Ms. Mathur you know it seems though you are saying this but the truth of the matter is
10:53was Rahul Gandhi being the speaker says under the rules of the house he has the authority to decide who should speak
11:03that is his authority that is his prerogative Rahul Gandhi has challenged that
11:09i want to understand are you challenging in a way the speaker's authority to decide
11:15the fact that Rahul Gandhi cannot speak on general naravune's memoir are you challenging his authority which he has got
11:23like it or not under the rules of the house
11:26prerogative the rules there has to be neutrality in it it is not why do we why do we question
11:38we question it see then the rules should be equal for the opposition and also for the treasury benches
11:43there cannot be different rules uh for opposition there could there cannot be a different rule for uh treasury benches
11:50anybody can stand up and say anything about our former prime ministers of congress anybody can go to any extent
11:57then all that is allowed mike will continuously be on but when it comes to uh opposition there's total
12:05dictatorial attitude by the speaker and then coming to your question again the prerogative how judiciously it is
12:14uh used is something uh displayed shown is something which is nothing anything under the sun uh is not under any cover
12:24we have the right to question it if the uh if the prerogative is not performed judiciously if the duty of being an empire is not performed judiciously we have every right to question and that is what the opposition is doing
12:42uh
12:48and says that he asked the prime minister not to speak
12:54because he feared that there would be a physical attack
12:59on the prime minister by the women MPs now when you make such a statement
13:03naturally it's going to raise the hackers are you seriously telling me
13:07that the speaker was trying to prevent uh was trying uh uh
13:13feared a physical attack by these MPs isn't the speaker also now being seen as his master's voice
13:19he speaks what the government wants him to speak very serious allegation to suggest that women MPs were going to physically attack the prime minister
13:27then he allows Nishikan Dubey a BJP MP to say whatever he wants about Jawaharlal Nehru
13:33no one expunges those remarks initially but Rahul Gandhi stopped so the double standards of the speaker ma'am seem to be exposed also
13:45Am I supposed to answer
13:47Am I supposed to answer
13:49Yes ma'am
13:51Yes ma'am
13:53Go ahead
13:55Okay
13:57A very good evening
13:59Whatever the allegations against honorable speaker Shri Om Birlaji are far from the truth
14:05Now let me tell you that all of us are supposed to act in accordance with the rules of procedure and conduct of business in the Lok Sabha
14:17Nobody is above the rules of the Lok Sabha
14:19We may like it we may not like it but we have to accept it
14:23The dignity and decorum of the house have to be upheld
14:27Whosoever he or she may be
14:29Now our conduct our behaviour should be befitting parliamentarians
14:34I think talking about this is like showing light to the sun all of us are aware of this
14:40Now having said all this let me tell you that the speaker acted in line with rule 349
14:47and in line with rule 353 of the rules of procedure and conduct of business in the Lok Sabha
14:53Now the point is we were all discussing the motion of thanks on the presidential address
15:00And the leader of opposition wanted to talk about something not connected with the business of the house at that point of time
15:08And I just request my counterpart from the Congress to read rule number 349
15:13It says that no material no newspaper can be read out if the issue so raised through such reading is not connected with the business of the house
15:24So I think we all must understand that
15:28So how was Nishikaan Dubey, Ms. Aparijita Sarangi
15:31Mr. Aparijita Sarangi, how was Nishikaan Dubey of the BJP allowed
15:35Mr. Ms. Aparijita Sarangi, how was Nishikaan Dubey BJP MP allowed to read chapter and verse from books many of which
15:44No, how was he allowed to do it
15:46I am coming to that
15:47And how was it that the speaker should make the should virtually suggest
15:50I am coming to that
15:51That women MPs were going to physically assault the prime minister
15:54As a woman MP how can you accept such a charge
16:00Can I come in
16:02There is no denying the fact that
16:04Whatever Nishikaan Dubey did was not right
16:07And for that matter
16:09The person in the chair, Mr. Teneti
16:12The then chair
16:13In fact reprimanded him
16:15Kept on telling him that the speaker under rule 353
16:19Has already given a ruling that those books cannot be shown
16:23So you know whatever
16:24And he
16:25Please go back to the video and see what Mr. Teneti did at that point of time
16:29So I think that satisfies you
16:31Despite that Mr. Dubey kept on doing that
16:33That I fully endorse, fully understand
16:35It was not right
16:36I entirely agree
16:38However, the next thing I must say
16:40Regarding the women parliamentarians from the Congress
16:43I tell you
16:44I am a second time parliamentarian
16:46I was sitting very close to the seat of Honorable Prime Minister
16:49In the among the treasury benches
16:51And suddenly these women from the side of the opposition
16:55Come across to the side to the well of the house
16:59Which is near the seat of the Prime Minister
17:02And the path that the Honorable Prime Minister takes every day
17:05To reach his seat
17:07Was blocked by my esteemed colleagues
17:10My women MPs from the Congress
17:12We were all aghast
17:14There was no need
17:15And they were carrying a huge banner
17:16And they came and surrounded the seat
17:18Had they been with that banner
17:21On their side of the well of the house
17:23There would have been no problem
17:24But then you know
17:25In such a situation
17:26You try to understand
17:27The Prime Minister of the country
17:29Has to walk in to his seat
17:31When he comes
17:32All of us leave that path
17:34Because you know
17:35He should be coming
17:36And smoothly should come and sit there now
17:38Now here
17:39The Lok Sabha speaker is the custodian of the house
17:43When we are derelict in our duty
17:45When we are not on the right track
17:47Not in
17:48Our behaviour is not in consonance with the rules of procedure
17:51He reprimands us
17:53I am talking of people from the NDA
17:55He reprimands us
17:56So many times he has done that
17:57So he is duty bound to do that
17:59Right
18:00He is duty bound to say
18:01That is the security of the Prime Minister
18:03Anything could have happened
18:04Any unruly incident could have happened
18:07Any unpleasant thing could have happened
18:08Some jostling could have happened
18:09Any apprehension
18:11So I think at that time we meet him
18:12He is prudent
18:13He was just prudent
18:14Ma'am
18:15Ma'am
18:16Yeah ma'am
18:17These are apprehensions
18:18I am very happy at least
18:20That you have admitted
18:21That Nishikan Dubey's behaviour
18:23Was out of line
18:24Let us be very clear
18:25Nishikan Dubey would not have said
18:27What he had said
18:28Unless your own party leadership
18:30Had told him
18:31He hasn't acted on his own
18:33And the speaker should have acted
18:35Far more sternly against him
18:37And ensured that his mic was switched off
18:39When he was making those defamatory remarks
18:41Yeah but you see with Rahul Gandhi
18:46The chair was constantly telling that
18:48He should not do that
18:49With Rahul Gandhi there was absolute
18:50Yeah well he continued
18:53And many believe he was continuing
18:55On behalf of the government
18:56But let me bring in Ashutosh and Rajat Sethi
18:58For a moment
18:59Ashutosh
19:00Yeah
19:01Here is the debate
19:02Over the Lok Sabha speaker now
19:04No confidence motion
19:05We have seen a no confidence motion
19:07In a previous session
19:08Against the vice president
19:09Now we are seeing it against Lok Sabha speaker
19:11It seems that essentially the opposition
19:14Is simply unwilling now to accept
19:17That the government has the numbers
19:19And therefore the government
19:21More often than not will get its way
19:23And the speaker
19:24And the vice chairperson of the Rajya Saba
19:26Often are accused of acting
19:28Or the chairperson of the government's
19:30You know that the government is running the show
19:33Is part of the problem
19:35A lack of trust
19:36Or an element of frustration
19:40Rajiv the most important thing is
19:42Is speaker behaving like a
19:45In a bipartisan manner
19:47Is he neutral
19:48Or is he behaving like a
19:50Like a government spokesperson
19:52That's a fundamental issue
19:54I was told
19:55And I know this
19:56That the speaker is a final word
19:57In the parliament
19:58He's a final word
19:59But this finality is
20:01Determined by the reasonable restriction
20:04He's constrained by neutrality
20:06If the speaker is not neutral
20:08If the speaker is seen to be
20:10To be playing for the government
20:12Then obviously opposition has every right
20:14To came out with these kind of
20:17No confidence notice
20:18It is nothing new
20:19This is coming for the fourth time
20:21And the Lok Sabha
20:22So the speaker should not worry about it
20:23Because numbers are there
20:24But what I am
20:26I am aghast to say this
20:27That this is happening
20:29And all kind of absurd allegations
20:31Are leveled against the women MPs
20:35The cabinet minister is saying
20:36That the prime minister is not safe
20:38Because there might have been attack on him
20:41It's like a danger to his life
20:45Another one is saying
20:46Just imagine
20:48But these are
20:50Are they out of their mind or what?
