Most Affordable IAS Coaching in India  

18 Aug 2023 : The Indian Express

Editorial 1: Standing the ground

Recent Context:

  • According to officials, the latest round of border talks between India and China did not lead to any solution
  • As, more than three years and three months have passed since the border standoff started in eastern Ladakh but concluding result is achieved.

 

Background of India China Border Dispute

  • Western Sector
    • India and China share a 2152-kilometre-long border in the western sector. It is located between the Indian states of Jammu and Kashmir and the Chinese province of Xinjiang.
    • There is a territorial dispute in this sector over Aksai Chin.
  • Middle Sector
    • In this sector, India and China share a 625-kilometre-long border that runs from Ladakh to Nepal.
    • In this sector, the states of Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand touch the border with Tibet (China). In this area, there is little disagreement between the two sides

Eastern Sector

  • In the eastern sector, India shares a 1140km boundary with China. The boundary line is called McMahon Line runs from the eastern limit of Bhutan to a point near the Talu Pass at the trijunction of Tibet, India, and Myanmar.
  • The majority of the territory of Arunachal Pradesh is claimed by China as a part of Southern Tibet.


India’s counter against China to safeguard its international border

  • Tension along the border led to an unprecedented buildup of troops on both sides.
  •  Over the last three years, the Indian Air Force is estimated to have airlifted nearly 70,000 troops and heavy platforms including tanks, artillery guns weighing over 9,000 tonnes as part of efforts towards enhancing the overall operational preparedness in eastern Ladakh.
  • The government has built infrastructure in the border areas over the last nine years, which has led to faster deployment of forces since the standoff.


India’s stand over China’s aggression along LAC

  • India has made it clear so far that the border standoff affects bilateral relations, and only a complete de-escalation will lead to normalcy in the ties.
  • However, disengagement at the specific friction points can be achieved, a broader de-escalation will take time. That is because troops and equipment will take time to be moved from the border areas.
  • In that sense, this standoff is more complicated than the recent ones in the last 10 years. It is similar to the Sumdorong Chu standoff in 1986-87, which took almost seven years to completely disengage and de-escalate.


International institutions provide platform for discussion to deescalate the forces

  • As in 2017, the two-and-half month Doklam border standoff was resolved just days before Modi and Xi met in Xiamen for the BRICS leaders’ summit and three-week-long 2013 standoff in Depsang was resolved weeks before then Chinese Premier Wen Jaibao was visiting India.
  • The window of opportunity exists between now and Chinese President Xi’s visit to India for the G20 summit.
  • There could also be a breakthrough before Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping meet in Johannesburg for the BRICS leaders’ summit on August 22-23.

 

Conclusion:

  • India must not budge and demand complete withdrawal of troops and de-escalation, before it normalises ties. Xi’s visit next month gives India some leverage; the government must use it.

Editorial 2: No case to Press

Recent Context:

  • Recently, 5 Members of Parliament were suspended from the  houses  during the monsoon session.

 

Rules regarding the suspension of MP:

  • Both Houses of Parliament possess the power to discipline recalcitrant members so that they can function undisturbed.
  •  This power is given to ensure the smooth functioning of the Houses and to punish those who create disorder. 
  •  Rule 374 of the Lok Sabha empowers the chair to name the member who “disregards the authority of the Chair or abuses the rules of the House by persistently and willfully obstructing the business thereof” — whereupon the government brings a motion instantly to seek the approval of the House to suspend that member.
    •  When the House adopts the motion, the member stands suspended.
  •  Rule 256 of the Rajya Sabha is identical
  • On suspension, the member is required to immediately leave the House or he will be forcefully removed
  • As the member is temporarily disqualified, he is not allowed to attend the meetings of the House or any meeting of the committees of which he may be a member, during his suspension.
  • Similarly, he won’t be allowed to give any notice of questions, motions or resolutions. In effect, he is compelled to remain a non-member during this period.

 

Concern over recent suspension of MP:

  • As, we discussed, suspension of a member can be done only in accordance with the rules (374 and 256). Further, residuary powers under Rule 266 of the Rajya Sabha can be invoked only when the House has to deal with matters that are not explicitly provided for in the rules.
  • Suspension is expressly provided for in rule 256, and therefore residuary powers of the Chairman cannot be invoked.
  • The suspensions for an indefinite period and therefore do not conform to the rules.
  • As The Supreme Court held in Ashish Shelar vs Maharashtra Legislative Assembly (2022) that any suspension beyond the period prescribed in the rules is unconstitutional
    • The court said, “If the resolution passed by the House was to provide for suspension beyond the period prescribed under the said rule, it would be substantially illegal, irrational and unconstitutional”.
  • Therefore, Willful and persistent obstruction of the business alone qualifies for the naming and suspension of a member. Moreover, suspension cannot be for an indefinite period

Right to punish a member is vested in the House only, and not in the Chair

  • As per the rule, the right to punish a member is vested in the House only, and not in the Chair. So, if the motion is not passed by the House, the member is not suspended.
  • Under the above rules, the maximum period of suspension is until the end of that session. The rules also provide for the termination of suspension at any time.

 

Suspension should be used as last resort by the house

  •  Suspension is resorted to as a last step. It should be done when there is blatant and shocking defiance of the Chair persistently by the member.
  • Similarly, willful and persistent obstruction of the business alone qualifies for the naming and suspension of a member.
    • This means that a very aggravated form of defiance and obstruction can, in itself, leave the Chair with no option other than suspension of the member
  • Secondly, suspension is a temporary punishment that can be revoked even the next day.
    • There are numerous instances in both Houses when suspension has been revoked within a day or two, even though the members were initially suspended for the remainder of the session
  • The basic principle is that the House needs the uninterrupted services of all its members and so suspension is to be a last resort.

Conclusion:

  • The legislative houses are in turmoil due to a variety of political reasons. The political class has the task of finding ways to end the turmoil and bring harmony to our legislatures.
  •  Exercising the disciplinary powers of the House cannot be the only effective way to run the supreme legislative body of the country. The true genius lies in finding and applying the right methods to carry out business of the house.