- 3 months ago
In this India Today video, anchor Marya Shakil looks at the three-week Parliament logjam that cost taxpayers over Rs 216 crore, with the government and Opposition locked in a bitter standoff. She also tracks the Justice Yashwant Varma cash case, as a parliamentary panel finds the charges against him proven.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Good evening, you're watching NewsTrack with me, Maria Shaquille.
00:03For nearly three weeks, Parliament has been caught in a cycle of confrontation, disruption and political deadlock.
00:09The government and the opposition remain at odds over the police crackdown on protesting students,
00:14the demand for a statement from the Home Minister and the controversy over alleged irregularities in Ram Temple donations.
00:22But beyond the political sparring lies a larger constitutional concern, institutional concern I must say.
00:28Parliament itself is losing the very time meant for debates, scrutiny and accountability.
00:35With a large chunk of scheduled hours lost, question hour virtually wiped out and several bills passed with little or
00:45no discussion,
00:46the cost of the deadlock goes far beyond the optics of disruption.
00:51With just one more day to go, the question now is what happens to taxpayers' money
00:55when our elected leaders simply choose to bicker.
01:00When Parliament cannot debate, what does the taxpayer lose beyond the money spent?
01:06Not just time and money, but questions left unanswered, laws passed with less scrutiny and a government held less accountable.
01:16And to answer some pertinent questions on your behalf, I will be joined by BJP, Chief Whip in the Lok
01:23Sabha, Sanjay Jaiswal,
01:25and Congress Whip in the Rajya Sabha, Nasir Hussain.
01:29But first up, this report.
01:46For the last three weeks, Parliament has been locked in a political deadlock.
01:51The opposition and Treasury benches have been at loggerheads over a range of issues with repeated disruptions bringing proceedings to
01:59a nearer standstill.
02:01At the heart of the standoff is the July 20th police crackdown on protesting students in Delhi.
02:07The opposition has been demanding a statement from Home Minister Ahmed Shah,
02:11seeking answers on the police action and allegations of pellet gun use.
02:16A day before Parliament is said to be adjourned,
02:19Sinodine Shah made a fresh attempt to break the deadlock.
02:50But leader of opposition, Rajya Sabha,
02:52Shahul Gandhi dismissed the offer.
03:04The students should know this.
03:0630 cars around Amit Shah.
03:08The police are standing there.
03:12The police are standing there.
03:15So the gas came out of the last minute.
03:31The opposition has also insisted on a discussion over the alleged Ram Temple donation irregularities,
03:38calling the demand non-negotiable.
03:40But while the two sides trade charges, there is another casualty of the deadlock.
03:46Parliamentary productivity.
03:47Because every hour lost in Parliament comes at a cost.
03:52Running Parliament for one minute costs 2.5 lakh rupees.
03:56Every hour costs 1.5 crore.
03:59And running Parliament for six hours a day costs a whopping 9 crore rupees.
04:04And the numbers from the current session paint a stark picture.
04:10Both houses were scheduled to function for 96 hours each.
04:14But the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha functioned for just 16.7 and 31.2 hours respectively.
04:21That means 79.3 hours were lost in the Lok Sabha and 64.8 hours in the Rajya Sabha.
04:28At a cost of 1.5 crore rupees per hour, as per government data,
04:33Parliament lost an estimated 216.15 crore rupees between July 20th and August 10th.
04:44And yet, Parliament was not complete without legislative business.
04:48The government managed to push through 19 bills during the session.
04:59But the manner of passage has raised questions.
05:03Several bills were passed, with little to no debate.
05:06At one point, seven bills were passed in just 36 minutes.
05:13And perhaps the biggest casualty of the Lok Jam has been question hour.
05:18Almost no question hour took place.
05:23Parliament is not just where political battles are fought.
05:26It is where laws are debated, ministers are questioned,
05:29and the government is held accountable.
05:32The deadlock may be between the opposition and the government,
05:35but the cost is ultimately being borne by the taxpayer.
05:39Bureau Report, India Today.
05:44Let me bring in Ayyad Nasser Hussain,
05:47who is a member of Parliament of the Congress Party
05:49and also Congress Whip in the Rajya Sabha.
05:51Mr. Hussain, the BJP says Rahul Gandhi is shifting the goalposts.
05:55The original demand was that Amit Shah must come to Parliament and answer.
06:00Home Minister Amit Shah now says that he is ready to debate and answer every question.
06:05Now Rahul Gandhi's response is,
06:08we don't want to listen to him, he must resign.
06:11Has the demand therefore shifted from accountability to resignation and why?
06:17See, I think the BJP is only trying to confuse the population of this country.
06:26Our demands were very clear from day one.
06:29If you look at the videos of what Malik Arjun Kharkir Sahib has spoken and demanded in Rajya Sabha
06:35and what Mr. Rahul Gandhi has spoken and demanded in Lok Tava.
06:39It's very clear.
06:40One, Amit Shah should come and make a statement on the 20th July violence against the students and Jantamantar.
06:48Two, he should also make a statement on Chadawa Chori.
06:52And then after his statement, let us have a debate.
06:56Let us have discussion on that issue and let him give clarification after that and answer the questions in his
07:01reply again to both the houses.
07:03That was our original demand and the Prime Minister of the country should apologize to whatever was done to the
07:09students on 28th July.
07:10These were the three demands and that have always been there.
07:13We are not shifting any goalposts anywhere.
07:16He is the Home Minister of the country.
07:19He is before the Home Minister.
07:21He is the Member of Parliament elected by the people of his constituency.
07:24It is his duty and responsibility to attend the Parliament every day when it is there in session.
07:31From 28th till now, he has not even come to both the houses even once.
07:37He comes to the Parliament building.
07:40He sits in his chamber but he doesn't attend the houses, whether it is Lok Sabha or Raj Sabha.
07:46What is he scared of?
07:48Why is he not coming?
07:49What is it that's stopping him to attend these houses?
07:52And he can't say that I am writing a letter from outside the Parliament to parliamentarians.
07:58Parliamentarians, you put the house in order and then I will come and speak.
08:03He should first appear in either one of the houses and then start speaking.
08:07Only then he will get to know whether the members of the Parliament would like to listen to him or
08:12not.
08:12Okay, Mr. Hussain, the opposition and particularly the Congress is being accused of politics of disruption.
08:18Who is responsible to the taxpayers here?
08:21They are the ones who pay for the Parliament to function.
08:26And these taxpayers, which includes us, we want discussion and debate.
08:35In a parliamentary democracy, it is the responsibility of the government to see that the Parliament functions.
08:42I am not seeing this.
08:44The pundits of political science all over the world have said this.
08:47And even their own leaders, when they were there in the opposition, they have told this n number of times.
08:56This is point number one.
08:57Point number two, we are asking for a debate.
09:01We are asking for a discussion.
09:02We want discussion.
09:03We want to debate.
09:05As I had mentioned in some other debate today in the evening,
09:10the government comes to the Parliament with its agenda in the form of bills.
09:15And we want to debate those bills and probably we would also like to pass them unanimously or with a
09:23consensus.
09:24But the opposition will also come with the agenda.
09:26They will like to raise the issues that concerns the people of our country.
09:31Those issues may put the government in an uncomfortable position.
09:36But then it is the duty and responsibility of the government to see that they accommodate these issues with the
09:43opposition is raising.
09:45And also to answer the questions that are thrown at them during the course of debate and discussion in the
09:50Parliament.
09:50So we are wanting a debate.
09:53We want a discussion in the Parliament.
09:54It is the government that is running away from the discussion because the Home Minister is not to be seen
10:00anywhere in the Parliament.
10:01The Prime Minister never comes.
10:03He chooses to address the parliamentarism from abroad, from election rallies, from some other events, government events across the country.
10:11But it doesn't come to the Parliament.
10:13So who is running from debate and discussion is a question mark.
10:16According to me, it is the government which is running because they don't want to discuss the genuine issues that
10:20the people of this country are facing today.
10:22Okay, you know, you are the Congress Whip in the Rajya Survive.
10:25The government here says it's ready to debate and answer every question.
10:29What is your threshold for ending the disruption?