20:52And if the speaker had the intelligence
20:55Has the information
20:57That the prime minister was to be attacked physically
21:00And his life was in danger
21:01Then why by now
21:03These women MPs
21:07Are not taken to the caste
21:09Why they are not arrested?
21:11Why a fire is not filed?
21:12Why inquiry has not been ordered?
21:14And why
21:15Why does somebody from the
21:16Somebody who is in charge of the prime minister security
21:19Has not resigned by now?
21:21See, we are talking about the security of the prime minister
21:24And is it such a casual thing?
21:26That the same women MPs are still sitting in the house
21:29They could have been dangerous for the
21:31Not only for the prime minister
21:32But maybe somebody else
21:34Are we out of our mind
21:36Making these kind of charges
21:38Scandalous things?
21:39No, no, one minute
21:40So
21:41Okay, beyond the charges
21:44Of course Rajat Sethi
21:45Another institution is being weakened
21:47Like it or not
21:48This is not the first time
21:49No confidence motions have been moved
21:51But there is a sense now
21:52That every institution is being hijacked
21:55By those in power
21:56The vice president
21:58A session or two ago
22:00Abruptly resigns
22:01Nobody knows till today
22:03The real reason behind
22:04Jagdeep Dhankar's resignation
22:06Many believe that the government was dissatisfied with him overnight
22:09Now we have got the Lok Sabha speaker
22:11The opposition has moved a no trust motion against him
22:14So there seems to be those in high constitutional bodies
22:18Are increasingly finding themselves reduced to
22:22Either you follow the line of the government of the day
22:25Or anything can happen
22:28And therefore the opposition is justified
22:30In saying you are not a neutral umpire
22:34Well Rajdeep ji
22:35You have had an illustrious career
22:37Of three, four decades
22:39Doing reporting from parliament
22:41You don't have to go that far
22:42But just pick up when Meera Kumar was the speaker
22:45In the last
22:46During the UPA2 era
22:48You will know several instances
22:50When Meera Kumar ji
22:51Was supposed to be
22:52Quote unquote neutral
22:53And what did she do
22:54We all remember the 2011
22:56Anti-corruption debate
22:57That was happening
22:58What was her role
22:59She continuously ensured
23:01That no discussion
23:02No debate happened
23:03In spite of the fact
23:04That adjournment motions
23:05Were filed
23:06And moved by the NDA
23:07And still
23:08Those duly approved
23:10And signed
23:11Adjournment motions
23:12Were not even tabled in the parliament
23:13You remember what happened
23:15During the Colgate scam in 2012
23:18What was her behaviour during that time
23:20There are many many instances
23:22Look at the Telangana creation issue
23:24But that is what about me Rajdeep
23:25With new regard
23:26That is what about me
23:27Rajdeep said
23:28That is what about me
23:29Rajdeep said
23:30That is what about me
23:31That is what about me
23:32I mean it does not justify
23:33Not at all
23:34How you are saying
23:35Because congress did it
23:36Therefore Om Birla can get away
23:37No I am just saying
23:39I am just saying
23:40That the nature of a speaker
23:42Always is a representative
23:45When he is getting elected
23:47That is how the nature is
23:48You are not appointing somebody
23:49Who is a complete neutral
23:50Politically speaking
23:51He has come out
23:52And got elected
23:53So has the congress speakers
23:54In the past also gotten elected
23:55And have become the speaker
23:57And they have been the custodians
23:58There is bound to be
24:00You know
24:01A degrees of biases
24:02Because these are
24:03At the end of the day
24:04Politicians
24:05I am
24:06All I am saying is that
24:07If he is quoting certain rules
24:08Did the leader of the opposition
24:10Did he flout those business rules or not
24:13I am
24:14If yes the answer is yes
24:16100% action should have been taken
24:18And the LOP should have been stopped from speaking
24:20And that is what happened
24:22Now what do you anticipate
24:23Should the speaker go out and allow
24:25Open flouting of the rules
24:27Then how is he the custodian
24:28How does he have the moral authority
24:30To continue in the chair
24:32He cannot allow that
24:33And then the business advisory committees
24:35Already decide on what all is going to be discussed
24:37What are the other
24:38These are like the broad arrangements
24:40Which the parliamentarians sign on to
24:42They have to adhere to that
24:44You can't create a fish market out of there
24:46You tell me when was it
24:48Which congress party speaker ever allowed
24:51Taking posters of this size
24:53Inside the well of the house
24:54Was it the norm?
24:56Was it allowed?
24:57It was never allowed
24:58These are some of the basic decencies
25:01That we expect from parliamentarians
25:03Have they exhibited that decency so far?
