03-23-2006, 12:47 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>In nailing Jaya, Cong got caught </b>
Pioneer.com
Navin Upadhyay / New DelhiÂ
Office-of-profit issue rocks House---- The wheel of a well-planned political conspiracy turned full circle on Wednesday. First, the Congress used a party worker to file a complaint with the Election Commission seeking disqualification of eminent actor and Samajwadi Party MP Jaya Bachchan for holding an office of profit. Then it plotted to amend the very same Act to save the skin of its own supreme leader Sonia Gandhi.
After Ms Bachchan was disqualified, Congress leaders lost no time in ridiculing demands for similar action against Ms Gandhi for heading the National Advisory Council (NAC) as its chairperson.
But on Wednesday reality dawned. Congress bigwigs sensed that the threat was more real than it looked at first and<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'> their supreme leader could indeed face the axe on a petition filed by the Telugu Desam Party (TDP) before President APJ Abdul Kalam for disqualification of Ms Gandhi and others.</span>
<b>Similarly, the way the Left parties connived with the Congress in facilitating the adjournment of Parliament sine die, was indication of their own worries, because at one point of time Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee had held the office of chairman of West Bengal Industrial Development Corporation.</b>
<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>Trinamool Congress leader Mamata Banerjee had raised the issue of the Speaker and other CPI (M) MPs and MLAs holding offices of profit and written to President Kalam seeking their disqualification.</span>
The script of the sordid drama that took place in Parliament on Wednesday was written well in advance when the Government fist decided to pass the Budget before Parliament went into recess. <b>While the Opposition thought that the Government wanted to curtail the full Budget session in view of the Assembly elections in five states, Congress legal eagles were drafting an ordinance that would exempt NAC and other offices headed by Congress and Left leaders from the ambit of "office-of-profit."</b>
<b>The Congress and Left camp had reasons to be worried on several counts. </b>
First, the NAC and other posts held by both sides was not covered under the Prevention of Disqualification Act, 1995. Secondly, the President was sooner or later bound to refer the matter to the Election Commission as he had done in the case of SP leader Amar Singh. Thirdly, Mr Kalam had set a precedent by disqualifying Jaya Bachchan by ignoring her plea that as chairperson of the Uttar Pradesh Film Development Board, she had not earned any pecuniary benefit.
<b>
In fact, the example set by the President in the case of Jaya Bachchan clearly implied that irrespective of the fact that a MP accepts monetary benefit or not, he could still be disqualified for holding an "office-of-profit". This had alarmed the Congress and Left leaders. </b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Pioneer.com
Navin Upadhyay / New DelhiÂ
Office-of-profit issue rocks House---- The wheel of a well-planned political conspiracy turned full circle on Wednesday. First, the Congress used a party worker to file a complaint with the Election Commission seeking disqualification of eminent actor and Samajwadi Party MP Jaya Bachchan for holding an office of profit. Then it plotted to amend the very same Act to save the skin of its own supreme leader Sonia Gandhi.
After Ms Bachchan was disqualified, Congress leaders lost no time in ridiculing demands for similar action against Ms Gandhi for heading the National Advisory Council (NAC) as its chairperson.
But on Wednesday reality dawned. Congress bigwigs sensed that the threat was more real than it looked at first and<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'> their supreme leader could indeed face the axe on a petition filed by the Telugu Desam Party (TDP) before President APJ Abdul Kalam for disqualification of Ms Gandhi and others.</span>
<b>Similarly, the way the Left parties connived with the Congress in facilitating the adjournment of Parliament sine die, was indication of their own worries, because at one point of time Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee had held the office of chairman of West Bengal Industrial Development Corporation.</b>
<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>Trinamool Congress leader Mamata Banerjee had raised the issue of the Speaker and other CPI (M) MPs and MLAs holding offices of profit and written to President Kalam seeking their disqualification.</span>
The script of the sordid drama that took place in Parliament on Wednesday was written well in advance when the Government fist decided to pass the Budget before Parliament went into recess. <b>While the Opposition thought that the Government wanted to curtail the full Budget session in view of the Assembly elections in five states, Congress legal eagles were drafting an ordinance that would exempt NAC and other offices headed by Congress and Left leaders from the ambit of "office-of-profit."</b>
<b>The Congress and Left camp had reasons to be worried on several counts. </b>
First, the NAC and other posts held by both sides was not covered under the Prevention of Disqualification Act, 1995. Secondly, the President was sooner or later bound to refer the matter to the Election Commission as he had done in the case of SP leader Amar Singh. Thirdly, Mr Kalam had set a precedent by disqualifying Jaya Bachchan by ignoring her plea that as chairperson of the Uttar Pradesh Film Development Board, she had not earned any pecuniary benefit.
<b>
In fact, the example set by the President in the case of Jaya Bachchan clearly implied that irrespective of the fact that a MP accepts monetary benefit or not, he could still be disqualified for holding an "office-of-profit". This had alarmed the Congress and Left leaders. </b><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->