10:33If Home Minister Amit Shah gives a detailed reply tomorrow, will the Congress allow Parliament to function normally on its
10:38last day of the monsoon session?
10:43See, we have been asking for a discussion.
10:45We have been asking for a debate.
10:47Our demand has been very clear that he should make a statement on both these issues.
10:52And let the members of Parliament discuss that issue on the basis of the statement given by the Home Minister.
11:00And then let him reply to the, to not only to the parliamentarians, but also to the nation as to
11:08what has happened on 28 July and things which unfolded after that.
11:12So who is stopping him from coming to the Parliament?
11:16This is for the first time in the eight years of Indian parliamentary democracy that a Home Minister is seeking
11:22permission from the opposition
11:24to come to Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha to address the parliamentarian or to participate in the parliamentary proceedings.
11:32This is the first time that is happening.
11:33Who has stopped him?
11:34He should come.
11:35We are wanting him.
11:36We are demanding that he should be in the Parliament.
11:40Ah, that's our demand.
11:41That's there in public demand.
11:42That's there on record in both the Houses of Parliament.
11:45Because both the leaders of opposition in Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha have been demanding this.
11:49We have been shouting slogan.
11:54This has been our consistent slogan from day one till now.
11:57So it is the Home Minister who is somehow not ready to face the parliament.
12:02It is he who is running away from the parliamentary debate in the entire Manson session.
12:06Okay, let me ask my last question to you here, Mr. Hussein.
12:10One thing is clear.
12:11There is a lot of distrust here between Treasury benches and the opposition.
12:16The BJP is saying that you were adamant on not getting the FCRA bill passed.
12:20And hence this continued disruption.
12:27Maria, you should understand that in our parliamentary history, we have seen how legislative scrutiny
12:38of bills have decreased over years.
12:43If you compare our UPA time, 67% of the bills were sent to legislative scrutiny to one of
12:50the standing committees or joint parliamentary committees or the select committees and so on.
12:55So if they really wanted, they have sent the FCRA bill, they are sending the FCRA bill for a JPC.
13:03Yes.
13:04So on things which cannot be decided by one two-hour discussion or five-hour discussion,
13:12on which bill we think that the stakeholders need to be consulted, they should be brought to discussion,
13:19there should be deposition from the witnesses on various issues, like the way it happened in the Bok bill.
13:24So I'm sure even after that bill goes to JPC, they will not take into account the recommendations
13:30and the concerns that would be raised by the opposition.
13:32It is a different matter.
13:33But then these bills need to go to standing committees for legislative scrutiny.
13:39It has been only 20 to 25% of the bills that have gone to this legislative scrutiny in the
13:47last 12 years,
13:48if you compare.
13:49This is not what we have been doing in the past 60, 70 years during our parliamentary debates and discussion.
13:59We need thorough discussion on certain bills.
14:01We need to have deeper understanding of the things.
14:03We need to have widespread consultations.
14:06We need to have consultations from the experts.
14:10We need to have lots of experts to come and say things, to discuss things on the bills.
14:15That's the reason we asked for the FCRA.
14:17We also wanted the FCRA to be sent to a JPC, and I think that has been sent today, and
14:26we are okay with that.
14:28But the point is, who ordered firing of the pellets against our own students on 20th July is a moot
14:36question,
14:37because the police of Delhi takes instructions from the Home Minister of the country
14:41and answers and reports to the Home Minister of the country.
14:45So, is it he or somebody else?
14:48These are the questions which need to be answered.
14:50Only the Home Minister can answer these questions.
14:52That's the reason why we are asking him to come and appear in one of these houses or both the
14:55houses.
14:56One.
14:57Two.
14:57Regarding Chadawa Chauri, it is very clear that the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya was constructed on the directions of the
15:07Supreme Court,
15:08which directed the government of the day to construct the Ram Mandir, and to constitute a committee by the government.
15:17The union government has formed the present committee or the trust, whatever it is called as there.
15:21And the Chauri has been done under its supervision.
15:24But I don't know whether they are involved in that or not involved in that.
15:27So, it is not the Yogi government that has to give a statement on this, that has to set up
15:32a SIT on this.