25:06So you can start taking a moral position
25:08And suddenly start telling that
25:10The speaker house has to be neutral
25:12It doesn't work like that
25:13It doesn't
25:14It's not a one way street
25:15Okay
25:18Ashutosh you want to respond
25:20The point that Rajat Sethi is making
25:22That the opposition in a way is creating
25:24Particularly the congress
25:26Particularly the congress is creating an anarchic situation
25:29It's creating a situation of my way or the highway
25:31Rahul Gandhi not allowed to speak
25:33We will disrupt the house
25:35See Rajdeep
25:36I just want to remind my dear friend Rajat Sethi
25:38In 2014
25:39Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was standing there
25:42He was ghera-ed by several MPs
25:46The paper was thrown on him
25:49Posters were over there
25:51Just 2014
25:53Just before the elections
25:54So don't come with this sermon
25:57That it has never happened
25:58The speaker has never allowed
25:59This kind of sermonization has to stop
26:02The fact of the matter is
26:04The speaker is hugely partisan
26:08A BJP MP was allowed to character
26:11Assassinate our prime ministers
26:13This is not defamatory
26:15I think by now
26:16That member of parliament
26:17Should have been sacked from the BJP
26:19Should have been disciplined
26:20Nothing happened
26:25Okay
26:26I've heard all sides to this story
26:29As I said
26:30I will give a final word to my two political MPs
26:34Quick 30
26:35Yeah, it is what about me
26:37It is
26:38No, no, look
26:39Whatever it is
26:40The fact is
26:41You are expected to maintain the higher standards
26:42Our first speaker
26:43G.V. Maulankar
26:44Maintained the higher standards
26:47I don't care what Congress speakers did 30 years ago
26:50I want to know
26:51What the present speaker is doing
26:53To ensure the dignity of the office
26:55He comes and gives a free
26:57Free pass to the government
26:59And does not
27:00Do so for the opposition
27:01That's the question that is being raised
27:03But J.B. Mathir
27:04Very quickly
27:05You are being accused of spreading anarchy
27:07That Rahul Gandhi wants my way or the highway
27:09Is his attitude to parliament
27:11How do you quickly respond to that?
27:13BJP has no moral right to take lessons on how to conduct house
27:23How to behave in the house
27:25Because country has seen it in 2011, in 2012, in 2014
27:30And we have on record
27:31Shushma Swarajji's statements
27:33Harun Jaitliji's statement
27:35On what they think the need for disruption is
27:37When the issue is of that grave nature
27:41And now they are taking and coming
27:43Taking lessons to us
27:44And also we should remember
27:46What kind of midnight
27:48In the midnight hour
27:50How the Prime Minister has compromised with U.S.
27:53And also it is also pertinent to note
27:55One monitoring committee is sitting in Washington
27:58And looking at our actions
28:00I am not bringing a different topic
28:02But I wish to say
28:03That this kind of taking lessons
28:05No, no, you are bringing a different topic now
28:07No, no, madam you are bringing a different topic
28:08No, let me say very assertively
28:10No, we will
28:11No, let me assertively say
28:14That this kind of behaviour is not accepted
28:19We need justice
28:20We have the right to speak
28:21Opposition leaders should be allowed to speak
28:23Okay
28:24And also our women MPs are very strong
28:26Very bold
28:27The fact is though
28:28They are from humble backgrounds
28:29Okay
28:30Who have come a long way
28:31And they are being stated like this
28:33That is just not acceptable
28:35And the figment of imagination
28:37Okay
28:38You made your point
28:39Okay, you made
28:40Madam, I have heard your point
28:41Did the Prime Minister
28:43Did anyone ever attack Prime Minister?
28:45Okay
28:46Have you ever showed any signs of attacking the Prime Minister?
28:49They just assume a lot of things
28:50Madam, I have heard you
28:51Can I
28:52I have heard you ma'am
28:53You made your point
28:54Can we have the void lowered
28:56I will give Aparajita
28:57That he got so scared
28:59I
29:00Okay
29:01The
29:02Madam
29:03Madam
29:04All the chappan inch and all
29:05But Aparajita Sarangi
29:06Why do you think
29:07That in a democracy
29:08That it's the
29:09It's the treasury benches
29:10That have to make the first move
29:11Why can't the Parliamentary Affairs Minister
29:13Call a meeting between
29:14Or the Lok Sabha Speaker
29:16Call a meeting between Rahul Gandhi
29:17And Narendra Modi
29:18The Prime Minister himself
29:20Rarely attends Parliament
29:21These are the problems
29:22How do you build trust
29:24Unless the two sides talk to each other?
