Ministers will not quit: Vajpayee
Babri rocks Parliament again
Tribune News Service

NEW DELHI, Dec 7 — The Prime Minister, Mr Atal Behari Vajpayee, today rejected the demand of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha seeking resignation of three Union Ministers, including Home Minister, Mr L.K. Advani, chargesheeted in the Babri Masjid demolition case.

“The question as to who should be in the Council of Ministers is one of Prime Ministerial discretion, and sense of political propriety. Many circumstances are relevant to the final decision of the Prime Minister on these issues”, Mr Vajpayee said while replying to a debate on the Ayodhya issue, which had paralysed proceedings in the House for the last two days.

The Prime Minister decided to reply to the Opposition demand after the Congress and other Opposition parties forced two adjournments earlier in the day seeking the resignations of Mr Advani, the Union Human Resource Minister, Dr Murli Manohar Joshi and Minister of State for Tourism, Ms Uma Bharti. It was decided by the Opposition at at a meeting of leaders of all political parties convened by the Speaker, that they would allow the Lok Sabha to function provided the Prime Minister replied to their demands. The Opposition had yesterday forced the Lok Sabha to adjourn without transacting any business on the ground that Mr Advani could not reply to the questions raised by them on the Ayodhya issue.

Keeping his appointment with the House at 5 p.m., as decided in the meeting of leaders, the Prime Minister first heard the views of different parties before announcing his decision. The entire Opposition held that since the three Ministers were chargesheeted in the Babri Masjid demolition case and the courts had held that there was a prima facie case against them, they should not remain as ministers. The Opposition targeted Mr Advani saying since he was the Home Minister and had control over the prosecutors, his continuation could derail the justice process.

Mr Vajpayee said in a prepared statement that “neither the Constitution nor the law disqualify a minister from holding office merely because a chargesheet is filed by the police or formal charges are framed by the court”.

The Prime Minister affirmed that ever since he assumed office in March 1998, neither he, nor his Government had ever interfered in the case, even though the investigating agency, the CBI, was directly under him. “As has already been indicated in another context, Government holds that interference in a pending prosecution is impermissible in law”, he added.

The Prime Minister said that in view of the fact that no change in the position of court cases has taken place ever since the Ministers concerned were inducted into office in March 1998, and no allegation of corruption or misuse of office is involved, the demand that the Ministers quit office or that they be barred from replying to certain questions is untenable.”

He said the cases would be allowed to proceed without any interference from the Government here, or at state level. “I urge this House to await the judicial verdict”, he added.

Earlier, the Prime Minister pointed out that the pending Ayodhya cases could be classified into two categories: one relating to the title dispute and another arising out of the happenings of December 6, 1992. In the second category, he said chargesheets have been filed by the CBI against over 50 persons. This case is pending before the Special Additional Sessions Judge (Ayodhya Prakaran) since October 5, 1993.

Initiating the debate, the Samajwadi Party leader, Mr Mulayam Singh Yadav said the demolition of the mosque at Ayodhya was a deliberate act and both the Congress and the BJP were responsible for it.

Mr Priya Ranjan Dasmunshi of the Congress cited the example of former senior Ministers Mr Madan Lal Khurana, Mr Buta Singh, and Mr Muthiah, who had been asked to resign by the earlier Vajpayee Government after charge sheets were filed against them and wondered why the Prime Minister was applying different rules to his present Cabinet.

Mr Somnath Chatterjee of the CPM said in the Ayodhya case, Mr Advani due to his position as Home Minister was both the accused and the prosecutor. He asked the Prime Minister whether it was possible for an individual to deal with his own cases. He pointed out that the BJP had not allowed the House to function for 12 days when the case against Mr Sukhram, who is now an ally of the NDA, came up in Parliament.

Former Home Minister, Mr Indrajit Gupta of the CPI said the question was whether people chargesheeted were entitled to continue as ministers.

Mr V.K. Malhotra of the BJP said the three accused Ministers held similar positions in the earlier Vajpayee Government and the people had re-elected them.

Mr Yerran Naidu of the Telugu Desam Party said his party was of the opinion that the Ayodhya case was an “old case” and one had to await the judgement of the courts before pressing for the resignations of the Ministers. He said there was a need to speed up the trial in the case.

Ms Uma Bharti said the Congress had made an issue of the Babri Masjid case at this juncture as the Bofors case was on the verge of its conclusion.

Earlier, for the second consecutive day, the proceedings in the House began on a stormy note with agitated Congress and other Opposition members demanding removal of three Union Ministers, including Mr L.K.Advani, Dr Murli Manohar Joshi and Ms Uma Bharti.