Heated Exchange in Parliament Over Rahul Gandhi’s Remarks During Motion of Thanks
Fresh political tension surfaced in Parliament after the Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju raised objections to statements made by opposition leader Rahul Gandhi in the Lok Sabha during the Motion of Thanks debate. Rijiju alleged that Gandhi had ignored established parliamentary procedures and called for an apology over what he described as inappropriate remarks.
According to the minister, comments directed toward the Indian Armed Forces were unnecessary and outside the accepted framework of discussion in the House. He stressed that parliamentary debates must adhere strictly to rules and long-standing conventions.
Speaker’s Ruling at the Centre of Dispute
Rijiju pointed out that the Speaker had already clarified that material from newspapers or magazines cannot be quoted directly in parliamentary proceedings. Despite this instruction, he claimed that Gandhi continued to push the issue, which the minister termed regrettable.
The minister further alleged that Gandhi repeatedly attempted to reference external publications even after the ruling, arguing that such actions undermined decorum and discipline within the chamber.
Claims of Rule Violations
Expanding on his criticism, Rijiju said that from the very start of the discussion Gandhi had departed from procedural norms by citing passages from a book whose publication details and authenticity were not clearly established.
He argued that parliamentary debates should be grounded in officially verified records and follow constitutional guidelines, adding that persistence in raising disputed material was contrary to the spirit of legislative functioning.
Political Reactions Expected
The confrontation has added to an already charged atmosphere in Parliament, with members from different sides expected to weigh in on the matter. Observers say the episode highlights ongoing friction between the government and the opposition over the conduct of debates inside the House.
As proceedings continue, all eyes remain on how the issue will be resolved and whether further clarifications or disciplinary steps will follow.