29:26Very quickly
29:27See three clear issues
29:32One, we strongly condemn the behaviour of the opposition
29:35Especially the Congress
29:37The other day Rahul Gandhiji stood up and said
29:40I am the LOP
29:41Do you think I need permission?
29:42When Prime Minister gets up he seeks permission from the chair
29:45Whosoever she or he may be
29:48The LOP saying this smacks of his arrogance
29:51His adamant behaviour
29:53And maybe his lack of knowledge of the rules of procedure
29:57This is one part
29:58So there is absolutely no condoning the behaviour of the leader of opposition and the team
30:04And the women MPs who crossed over from that side to this side to the Prime Minister's seat
30:09And blocked the path
30:10There was no reason
30:11Nobody can justify
30:13I mean whatever
30:14Whosoever he or she may be
30:15Nobody can justify that behaviour of the women parliamentarians from the Congress
30:19Now number two
30:21As far as Honorable Sri Aum Birlaji is concerned
30:24He is a second time speaker
30:26And no confidence motion has been brought against him
30:29Nothing can be more ridiculous than this
30:31Because we know what's going to happen
30:33In persistence of Article 96 of the Constitution of India
30:36He has decided to step out
30:38He will not be entering the Lok Sabha
30:40Till 9th March
30:41Or whichever date we discuss the no confidence motion
30:44And you know and I know what's going to happen
30:46It will fall flat
30:47Because they don't have the numbers
30:49Knowing fully well they don't have the numbers
30:51They have brought it
30:52You know it's not about numbers ma'am
30:54You did not
30:55We need
30:56What stopped the speaker from bringing Narendra
30:59Ma'am
31:00I am not saying you don't have the numbers
31:02But the speaker could have brought
31:03At least made an effort to get Rahul Gandhi and Narendra Modi into a room
31:07But the sad truth
31:09And I want to say this as my take at the end
31:11The sad truth is we have a situation today of a complete breakdown in trust
31:16That's the reality at the moment
31:18In that a democracy works
31:20Please let me speak for 30 seconds
31:21Yes ma'am a democracy
31:25Yes only 30 seconds ma'am do finish
31:27Yeah I just want to say
31:29Yeah the for the first day when everything started
31:33The log jam took place
31:35You know 40 minutes we waited for the leader of opposition to stand up and speak
31:40On the business of the house and that was motion of thanks
31:43He did not
31:4440 minutes we waited
31:46So please don't say that our honourable speaker had partisan approach
31:50And he did not allow him to speak
31:52Did not give the opportunity to speak
31:53Okay
31:54This is absolutely far from the truth
31:55Okay I am going to leave it there
32:01As you can see there is a serious lack of trust on both sides
32:06And a democracy works when you respect the opposition
32:10And the opposition respects whoever has been elected to power
32:14That mutual respect has broken down in our system
32:18And unfortunately constitutional figures have as a result
32:22Often become rubber stamps of those in power
32:25Think about it
32:26Let's turn from there to another contentious issue
32:29Where a hate video posted by the BJP's Assam unit
32:34Has now reached the doors of the Supreme Court
32:37We are talking about the video which showed Hemanto Biswasarma
32:41The Assam chief minister with an air gun
32:44Targeting those in skull caps
32:47Muslims of this in that video
32:50The video has since been deleted
32:52But it's been seen with a million views
32:55And now a group of concerned citizens
32:58Including the former LG of Delhi
33:01Have filed a public interest litigation
33:03Which was heard today in the Supreme Court
33:05With the Supreme Court judges saying
33:07That they will look at this very closely
33:10And that they will look to see
33:12How this video has
33:15What action should be taken on this video
33:19The PIL has cited several examples
33:22Of the manner in which hate speech
33:24Is being spread by constitutional figures
33:27Including in this case they claim
33:29The Assam chief minister
33:31Let's listen into what Hemanto Biswasarma has had to say on it
33:34And the left parties who have joined that petition
33:38Asamqa political discourse
33:44This discourse is quite polarized
33:46In the Burst and Bangladesh
33:49This is a polarized discourse
33:50This is a polarized discourse
33:52Asamqa politics
33:53That BJP is propagating through their official handle.
34:16This is an open exhortation to target Muslim minorities,
34:22to annihilate them.
