Of ''Privileged Legislators''. Review on Writing Reviews on MouthShut

Should Immunity mean Impunity?

The following is the Report which  appeared in an Orissa Newspaper on the 6th December 2002.

''In course of discussions on various issues during the Zero Hour at the Assembly today, Mr. Kalpataru Das, MLA drew the attention of the House by standing on his chair and stated that the World AIDS Day was observed on the 1st December at Bhubaneswar.  The Chief Minister himself and the Health Minister were present. On this occasion, a 6   Banner was installed, for which an expenditure of more than Rs. 20 lakhs  was incurred  through various NGOs.  A Rally was also organised, in which children starting from tiny tots to school boys and girls took part.  A number of commercial sex-workers also participated and were shouting anti-Government slogans.  These commercial sex workers also took with them two bitches with placards hanging on the necks, one carrying the name ''Meena''  on one and ''Ranjana''  on the other.  They shouted slogans saying ''who brought AIDS to Orissa?  Meena and Ranjana - who else?'' . ''Meena Ranjana Haai  Haai.''

While Mr. Das asked what is this incident, and who are these people,  Mr. Prabhat Tripathy MLA joined in, and requested the Speaker for serious attention of the Government  and remedial measures on the issue. He demanded a Government enquiry on the corruption to the tune of  lakhs of rupees by Meena and Ranjana in the name of AIDS Cell through different NGOs.  Senior legislator Ashok Das spoke on the issue and asked  who are these Meena-Ranjana?  Are they bitches or AIDS Virus? , and this brought about laughter for sometime in the House. The House quietened down after the Speaker directed the concerned Minister to furnish a detailed  report on the matter within two three days.''

If you think it is a local rag which carried the Report, you are mistaken.  The concerned paper is the Oriya daily ''Samaj'',  started by the Servants of India Society.  A paper which was venerated as an Institution for decades.

It is no secret to the people of Orissa that the reference to the ''bitches'' relate to two lady IAS officers of the State, in charge of the Health Department.

Shocked at the vulgarity of the whole matter, I tried to find out whether what is reported is factual.  And asked some people who were present in the House as to what actually transpired.

I am told that vulgarity and ribald jokes have become quite common. In one of the earlier sessions, a Member is said to have made a remark ''How does an unmarried lady officer propagate use of condoms for AIDS Control?'', or something to that effect.  The comment apparently was again directed atthe one of the lady officers who was a victim in the present episode.

The tragedy is that there is no report of a single sane voice to check the distasteful talk. Not the Speaker, not the Leader of the House, not the Leader of the Opposition  any other Member appears to have thought it fit to control or condemn such reprehensible talk.  Have our democracy and its Institutions come such a miserable state?

Can any private person dare indulge in the type of scurrilious talk in  a public forum other than the legislature and Parliament?  And get away with it?  Except under the garb of reporting the proceedings of the legislature, can any newspaper get away with the type of gutter reporting? Without facing the consequences?

The hapless victims cannot proceed against the ''Peoples' Representatives'' who are protected by the so-called Privilege.  They cannot proceed against the newspapers, which are  ''only reporting the proceedings of the House.''

You might say that the Speaker may ultimately expunge the remarks. If the venerable gentleman, having allowed a member to get away with it without immediate reprimand, deigns to expunge the remark, can he undo the damage?  What about the news reports?  They remain for the posterity as  glorious relics of our freedom  of press and freedom of speech.  At this rate, one need not be surprised if the expunged remarks acquire the notoriety and titillation value of censored  clips of vulgar movies.

The story does not end here.  Not unexpectedly the IAS Officers Association decides to register their protest.  They meet the  Speaker with their grievances.  What happens after that?

A notice for Privilege Motion is slapped.  Not against the Association or its representatives who met the Speaker.  The Motion is against the two lady officers who were victims of the distasteful exchange in the Assembly.  And here is a shocker.  The Notice is filed not by a stray MLA.  Not two of them.  But  45 of the ''Honourable''  Members jump into the fray to file the Notice if the report of the Times of India (18th December) is to be believed.

What are the charges against them?

According to the same news report, the charges are that the ladies were  ''leading a campaign'' to ''demean the dignity and Authority of the Assembly.''  The same report  states that the two officers were accused of  ''mobilising and arranging the meeting of IAS  officers with a view to ''obstructing the freedom of Speech.of the MLAs” and  ''discussing the proceedings of the House and the conduct of the members while discharging their duties inside the House.''

What is more ludicrous and pathetic is that the same news report quotes Mr. Kalpataru Das (the same gentleman who had to stand up on his seat to draw the attention of the House as per the Samaj report).  As per the report he  wants to know whether the officials were competent to discuss the proceedings of the House outside and pass comments.  He goes on to ask as per the report - ''Have they decided to teach the chair about the etiquette of the members?''

My reply to the ''Honourable'' gentleman would be:   It does not require IAS officers to teach you about etiquette.  If what is reported about your conduct is true, even a school boy can do it, and will be ashamed  of having to do it. If I were a teacher, I would have asked you to stand up on your seat, not to draw the attention of the House and talk.  May be your teachers didn’t do enough of it during your school days.

I hold no brief for the two lady officers concerned.  But one cannot fail to notice that, excepting general and vague talk about swindling lakhs of rupees, there is no report of any specific charges of corruption.  No specific transaction seems to have been questioned.  A general enquiry would reveal that the two ladies enjoy a reputation for integrity and efficiency.   Is that the reason for the vitriolic attacks?  One is reminded of members of the Privy Council, who enjoyed the title ''Right Honourable.''  Bernard Shaw (or is it someone else?) is supposed to have quipped:  ''They are rarely right and never honourable.''

On the contrary, if the general perception about their integrity is wrong, and they are proved to be corrupt as alleged, let them get the most severe punishment.

But should the so-called leaders be allowed to sink to such depths of degradation? Does ''Privilege'' permit dehumanisation ?  Does ''Privilege'' countenance or condone stripping a fellow humanbeing of personal dignity?  If so, it is high time they are stripped of the privilege.  Immunity without responsibility should not lead to impunity.