The monsoon session is due soon. Unfortunately, it’s far from clear how it could safely be held. Given the country’s need to discuss the covid crisis, though, let there be no delay
As coronavirus infections rage on, with only dim prospects of their upward curve flattening soon, we need our country to be in conversation with itself, no matter how difficult this is under constrained circumstances. We need Parliament, in particular, to reconvene. Unfortunately, the monsoon session, which typically begins in the latter half of July, still seems mired in uncertainty. Under our Constitution, there should not be a gap of more than six months between sessions, so this would require both Houses to hold sittings no later than autumn equinox. Secretariat officials in charge of determining how parliamentary proceedings can be safely held, however, are reported to have informed the Rajya Sabha chairperson and Lok Sabha speaker that none of the three halls in the building can accommodate a session without social-distancing norms being violated. Convening the lower house is especially hard, as it has 543 members. The Rajya Sabha has 245. Even the use of galleries meant for their relatives and the press would not expand hall capacity sufficiently. If this is so, an online session suggests itself, and while this idea is said to be under discussion, adopting it is not as simple as it may seem.
For one, it appears that virtual participation in House proceedings may require a tweak of the rulebook, one that could need to pass muster in the very Parliament that the move seeks to reopen. If this is so, then it makes for a catch-22 situation. For another, it is still not clear how comfortable members are with attending Parliament via the internet. While technological enablers do exist, political leaders may find their participation moderated by the technicalities of connectivity, which could introduce unfair disparities among equals. Unease about the idea could also stem from suspicions of the mechanism’s vulnerability to an attack by hackers, especially if a division of votes is called for and every “aye" and “noe" must be counted accurately. At another level, politicians may miss the sense of party solidarity that is generated by being seated together.
Yet, we are faced with a moment unlike any other in the history of our democracy, and the gravity of it enjoins our representatives to do what they were elected for. They need to represent us. They should be our voice as they discuss myriad issues of popular concern that the covid crisis has thrown up. At a time like this, the country would benefit from a wide spectrum of views. If the current pandemic is playing a pivotal role in reshaping various fields of human endeavour, as it is expected to, then our legislative institutions must not only keep up with the changes being wrought, but also try to keep them in consonance with the will of our citizens. To enable as much, the government would be well advised to begin the process of forging a consensus on how the next session on our democracy’s calendar can be held. A hybrid model of in-house and online participation has been suggested as well. For this, each party could pick a few parliamentarians to assemble in the usual hall, even as the rest attend the session remotely. Again, this raises a question of equity. What about small parties and independent members? Also, the membership of those who are physically present may be seen as weightier than that of others. All this needs a national debate. For now, what we could all agree upon is that Parliament must reconvene.
Click here to read the Mint ePaperLivemint.com is now on Telegram. Join Livemint channel in your Telegram and stay updated
