Date: 10 Apr 2012
Real worrying situation to know as to who are the people who are taking care of MERA BHARAT MAHAN......... \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Date: Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 11:12 AM Subject: Kejriwal's reply to RAJYA SABHA \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Merits a standing ovation \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Kejriwal's reply to RAJYA SABHA > To\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ > Shri Mukul Pande > Director > Rajya Sabha Secretariat >\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ > I have received the notices sent by you from Sri Rajniti Prasad and Prof > Ramkripal Yadav in which I am accused of insulting the Parliament. >\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ > I unequivocally deny that I have insulted the parliament in either speech > or deed. I respect parliament immensely. I revere the parliament immensely. > I consider parliament as a temple of democracy. For these reasons, I am > immensely worried and pained that this temple of democracy is insulted very > often by the speech and deeds of a few people who sit inside the > parliament. Various facts and instances show that parliament is insulted by > a few people sitting inside the parliament rather than by people outside. I > respect the parliament, many good parliamentarians, but find myself unable > to respect a few parliamentarians. >\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ > Recently, a movie called "˜Pan Singh Tomar" was released. A dialogue from > this film says rebels live in outback and dacoits live in parliament. I > watched this film three times. The audience clapped whenever the hero > uttered this dialogue. I was immensely pained each time I listened to the > ovation. Why is that when the hero referred to dacoits in parliament, > people felt that he was reflecting the sentiments of the people of this > nation. Its worth contemplating as to what went wrong that the people of > this nation have such an anger and disdain towards people sitting in > parliament? Who is responsible for this impression about the parliament? > The people of this nation or the people sitting in parliament? The respect > of parliamentarians is not diminished by what is said about them. Their > respect is commanded by their conduct and behavior. >\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ > The present Lok Sabha has 162 parliamentarians on whom 522 criminal issues > are lodged. Out of these, 76 are heinous crimes. Murder cases on 14, > attempt to murder cases on 20, fraud charges on 11, kidnapping charges on > 13. In addition to these, there are many parliamentarians on whom > corruption charges are lodged. Ex; Shriyuts Suresh Kalmadi, A Raja, Smt > Kanimozhi, Lalu Prasad Yadav, Mulayam Singh Yadav etc., If Jan LokPal would > have been in existence, then a few more would have been charge sheeted. In > this context please enlighten me weather the presence of such people > enhances the dignity of parliament or reduces it? A few of the above are > such that one would rather avoid inviting them to their homes for marriages > and festivals. Is not the parliament insulted by the presence of such > parliamentarians? >\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ > Why were such people given tickets? All parties pro-actively give tickets > to people with criminal backgrounds and each successive election has seen > an increase in them getting elected. In 2004 elections, 128 people in Lok > Sabha were with criminal backgrounds. In 2009 elections their number went > up to 162. By this progression, the day is not far when the majority of the > parliament will consist of people with criminal background. Hence, we > should not be surprised when the audience gives an ovation to the hero who > says dacoits are in parliament. >\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ > All parties are responsible for bringing the parliament to this. In 2009, > Congress gave tickets to 117 people with criminal background, out of which > 44 got elected. BJP gave tickets to 116 people with criminal background, > out of which 44 got elected. Other parties too have proactively given > tickets to the tainted. The court has charge sheeted a good many of them > with heinous crimes. What was the compulsion of these parties? Did not the > parties insult the parliament by giving them tickets? Should not the > parties be punished for insulting the parliament? >\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ > It is being said that presently, they are merely accused. Charges have not > been proved in court. The case is pending. My answer to this is that these > cases will never end. A single judgment takes more than thirty years in > this country to be pronounced. Why is our country's justice delivery > mechanism so lethargic and procrastinating? The parliamentarians were > supposed to correct this anomaly. Why didn't they correct it in the last 65 > years? Was it not done on purpose? Was it because if it was corrected, > swift justice delivery would have been possible and most of such people > would be incarcerated in jails? Is not the doubt strengthened then that, > till such time these people sit in parliament, our justice delivery > mechanism will not be reformed? Is not the apprehension valid that till > such time people like these are in parliament, crime will not come down in > our country? Please tell me how can I respect parliamentarians like these? >\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ > Its correct that these people are merely charged at present. The charges > are not yet proven. Cases are pending. It is possible that twenty years > later, the courts may pronounce them innocent. Alternatively, it is also > possible that twenty years later, many of these may be held guilty by the > court. In such a scenario, isn't this a cause for immense worry that this > nation's laws were framed by murderers, kidnappers and fraudsters? You say > that I have insulted the parliament. I respect the parliament immensely but > can you explain to me the rationale of respecting such parliamentarians. >\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ > There was a parliament in which Shri Lalbahadur Shastri resigned in the > wake of a single train accident. One feels the urge to submit everything at > the altar of such a parliament. But how can I respect a parliament with the > present composition? >\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ > On 29th December 2011, during the Lokpal Bill discussion, RJD > parliamentarian Shri Rajniti Prasad snatched the Bill from the hands of the > Hon'ble minister, tore it and threw it. Was not the parliament insulted by > this act? If we see parliament as a temple of democracy, isn't the > presiding deity insulted by tearing the Gita in such a temple? It was too > much that not a single parliamentarian stood up to protest this tearing of > the Bill. The chairperson too was mute. Why this speechlessness by those > who swear by the parliament? This was not the first such instance. Many > bills have been torn in this temple of democracy. But not one person has > been punished ever. Don't you think that Shri Rajniti Prasad should be > punished severely for tearing away the Bill inside parliament? Such an > exemplary punishment that no parliamentarian dare ever to tear away any > bill inside the parliament in the future. >\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ > Rajya Sabha has many industrialist parliamentarians who have no connection > whatsoever to people or public service. A good many industrialists enter > the Rajya Sabha in the wake of their money-power and tickets given by > various parties. People like these misuse the parliament to further their > industry. Shri Vijay Mallya is the owner of Kingfisher. It is not known > that he has done any public service. He is the member of the parliamentary > standing committee on civil aviation. He decides the civil aviation policy > of this nation. So, it is but natural that he will frame such policies that > benefit Kingfisher enormously. Isn't this a direct misuse of parliament? > Rajya Sabha has a cluster of such parliamentarians who misuse the > parliament directly to further the cause of their respective industries. > Isn't this misuse of parliament an insult to the parliament?\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ > > Cash for Questions in parliament came to light. This was a grave insult to > parliament. But such parliamentarians were merely sacked. Giving or taking > bribe is a criminal offence. Such people ought to have been jailed when > proven guilty. The fact that they were sacked demonstrates that they were > guilty. Why weren't they jailed? Why were they let off by mere sacking? For > such a grave insult to the parliament, if they were to be exemplarily > punished, future parliamentarians would not have dared to try insulting > parliament again. Since they were let off lightly, the 2008 open > horse-trading of parliamentarians was repeated. People saw buying and > selling of parliamentarians in the holy temple of democracy. The collective > conscience of the nation cried. Democracy wept. Parliament shed tears. But > the government survived. Not a single parliamentarian has been punished > till date. Was this not akin to treason? Isn't trading of parliamentarians > considered as treason? How can I respect such parliamentarians?\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ > > Microphones have been uprooted and thrown innumerable times in the > parliament. Chairs are hurled at each other. How can I respect such > parliamentarians? On one hand 8 Bills are passed without discussion in 17 > minutes and on the other hand, there is daily disruption by > parliamentarians which results in parliamentary business being stalled. >\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ > The nation is struggling against corruption and price rise. Common man is > finding survival difficult. Farmers are committing suicides. Whistleblowers > against corruption are being murdered. People are writhing. On these issues > the parliament is either quiet or semantics are delivered. These problems > which have beset our nation for years have not been addressed. As a > thumb-rule, there is no unanimity in the parliament on these issues. The > issues linger on in standing committees, people writhe in agony. >\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ > Oddly, on any issue regarding parliamentarians all parties unite. When a > parliamentarian among them Shri Sharad Pawar is slapped, (slapping was > wrong, should not have been slapped) all parliamentarians writhed. All > parties got united. All leaders denounced this for two hours. Whenever > there is an issue of increase of allowance to parliamentarians, their > comforts, perks, we see instant unanimity among parties. All parties unite > against the use of an idiom (Chor kii daadhii me tinkaa). This tiny idiom > hurt the parties so much that parliament discussed this issue for hours. > All these instances force us to contemplate, aren't a few parliamentarians > more concerned about their self-interests rather than the people?\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ > > Along with parliament, legislative assemblies too are temples of democracy. > In such a temple if some legislature and the child & women development > minister of that state watch porn publicly, please tell me how can I > respect such legislatures?\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ > > Its not that this parliament doesn't have good parliamentarians. Many good > parliamentarians exist. And I respect them immensely. But the voice of such > good parliamentarians is drowned in the cacophony of the parliament. >\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ > I have raised a few fundamental questions on the notice received to my > statement. The same constitution that gives powers to parliamentarians to > enact laws gives the people the power to ask questions to the > parliamentarians. Questions are raised weather the parliament that is > comprised of so many criminally tainted parliamentarians can ever enact an > efficient law to end crime? If the parliament which is comprised of so many > people with corruption charges can ever enact a good anti-corruption law. A > law which, if enacted will create problems for some parliamentarians? > During the Jan Lokpal movement, the people of this country came down to the > streets demanding an effective law. People have started asking questions > when the government and the parliament seemed reluctant to enact such a > law. People have a question whether Jan Lokpal Bill will be enacted? >\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ > All these make it clear that the parliament is insulted not by me but > continuously by a few people sitting inside. By those on whom the people > put their faith and future. I just stated the facts. I have not stated > anything wrong. I just raised the queries of the people. If in the eyes of > your law, I am guilty, I am ready to be punished under such a law. If you > find me guilty under your law, my request would be to give me an > opportunity to present myself in person to air my views.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ > > With regards\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ > > Arvind Kejriwal =========================================== 000000000