15:33It is the union government because they have appointed the committee that they should give a statement on this
15:38and they should conduct a high-level inquiry into it.
15:40So, if we are asking for this, is this too much to ask?
15:44Okay.
15:44If we are asking for a debate on this, is it too much to ask?
15:48There is a third issue which we couldn't raise in a bigger way because there was not much time.
15:53That is E20, ethanol issue.
15:55That affects every vehicle-owning person in this country.
16:04And also it affects the farmers of our country.
16:07We need to still take it up in a big way which we'll do in the days to come.
16:11These are the issues that concern the people of our country.
16:14So, why is the government not ready to discuss this issue?
16:16Will it embarrass them?
16:18Are they on a back foot on this?
16:20Or do they have nothing to say on this?
16:22Or they don't have answers to the questions that have been raised by the people and also by the opposition
16:26in the parliament?
16:26Okay. So, let me take all that you are saying to my next guest.
16:31Nasir Hussain, really appreciate your time.
16:33Joining me now is Sanjay Jaiswal, BJP Chief Whip in the Lok Sabha.
16:37Mr. Jaiswal, Home Minister Amit Shah has said that he is ready to answer every question.
16:42But Raul Gandhi wants to know who ordered the use of force on protesters on July 20th.
16:47Now, the question is, with the monsoon session almost like a total washout, who will really explain the taxpayers?
16:54Who will explain them as to how their money was used or misused?
17:01The thing is that we have always been ready to discuss anything which opposition wants.
17:07First, they wanted to have a serious discussion about the agitations.
17:15We were ready to do that.
17:17That once the discussion started, then they changed the goalposts intentionally.
17:23Rahul Gandhi spoke so many unparliamentary words that nobody will allow him to speak.
17:30So, he was not interested in participating in discussion.
17:34It has been nearly more than a week when Amit Shahji has conveyed through our Parliamentary Affairs Minister that if
17:46we want to discuss, we are ready to discuss.
17:49But first, bring Parliament House in order.
17:53If the House will be in order, if there will be a discussion starting from a bill, then we are
18:02ready to participate in it.
18:05Unfortunately, Rahul Gandhi wants that the Parliament should function on the whims of fancy of him.
18:13See, Parliament's most important work is bringing, formulating the laws.
18:19And they want that no law should be discussed there, only on those issues which Mr. Rahul Gandhi wants should
18:27be discussed in Parliament.
18:29That's never going to happen.
18:31The first and foremost responsibility of the Parliament is to formulate the laws.
18:36Why you want that there should be no discussion on law and you want only those issues which you want
18:42to rig?
18:43There is definitely a time that every week you can discuss one issue.
18:49But they have always changed the goalposts.
18:52First, they said we want to discuss student education.
18:55Then they said they want to discuss why we want a statement on Home Minister.
19:01Then suddenly they discussed, okay, if the Home Minister will speak, then we will not listen to the Home Minister.
19:07We will have some other issue to be discussed.
19:12So, everyone was knowing in Parliament that their main purpose is that FCRA bill should not be passed.
19:20They are not interested in discussing anything in Parliament because their first and foremost was FCRA bill should not be
19:29passed.
19:30They have raised so many times that FCRA bill should go to a standing committee or a select committee.
19:35Today, when we gave it to the JPC, still they objected that why you are giving it to the JPC,
19:41now cancel the bill.
19:42So, the basic purpose was that they don't want any discussion in Parliament.
19:47Okay, Sanjay Ji, you have said that the Congress did not want the FCRA bill to be passed.
19:53The bill, of course, has now gone to the JPC.
19:55But you entered this monsoon session, I am talking about the BJP, with claims that the ND has the numbers
20:02to pass the delimitation bill.
20:04What really is the future of that bill?
20:08I am not an authority to talk on these issues.
20:12Any bill has to be decided by the government.
20:16We are member of Parliament.
20:17I am chief.
20:18If the bill comes in Parliament, then my responsibility starts.
20:21So, these things are answered by the government in the Cabinet.
20:27It has to be decided in the Cabinet.
20:29As a member of Parliament, I can't tell you which bill is coming, which bill is not coming.