34:25I call upon the Supreme Court of India to take cognizance of this
34:31and proceed against the Chief Minister of Assam
34:35because he has violated his oath of office.
34:40Okay, joining me now is one of those who's filed that public interest litigation.
34:45Najeeb Jang, former LG of Delhi and IS officer joins me.
34:49Najeeb Jang, you have sought judicial intervention
34:53against Assam Chief Minister Hemant Abhiswa Sarma.
34:57What motivated you to do this legal action on a video of the kind that was released,
35:03put out on social media and later deleted?
35:07Rajdeep, thank you for doing this show. I think it's necessary to speak on this.
35:14Well, for the last few years, we've been extremely perturbed at the kind of noises we hear
35:22which are threatening, which are obscene against the Muslim community.
35:26We have tried our best to speak to people.
35:30We have spoken to the RSS several times.
35:33But there is no ebbing to this issue.
35:37All kinds of obscene conversations are made.
35:43And this recent video absolutely took the cake.
35:50I mean, Muslims have tolerated being called barking dogs, being called cut mullah.
35:57Colonel Sophia has been insulted and so on.
36:02This was born with great patience, thinking that it will ride over.
36:07But now the last two weeks, the statements of the Assam Chief Minister,
36:13it's not a question of just calling them Mia.
36:16It's a question of a call to throw them out of Assam.
36:20It's a call to deprive them of honest businesses.
36:24And the repercussions have already been felt.
36:27When I read in the paper somewhere that a fair charge for a taxi for 20 rupees
36:35and the lady paid him three or four.
36:37Now, that is extremely serious.
36:39And when you see the Chief Minister of a state holding a gun,
36:46albeit they have withdrawn that, but it came out.
36:49And the bullet coming through it, heading towards two skull-capped Muslims,
36:55I think it struck terror in the hearts of crores of Muslims.
37:01Because this is a clear indication that is this something more planned against the community?
37:08And therefore, we thought that this is the time now that we should approach the Supreme Court.
37:15In fact, let me say this.
37:17I am very disappointed in the courts of the country because this is something which called for Suomoto action.
37:26The courts should have done it themselves.
37:29But then we got together, and there are some 10, 12 of us who are concerned citizens,
37:34who felt that we should bring this to the notice of the Supreme Court.
37:39And of course, by filing this petition, this has now come out in public domain.
37:44This action has upset.
37:47Sir, but if I may stop you for a moment.
37:52What you are saying, therefore, is enough is enough.
37:54That Muslims are running out of patience by the constant demonization and targeting of the community.
38:00But on the other hand, the Assam BJP is claiming that this social media ad was not directed against Indian Muslims.
38:08It was directed against illegal immigrants, i.e. Bangladeshi, Bengali-speaking Muslims.
38:13That is their argument.
38:15Do you buy this argument that is being made that you differentiate between Indian Muslims and Bangladeshi Muslims?
38:24Not at all.
38:27It is a nonsensical argument.
38:29They have been caught on the wrong foot, and therefore, they are making these excuses.
38:33The language of the chief minister over the last several weeks, if not several months, is completely unacceptable.
38:41It demands action.
38:43In any same democracy, action would have been taken against him.
38:48Only two people have filed FIRs against him.
38:51My friend, Harsh Mandar, who is also part of this PIL, and I am told today, Asaduddin Ovesi in Hyderabad.
38:59Let's see what happens.
39:00But look at the reaction of the honorable chief minister.
39:03He says that he will file 100 FIRs against Arch.
39:07Is that not an absurd statement?
39:09I mean, you call them meers, you want to deprive them of their livelihood, and then you threaten action against a person who feels that you have done wrong.
39:20So, this going back by the Assam BJP.
39:25But may I ask you this, is this directed against, therefore, Assam BJP, Hemant Abhiswa Sarma, the chief minister of Assam for who you say is not fulfilling his constitutional responsibilities?
39:39Because you mentioned in your PIL, Maharashtra minister, Nitesh Rane, and his hateful remarks.
39:45You mentioned remarks by National Security Advisor Ajit Doval, again, which you claim have fueled social tension.
39:53Are you seeking, therefore, the Supreme Court to give clear guidelines for any kind of hate speech?
40:01Because the court has often spoken of a hate speech, but the police doesn't take action.
40:05So, are you asking now, not just the Assam chief minister, but anyone from any community who resorts to hate speech, action must be taken instantly?
40:15Rajdeep, Mr. Sarma's action of that revolver or gun was the trigger point.
40:23I mean, enough was enough, but our PIL actually seeks no action against them.
