Explainer: Why are remarks expunged in Parliament?
Rule 303 of the Lok Sabha authorises the Speaker to remove words, phrases or expressions in dissent notes given by an MP
New Delhi: On July 1, Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla expunged portions of Congress leader and the leader of the opposition in Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi’s speech targeting the central government over various issues. Earlier, Birla had emphasised that the chair has to protect the prestige of the legislature and is the final authority to expunge or retain remarks by lawmakers.
Here is an explainer on how this works.
Does Parliament have a rule to expunge remarks?
Rule 380 of the Lok Sabha and Rule 261 of the Rajya Sabha says If the Lok Sabha Speaker (or the Rajya Sabha Chairman) is of opinion that words have been used in debate which are defamatory or indecent or unparliamentary or undignified, the Speaker may, while exercising discretion order that such words be expunged from the proceedings of the House.
How expunged remarks can affect a lawmaker’s speech?
Once a part of a speech is expunged, it will no longer be a part of the official record. Rahul Gandhi’s controversial comments on Hindus in the first session of Parliament have been expunged and therefore, no one can refer to or claim that he made those remarks in Parliament. It is also a loss for MP as the point he made in the House would not remain the record of Parliament for generations to come.
Can written comments or speeches made in the House committee meeting be expunged too?
Yes. Rule 303 of the Lok Sabha authorises the Speaker to remove words, phrases or expressions in dissent notes given by an MP to a Committee’s report if the former finds it “unparliamentary or otherwise inappropriate.”
In this digital age, with live transmission of Parliament sessions, can expungement serve its purpose?
It is true that during a live transmission, unparliamentary remarks can go unchecked as the decision to expunge such expressions are often taken at a later stage. Sometimes, the Chair immediately gives oral instruction to remove a word or a phrase from the records. But all such expunged remarks continue to remain available in the net. Sometimes, the members themselves post their uncorrected, live speech on social media. And, after consumption of such remarks by millions in the social media, the purpose of expunging remarks is definitely hampered.
What is the remedy?
Clearly, a pre-Doordarshan era system can’t work in this digital world. To be sure, some presiding officers are aware of the problem. When the flow of live transmission or digital footprints can’t be regulated, legislative bodies might think of creating new ways to discourage MPs from using such expressions.