20:34I can only talk about those bills which are being discussed in the Business Advisory Committee.
20:42And in the Business Advisory Committee, the delimitation bill this time was never discussed.
20:47OK. So, let's move on to ask you about what we saw play out, which was clear obstruction.
20:53One may say that the government says that the opposition is running away from discussion debate.
20:57The opposition is saying that you are running away from debate.
21:01And that the Parliament is a platform to take up issues.
21:04Why won't the government discuss issues like Chandachori, which the opposition calls almost non-negotiable?
21:11And then, one may ask that are parliamentary rules being applied selectively here?
21:21It's not applied selectively.
21:23First, police order is not a central government issue.
21:26Police order is a state issue.
21:29If Mr. Rahul Gandhi wants to discuss police order, first he should say that let's discuss police order of Karnataka.
21:37Let's discuss police order of Telangana, Kerala, Himachal.
21:41See, we have got our limitations.
21:44There are some subjects which are central government.
21:48Some are under state government and some are concurrent issues.
21:52Police order is very clearly a state government issue.
21:56In 12 years, have this government raised one issue in any opposition-ruled state on police order?
22:05I am 100% sure and I can challenge you.
22:09It has never happened.
22:11So, everybody has to be in their limits.
22:14And we were ready.
22:16We were saying that we will let the bill to discuss.
22:19They said that we will discuss on Monday the Supreme Court judges will.
22:23And we cancelled the Supreme Court judges' will for three days so that Congress could discuss Supreme Court judges' will.
22:31And on Monday, again, they were playing the same game.
22:34So, the main purpose was that they don't want to run the parliament.
22:37We have passed our bills.
22:40See, if the parliament runs, you have got so many opportunities to discuss so many things.
22:45You could have discussed under Zero Hour.
22:47You could have discussed under 193, 377.
22:51There are so many tools where you can speak on any issue.
22:55But the fact was that you were really frightened that if we discuss any issue, they will be bitten as
23:05it has happened previously.
23:07So, it's better not to discuss anything.
23:09Sanjay Ji, my last question is what the Congress Party is saying.
23:13And they are quoting the senior BJP leader and former minister, late Arunjetli, who had famously said as leader of
23:25opposition in the Rajya Sabha that parliamentary obstruction is also legitimate and that it favours democracy.
23:32So, what has changed?
23:33Why was disruption against UPA legitimate and now it is undemocratic because you are in power?
23:44No, it's legitimate on both sides.
23:46But first, you have to settle that on which issue you want to discuss.
23:52First, you said we want to discuss this Jantar Mantar protest.
23:57After three days, it was discussed.
23:59You ran away from it.
24:00Then you said that we want to discuss Amish Shahziz.
24:05One week before, we have given our parliamentary affairs minister, Kiran Rejuju, met them.
24:13They said that, okay, bring a house in order.
24:15Let's discuss one bill and everything gets settled and we will discuss this issue also on one day.
24:22They never agreed for that.
24:24Now, four days back, we clearly said that, okay, let's discuss it.
24:29Then they said, no, we will not discuss it.
24:31Now we will discuss something else.
24:34Here's the issue.
24:35So, we have also been in opposition.
24:38I was also a member of opposition.
24:39I have seen how Arunjetli or Sushma Swaraj was functioning.
24:43We are under Sushma Swaraj.
24:44If some issue has been raised, we will never change our goalposts when we were in opposition.
24:50This is the first time in opposition we are seeing that they want to discuss an issue.
24:56And when the government agrees on that issue, they change the goalposts.
24:59No, no, we will not discuss this.
25:00We will discuss separate things.
25:01And our constitution clearly says that parliament is for passing of the laws, of the bills.
25:10You don't want to discuss any bill and you have given an agenda that we will discuss on five things.
25:17They are not, they have never settled on one issue.
25:21That's the difference between what Arunjetli and Sushma Swaraj has done as a leader of opposition
25:26and now what Mr. Rahul Gandhi is doing as a leader of opposition.
25:32All right, Sanjay Jaiswal, really appreciate your time.
25:35Thank you for joining us here on India Today.