40:30Our PIL is directed at the Supreme Court that the Supreme Court should lay down guidelines for future, clear, specific guidelines.
40:38Very often, the courts have spoken against all this.
40:42In a couple of judgments, they have said that FIR should be filed when there is hate speech.
40:47But no clear guidelines have been set out by the Supreme Court on how the police should react.
40:53There should be a clear order on anyone.
40:56So, coming to your question, Mr. Sarma's recent act was the trigger point.
41:02But this is directed against all of them who make such speeches.
41:06Because like you said, that you have put an entire community, and not only the Muslims, the Christians are having an awful time in the country.
41:15No one speaks for them. Their numbers are so minuscule that they can't defend themselves.
41:21So, we want clear guidelines of action or spoken words against any community.
41:28And that also includes, by the way, Dalits and other backwords.
41:32Thank you very, well, those are very, very strong words, Najeeb Jangan.
41:39I do hope that the court realizes that it also has to fulfill its constitutional responsibility.
41:45Enough is enough. Hate speech is anti-Constitution.
41:49It is simply unacceptable.
41:53Wake up and smell the coffee is what we can tell the Supreme Court today.
41:58So, after all the controversy and the toing and froing and the uncertainty,
42:05well, the good news is the India-Pakistan World T20 match will go ahead this coming Sunday.
42:12Pakistan's U-turn of sorts came after an ICC meeting with Pakistani and Bangladesh delegations was held in Lahore.
42:21Pakistan saying that they would now go ahead with the match because Bangladesh has been suitably compensated by the ICC,
42:29or at least that's the official position that Pakistan and its government have taken.
42:35But what's the inside story? Joining me now is a special guest, the editor of Friday Times, renowned anchor, journalist,
42:42and, of course, a former Pakistan cricket board chairman, Najam Sethi joins me.
42:47Appreciate your joining us, Mr. Sethi, there from Pakistan.
42:51Explain to our viewers the reasons for Pakistan's U-turn.
42:55None of the real objective conditions seem to have changed in the last fortnight.
42:59Has Pakistan therefore only ended up embarrassing themselves by first saying they will boycott the match against India
43:06and now falling in, lying in and saying, no, we will play with India?
43:10What's the inside story, sir?
43:12In fact, it's the ICC that has taken a step back.
43:17And I think one of the reasons that Pakistan gave a 15-day notice,
43:24that was the reason was that they wanted space with which to talk to the ICC and Bangladesh.
43:31And I think they had reason to believe that that would yield some results.
43:35And so I think the ICC has decided to back off a little bit, give Bangladesh some space.
43:43And I think Pakistan has achieved part of its objective, which was to get Bangladesh back in the game in one way or another,
43:51because the ICC was threatening them with all manner of sanctions.
43:56And I think between you and me, I think going forward, maybe in March you will see some other concessions
44:02that have been extracted from the ICC.
44:04I'll come to those concessions in a moment, Mr. Sethi.
44:09But are you seriously telling me that Pakistan wasn't worried about the sanctions that the ICC had threatened to impose on them,
44:17possibly a long period of isolation, a loss of revenue?
44:21Isn't this really about Pakistan realizing that they cannot afford not to play against India,
44:27both in financial terms as well as in terms of their own future in this global game?
44:32No, that's not true at all. It was a very considered decision.
44:38They looked at all the angles. They knew that there could be no sanctions.
44:42They consulted the top lawyers at home and abroad.
44:45And there are precedents that made it clear to them that they were on a very strong wicket.
44:51And at best they would lose a point. No more than that.
44:54And I think the ICC also realized that, which is why then the ICC got into motion and made overtures.
45:00And that's how Imran Khawaja, the deputy chief, got into action.
45:06That's how the Bangladeshis got into action.
45:08That's how they came to Pakistan to negotiate so that Pakistan could play this match.
45:13Pakistan knew that the broadcasters had the ICC, as it were, on a cold slap.
45:20And so, as far as the question of resources is concerned, you know, now Pakistan, there was a time when Pakistan used to rely on ICC resources for sustenance, like many of the other boards do.
45:32But not anymore. Now that the PSL has taken off in a big way, we get more money from the PSL than we get from the ICC.
45:40So, Pakistan is well looked after by its own resources. So, that was never an issue. Never an issue.
45:47You know, Mr. Sethi, you're saying that, but it's a terrible example of mixing cricket with politics, dare I say.
45:55It's almost as if Pakistan had a problem with the fact that India, like it or not, is the world capital of cricket, the superpower of cricket.
