Centre, Opposition spar over probe agencies in Rajya Sabha, Dhankhar steps in

The Opposition on Monday attacked the Union government in Rajya Sabha over purported misuse of central investigative agencies to target political rivals, even as the latter claimed the allegation was “a very regular practice of shoot and scoot” and not backed by any substance, and chairperson Jagdeep Dhankhar stressed that unsubstantiated statements by any members amounted to “a very serious breach of privilege”.

The matter came up during Zero Hour when Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) member Sanjay Singh alleged the Enforcement Directorate (ED) had been misused extensively by the government in the last eight years to target leaders of opposition parties.

“ED has been used during the last eight years to carry out 3,000 raids against Opposition leaders, and the agency could convict only 23 people which is barely 0.5%. ED doesn’t act against Nirav Modi who is accused in ₹20,000 crore scam,” Singh said.

Taking note of the allegations, the chair said no member will be allowed to present unsubstantiated facts. “It constitutes a very serious breach of privilege. I am very particular about it, whether it is this side or that side (treasury benches or Opposition benches), anything being spoken in this house has to be indicated with precision, with sanctity and with ownership,” Dhankhar said.

The chairperson said a member could give his input in the House but it must be based on facts and figures. He added that the member would be called upon to place the relevant record on the table of the House.

“If the record is not there, I may seek guidance from members that it may be a breach of privilege. Any expression cannot be controlled here, and the only controlling factor is we have to believe in sanctity of the document. A newspaper report or an opinion given by someone is absolutely of no consequence. What I need is legally admissible documentation, it must be the premise of making an allegation,” he said.

Leader of Opposition Mallikarjun Kharge said whenever members speak, they usually base their arguments on replies by the government to starred and unstarred questions in the House, figures in the media and accounts of journalists. “Other than that, when the PM speaks outside about providing two crore jobs... or ₹15 lakh, if we talk about it, you will say what is the authenticity… This has come from the PM and we believe this is authentic, his figures are correct,” he said.

Dhankhar said he would hold a meeting with floor leaders, leaders of smaller parties, nominated MPs and others on Tuesday to figure out the way forward. “I am of the opinion so far that this platform is a very august platform, and anything reflected here, the person must own the statement,” he said.

Union minister and leader of the house Piyush Goyal said the Opposition’s attack “has become a very regular practice of shoot and scoot.”

“There are a number of websites and social media platforms on which people make all sorts of claims unsubstantiated by facts...they are not backed by responses to any unstarred or starred question or even RTI. People come out with fake claims. When someone makes a claim that raids were conducted against 3,000 political people, it is completely erroneous. He (Sanjay Singh) has made it without any substance,” he said.

No law gives immunity to elected representatives, Goyal asserted, adding that the government was rendering a public service by acting against politicians accused of irregularities.

Singh said the figures (3,000 raids) mentioned by him were the government’s response to a question by Shiv Sena MP Priyanka Chaturvedi.

He claimed ED and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) don’t act against people like Nirav Modi, Lalit Modi and others but against AAP leaders such as Manish Sisodia, referring to the Delhi excise policy scam in which Sisodia’s personal assistant has been questioned by ED.

Dhankhar asked Singh to “make his point carefully”.

“Let me caution you… the member has made some reflections. You all are aware that in public domain, it will be difficult to sustain them, to make a sweeping statement on this platform that no action is being taken where multiple adjudicatory mechanisms have taken place. We can’t allow this platform to be used for you to say no action has been taken...Make your point carefully. I will examine what the MP has said and he will be called to substantiate it on the floor of the house,” he said.