BJP : In a recent exchange of remarks, Union Minister Hardeep Singh Puri and Congress MP Manish Tewari clashed over the upcoming inauguration of the new Parliament building. The Congress leaders had raised concerns regarding Prime Minister Narendra Modi inaugurating the building instead of the President, sparking a heated debate on constitutional protocols.
Puri accused the Congress
Puri accused the Congress of needlessly creating controversies where none existed, emphasizing the distinction between the President as the Head of State and the Prime Minister as the Head of Government and the leader of the Parliament on behalf of the Government. He pointed out that while the President is not a member of either House, the Prime Minister holds a significant role in shaping policies that are ultimately enacted into laws by bjp.
However, Tewari responded by invoking Article 79 of the Constitution, which states that the Parliament of India consists of the President and two Houses, namely the Council of States (Rajya Sabha) and the House of the People (Lok Sabha). He suggested that Puri should familiarize himself with the Constitution, implying that his understanding was flawed bjp.
The controversy surrounding the inauguration of the new Parliament building revolves around the decision for Prime Minister Modi to perform the ceremony on May 28, coinciding with the birth anniversary of VD Savarkar. Congress leaders, along with other opposition figures, questioned why the President was not entrusted with this responsibility.
Rahul Gandhi, a prominent Congress leader, argued that the President, not the Prime Minister, should be the one to inaugurate the new building. This sentiment was echoed by Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge, who criticized the BJP-RSS government for diminishing the significance of the Office of the President. Kharge contended that the President represents the government, the opposition, and all citizens alike bjp.
Congress leader Shashi Tharoor expressed his perplexity over the Prime Minister conducting the ground-breaking ceremony for the new Parliament building, as Articles 60 and 111 of the Constitution clearly designate the President as the head of parliament. Tharoor found it incomprehensible and potentially unconstitutional for the Prime Minister, rather than the President, to inaugurate the building of bjp.
Responding to Tharoor’s remarks, Minister Hardeep Singh Puri emphasized that the President does not hold membership in either the Lok Sabha or the Rajya Sabha, thus suggesting that the Prime Minister’s role was appropriate.
Anand Sharma, another Congress leader, cited Article 79 to support the view that Parliament consists of the President, the head of the Parliament, and the two houses. Sharma explained that the Rajya Sabha, as the permanent house, represents the Council of States, reflecting India’s status as a union of states. He also highlighted the significance of the Chairman of Rajya Sabha, who holds the second-highest position in the warrant of precedence as the Vice President of India.
Shiv Sena MP Priyanka Chaturvedi criticized the BJP, accusing them of constitutional impropriety due to their power-driven approach. Chaturvedi argued that the President, as the Head of the Legislature, should be responsible for inaugurating the new Parliament building, as dictated by protocol.
As the debate intensifies, the disagreement between the ruling BJP and the opposition Congress exposes differing interpretations of the Constitution and the appropriate roles of the President and the Prime Minister. While the BJP defends its decision for the Prime Minister to inaugurate the building, citing the President’s non-membership status, the Congress argues for upholding the protocol that designates the President as the key figure in the parliamentary proceedings.
A clash of perspectives unfolded between Union Minister Hardeep Singh Puri and Congress MP Manish Tewari regarding the upcoming inauguration of the new Parliament building. The Congress leaders had expressed reservations about Prime Minister Narendra Modi being tasked with the inauguration instead of the President, triggering a spirited debate on constitutional nuances.
Puri vehemently accused the Congress of conjuring up controversies out of thin air, insinuating that they were unnecessarily creating a commotion. He underscored the distinction between the President, who serves as the Head of State, and the Prime Minister, who assumes the mantle of Head of Government and leads the Parliament on behalf of the Government. Puri pointed out that the President does not hold membership in either House, while the Prime Minister plays a pivotal role in shaping policies that are eventually enacted into laws.
BJP Defense: Justifying the Prime Minister’s Role in Inaugurating the New Parliament Building
Tewari, however, retorted by invoking Article 79 of the Constitution, which explicitly states that the Parliament of India comprises the President and two Houses: the Council of States (Rajya Sabha) and the House of the People (Lok Sabha). By alluding to this constitutional provision, Tewari implied that Puri should acquaint himself with the nuances of the Constitution, implying that his understanding was flawed .
At the heart of the controversy surrounding the inauguration of the new Parliament building is the decision for Prime Minister Modi to preside over the ceremony on May 28, coinciding with the birth anniversary of VD Savarkar. Congress leaders, along with several opposition figures, voiced their perplexity over why the President was not entrusted with this responsibility, giving rise to a heated discussion on the matter.
Rahul Gandhi, a prominent Congress leader, contended that the President, not the Prime Minister, should have been the one to inaugurate the new building. Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge voiced a similar sentiment, questioning the exclusion of President Droupadi Murmu from the inauguration. Kharge further asserted that the Office of the President of India was being relegated to a mere tokenistic role under the BJP-RSS government.
Shashi Tharoor, another Congress leader, expressed his bewilderment at the Prime Minister conducting the ground-breaking ceremony for the new Parliament building. Tharoor cited Articles 60 and 111 of the Constitution, which unequivocally designate the President as the head of parliament. He found it bizarre that the Prime Minister took on the task of the ceremony and the subsequent inauguration, suggesting that it might even be construed as unconstitutional.
In response, Minister Hardeep Singh Puri reiterated that the President does not hold membership in either the Lok Sabha or the Rajya Sabha. By highlighting this fact, Puri sought to justify the decision for the Prime Minister to assume the responsibility of inaugurating the new building.
Constitutional Nuances: Understanding the Roles of the President and the Prime Minister
Anand Sharma, another prominent Congress leader, referenced Article 79 to substantiate the argument that the Parliament comprises the President, who heads the institution, and the two houses. Sharma expounded on the significance of the Rajya Sabha as the permanent house, representing the Council of States and reflecting India’s status as a union of states. He further emphasized the importance of the Chairman of Rajya Sabha, who holds the second-highest position in the warrant of precedence as the Vice President of India.
Priyanka Chaturvedi, a Shiv Sena MP, lambasted the BJP for what she deemed as constitutional impropriety driven by an unchecked thirst for power. Chaturvedi criticized the BJP, asserting that the President, as the Head of the Legislature, should be responsible for inaugurating the new Parliament building in adherence to established protocol by bjp.