46:03You may see it differently, but the world wants to come to India and play here.
46:08They don't want to play the PSL as much as they want to play the IPL.
46:12And maybe Pakistan simply wants to try and use these fora to express its anger against India, dictating terms to the world.
46:23And that becomes an example of churlishness and mixing cricket and politics, isn't it?
46:30No, not at all. The world definitely wants to come to India to play the IPL and all other fixtures.
46:36There's no doubt about the fact that India is a major contributor to ICC revenues. No doubt. Nobody's questioning that.
46:43But what we are saying is this, that the ICC is supposed to be an independent body. It's not the BCCI.
46:48And so, therefore, you need to have a system of equity.
46:51And I have been, you know, working on this question of equity since the big three discussions and so on.
46:57And, you know, we were the only ones who didn't want to sign on the dotted line.
47:00In the end, we were proven right that, you know, the big three formulas were all unjust.
47:04And eventually they had to scrap those and come to a new agreement.
47:07And by the way, I might tell you, my sense is that there will be new formulas going forward, better, more equitable formulas.
47:14So now to come to what you're saying, everybody wants to play in the PSL.
47:20Those who don't get into the IPL are all too ready to play in the PSL.
47:25And so we realize that. But here's the interesting point.
47:28India has never allowed Indian players to play in any league outside India.
47:33Isn't that right? Pakistani players play in all the leagues outside Pakistan.
47:37We are welcoming. We want India to come and play in Pakistan by both in ICC fixtures and bilateral fixtures.
47:44But India even refuses to play us in bilateral fixtures outside Pakistan.
47:49No, no, no. The reason, Najam Sethi, you know this better than anyone.
47:54The reason is, so long as the Pakistani state is seen as a sponsor of terror against India,
47:59what happened in Pahlkam, for example, last year, terror and cricket don't go together.
48:04You can't have bilateral series if Pakistan is going to be seen as a sponsor of terror.
48:09I expect India to visit Pakistan and play against Pakistan.
48:12You need to create a conducive atmosphere, sir.
48:16Well, Rajdeep, you know, it takes two hands to clap.
48:20Do you know what the narrative is?
48:23The narrative is that your national security adviser, Mr. Dole, is on record for saying
48:27that we're going to sort out Pakistan by sponsoring insurgency in Balochistan.
48:31That's on record. You know it as well as I do.
48:34So now every time there's a bomb blast that goes off and the insurgents do something in Balochistan,
48:38every day Pakistani newspapers are pointing the finger at India,
48:42much like India used to point the finger at Pakistan during those years when the insurgency was raging in Kashmir.
48:48So it's basically tit for tat.
48:50You can't accuse Pakistan of terrorism without evidence.
48:53And on the other hand, when Pakistan accuses India of terrorism, you turn around and say, oh, that's not right.
48:59So let's not go there, please.
49:02You know, you're calling it tit for tat, but let me ask you honestly.
49:07Do you really believe that this was about Pakistan feeling anguished about Bangladesh being wronged?
49:14Or was it Pakistan seeing an opportunity to forge an axis with Dhaka in a way to somehow politically encircle India?
49:22That this was therefore a political decision and you know that better than anyone else.
49:26This was not about cricket, it was about politics, Mr. Sethi.
49:29Would you agree or not?
49:32I know it.
49:34That's what was happening for 15 years in Bangladesh and Hasina and Marendra Modi were in bed together.
49:40So now what's happened is the tables have been turned.
49:43You have a new government that is pro-Pakistan.
49:45For 15 years you had a government that's pro-India.
49:48So Bangladesh was sitting with India all the time.
49:50Now Bangladesh is going to sit with Pakistan.
49:52That's politics feel.
49:56That's politics for you.
49:59I think you're being very honest.
50:00I'm glad that you're being honest about that.
50:04That's politics.
50:05But whether a cricket field should become an arena for politics is the big question that all of us cricket lovers certainly will continue to ask.
50:13But Najam Sethi for joining me there and giving us a Pakistani perspective, appreciate that.
50:18On this programme, we will get voices of credibility from both sides of the border on issues like this.
50:25You can call me anti-national for that.
50:27But there will be times where I'll say, garv se kaho anti-national, my first commitment is to the news and journalism.
50:34Thanks for watching.
50:35Stay well.
50:36Stay safe.
50:37Good night.
50:38Jai Hind.
50:39Namaskar.
50:40Good night.
50:41Not lugares.
50:42See you for watching.
Comments