25:39Shifting focus now.
25:40A fire, a judge's official residence, and a huge stash of cash, charred, burnt, and lying inside a storeroom.
25:51I'm going to put out those visuals.
25:54This is the extraordinary controversy surrounding former Delhi High Court judge, Justice Yashwant Varma.
26:01On March 14th, 2025, a fire broke out at Justice Varma's official residence in the national capital.
26:08But when the flames were doused, firefighters found something no one expected.
26:14Stacks and bundles of currency notes inside the premises.
26:19Some were said to have been more than a foot high.
26:24And suddenly, a fire became a full-blown judicial controversy.
26:27The questions were immediate, genuine, and explosive.
26:30Where did the cash come from?
26:32Who did it belong to?
26:33And why was it inside the judge's official residence?
26:38Then Chief Justice of India, Justice Sanjeev Khanna, ordered an in-house inquiry.
26:44Justice Varma was transferred from the Delhi High Court to the Allahabad High Court.
26:49And his judicial work was withdrawn pending the probe.
26:52The matter eventually reached Parliament.
26:56Lok Sabha Speaker, Om Billa, constituted a three-member committee under the Judges' Inquiry Act
27:03to examine the charges against Justice Varma.
27:06Justice Varma at all times denied that the money belonged to him or his family.
27:11He said the storeroom was used for unused articles and furnitures,
27:16was disconnected from the main residence,
27:18and that neither his wife nor he or anybody in his family was present when the fire broke out.
27:27He further maintained that when the fire was put out,
27:31he and his family did not see any cash there.
27:34And then he raised an even more serious allegation.
27:38Justice Varma said the material shown to him created an apprehension of a conspiracy against him.
27:44But the conspiracy theory has been debunked.
27:48The parliamentary panel has concluded that all three charges against Justice Varma were proven.
27:55The panel found that a substantial quantity of Rs. 500 notes had indeed been present in the storeroom.
28:04And importantly, it said, this was not simply a case of a few stray notes.
28:09The evidence pointed to bundles, heaps, and stacks of currency.
28:14But the committee could not really establish exactly how much money was there.
28:20Why? Because the cash was never formally seized, counted, or preserved.
28:25And that leads to another explosive finding.
28:28The committee found that the storeroom was not immediately sealed after the fire.
28:34Cleaning took place.
28:36So cleaning had taken place.
28:39And by the time investigators formally inspected the site, the cash was gone.
28:45The panel referred to Justice Varma's private secretary and a household staff member
28:51being present near the storeroom during the cleaning.
28:55And crucially, I would say, but crucially, it did not conclude that Justice Varma himself removed the cash.
29:04The committee also rejected his contention that the storeroom was completely outside his control.
29:10It held that the room formed part of his official residential premises and remained under his institutional control.
29:17And when it came to Justice Varma's explanations, the parliament panel was scathing.
29:24It found them inadequate, describing his responses as evasive, incomplete, and misleading in effect.
29:34The panel separately drew attention to Justice Varma's interaction with staff at around 2 a.m. following the fire.
29:42The report said that Justice Varma did not explain what was discussed during that interaction or what directions were issued.
29:51So what did the committee actually establish?
29:54Not that the cash belonged to Justice Varma, not that he personally removed it,
30:01and not the exact amount of money involved,
30:06but that substantial, unexplained cash was present in premises under his control,
30:14and that he failed to satisfactorily explain its presence, source, or ownership.
30:21And that has now opened up an extraordinary constitutional question.
30:28Can parliament remove a judge who has already resigned?
30:31Yes, it can.
30:33It requires a two-thirds majority.
30:35Once both houses approve the motion with the required majority,
30:41it is presented to the president.
30:43It is learned that an impeachment motion could be brought in the winter session
30:48to remove Justice Varma from office.
30:51Well, what began as flames in a judge's storeroom
30:54has now turned into a constitutional firestorm.
30:59That's all from me on this edition of NewsTrack.
31:02Thanks so much for you.
31:03Thanks.
31:03Thanks.
31:03Thanks.
31:05We'll be right back next time.
31:06Bye-bye.
31:09Bye-bye.