& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

CONNECTING THE DOTS

Do they have no shame?
***Decency, decorum and dignity of the Jatiya Sangsad must be safeguarded. Breach of these values needs to be seen as an aberration and corrective measures must be taken to Jind remedies for them. Parliament as the highest forum of democracy can provide wonderful opportunities for debates and discussions with lively display of wit and humour.**
What ened in the Jatiya Sangsad last week defies any logic. BNP's joining of the Sangsad proceedings was
followed by speeches by several female legislators which were laden with partisan jabs, name calling, and cheap shots. Sadly, substance did not apply to any of these speeches.
This is not a new phenomena. During the last few years tumultuous debates and pandemonium in the Sangsad occurred with disturbing regularity. The erosion in the decorum in parliamentary proceedings has caused frequent spells of paralysis in the functioning of the Sangsad, to which both the ruling and opposition parties have contributed in varying measures.
So why do some of our legislators behave in this manner? It is unfortunate but true that some of them have a hard time distinguishing between the Paltan Maidan and the Sangsad. I can identify a number of factors behind this trend of disorderly conduct. These are: (a) non-availability of adequate time for members to raise matters pertaining to their grievances on the floor of the Sangsad; (b) misgivings created at times by seemingly unresponsive attitude by those in power; (c) disinclination on the part of the leadership of various legislative parties to adhere to parliamentary norms; (d) absence of prompt and proper action against an erring member under the Rules of Procedure; and (e) lack of sufficient training and orientation,
especially for new members, in parliamentary procedure and etiquette.
Acknowledgement of the above factors as the root cause of indiscipline and disorder would be a significant step for addressing the main issue of maintaining dignity of our Jatiya Sangsad.
The experience over the last few years has been that the erosion of decorum and etiquette cannot be prevented or reversed through rules and regulations alone. Some analysts
have suggested that measures such as denying salary to legislators disrupting parliamentary proceedings, or a rule for automatic temporary suspension of members after the Speaker names them for abusing parliamentary rules, should be enacted.
However, these deterrents may not be enough. The only way of dealing with this erosion of decorum is through the practice of a robust system of parliamentary ethics, the initiative for which has to come from both the Treasury and Opposition party members.Unfortunately there has been a leadership vacuum in the Parliament. Neither of the two major parties has been able to give an ethi-
cal lead inside the Sangsad. The lack of self-confidence of the leadership in the two parties has added to their feelings of political insecurity. This has led to an undesirable abrasive style of politics poisoning the conduct and proceedings inside the Sangsad.
Success, effectiveness and prestige of any institution rests on its orderly functioning and the extent to which it adheres to standards of discipline, dignity and decorum for discharging
its activities. This is particularly true for the parliamentary institutions which embody the will of the people and constitute the fora of democracy to carry out, among other activities, the principal task of legislation and scrutiny of the executive. Erosion of discipline and decorum will lead to the erosion of parliamentary institutions.
Decency, decorum and dignity of the Jatiya Sangsad must be safeguarded. Breach of these values needs to be seen as an aberration and corrective measures must be taken to find remedies for them. Parliament as the highest forum of democracy can provide wonderful opportunities for debates and dis-
cussions with lively display of wit and humour. There should be no place for unnecessary mud-slinging in such an environment.
The Jatiya Sangsad is the heart of our democracy. Whether that democracy is healthy depends in part on whether the public has respect for the parliamentary proceedings as relevant to their lives and has confidence that its scrutiny of both the executive and its legislation is effective.
To restore people's confidence in the Sangsad, attempts have to be made to prevent deliberate plans of certain legislators to stall the proceedings of the Sangsad by shouting and raising slogans and hurling abusive language. Reasonable people can disagree on policy related issues. But those could be debated in a civilised manner.
The members of the Sangsad owe it to their constituents to rise above petty partisan politics. There is so much at stake. Be it our fragile economic recovery, the accelerating pace of climate change, the plight of the millions of our fellow citizens living below the poverty line, or any of a multitude of issues facing us each and every day. We desperately need leadership in the Jatiya Sangsad to deal with the affairs of the state.
We can only hope that our legislators shall at all times conduct themselves in a manner which will maintain and strengthen the public's trust and confidence in the integrity of the Sangsad and never undertake any action which would bring the Sangsad into disrepute. Is that too much to ask?
The writer is Professor and Chair, Department of Economics, Marquette University, Milwaukee, USA.