New Delhi [India], April 9 : Congress leader Abhishek Manu Singhvi argued that the impeachment process has been reduced to the discretion of a single individual, thereby eliminating the intended scrutiny by the Parliament.
"The impeachment process is reduced to the decision of one person. It eliminates any further scrutiny by the temple of democracy, by an adjudicatory body appointed by the Supreme Court and consultation of the Supreme Court," Singhvi said in a press conference here.
He questioned the powers of the presiding officer (Speaker or Chairperson) in this matter.
"Did the constitution makers, ever did Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar, whose anniversary is coming next week, ever imagine that you would put certain things in the hands of a single person to an extent where his accountability would be reduced to zero?" Singhvi asked.
Highlighting the six stages of impeachment outlined by the Supreme Court, the senior Congress leader said that the apex court's order "ends everything at the first stage" by "telescoping" the six stages of impeachment.
"The court there itemised that impeachment has roughly six stages. The problem with this order is that it ends everything at the first stage. It triangulates all the six stages; it telescopes all the six stages as if that power, that architecture, that sequence at the threshold can be so narrowly looked at only by the presiding officer. If this approach is followed, you tell me, how will you ever go to impeachment in a committee? How will you ever go to the collective process of parliamentary wisdom?"
Singhvi went on to enumerate the six stages: the admission stage, formation of a committee, formulation of charges by an adjudicatory committee of top judiciary judges, report submission, parliamentary discussion, and finally, Presidential action for removal.
"Now, what has happened here is very extraordinary... It then proceeds, completely wrongly, to hold a full mini-trial. It takes each charge; it gives the opinion of the presiding officer on that charge. You don't have to be lawyers; common sense tells you that in every charge, if he is the presiding officer and he gives a view, then there can never be impeachment," he added.
"Ironically, in para 8, that order of the presiding officer quotes a Supreme Court judgment. So, an adjudicatory process plus a political process. The whole thing is telescoped into one person's unilateral view. The Supreme Court said this, which is quoted in the order rejecting our motion: 'Parliament sparingly resorts to the mechanism of impeachment designed under the Constitution by political process.' You short-circuit it," Singhvi noted.
The controversy over the interpretation and application of the impeachment process comes amid a fresh development in Parliament, where both the Rajya Sabha Chairman and Lok Sabha Speaker rejected opposition notices seeking a motion to remove Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar, underscoring heightened political tensions around constitutional accountability mechanisms.
Earlier on Monday, Rajya Sabha Chairman CP Radhakrishnan and Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla rejected the impeachment motion notice submitted by opposition members seeking the removal of Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar.
The notice of motion for impeachment of Gyanesh Kumar was signed by 130 Lok Sabha members and 63 members of the Rajya Sabha.
The notice of motion in Lok Sabha - filed on March 12, under Article 324(5) of the Constitution of India, read with Article 124(4), Section 11(2) of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, and the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 - sought the removal of Gyanesh Kumar. It was submitted to the Lok Sabha Speaker.
A similar notice was submitted to the Rajya Sabha Chairman and Vice President Radhakrishnan on March 12.
A Lok Sabha bulletin said that the Speaker has refused to admit the motion after due consideration.
"After due consideration of the notice of Motion and a careful and objective assessment of all relevant aspects and issues involved therein, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, in exercise of the powers vested in him under Section 3 of the Judges (Injury) Act, 1968, has refused to admit the said notice of motion," it said.
A Rajya Sabha bulletin also informed members of the rejection of the notice.
"After due consideration of the notice of Motion and a careful and objective assessment of all relevant aspects and issues involved, the Chairman, Rajya Sabha, in exercise of the powers vested in him under section 3 of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, has refused to admit the said notice of Motion," it said.
As this happened, Senior Congress leader Jairam Ramesh took a dig at the BJP-led government over the rejection of the opposition motion in the two Houses of Parliament.
"We know what happened to the last Chairman of the Rajya Sabha who accepted a petition moved by Opposition MPs," he said in a post on X, attaching the Lok Sabha bulletin.
Ramesh was referring to former Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar, who had resigned from his post in July last year. ( ANI)
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor