Lokpal Debate in Rajya Sabha: UPA-II's blunder?

 My View

“Power corrupts, but the prospect of losing power corrupts absolutely”- Ram Jethmalani (BJP)

I took the liberty of deciphering his statement, and my conclusion made sense (at least to me). UPA-II govt., apprehensive of the mounting pressure from the public and the feasibility of losing public support, drafted a Bill that created uproar in the Upper House making Shivanand Tiwari term it as “a disease worse than cancer”. And finally the decision to stall vote, in the backdrop of losing support, even from its alliances, was seen as murder of democracy (Trinamool) and a sad day for Parliamentary Democracy.

Called THE LOKPAL AND LOKAYUKTAS BILL, 2011, it created more obscurity and opposition than applause (over it being passed advocating public opinion, or rather Anna’s hegemony). While there were many points of discord, like violating the federal structure of the Constitution, the autonomy of the CBI, the appointment and removal of the Lokpal and bringing the lower bureaucracy under the ambit of the Lokpal, I am more intrigued by the Government’s decision to stall vote in the Upper House.

Arun Jaitley (AJ), perhaps made the best statement of the session, when he said “It is ironical that I am the leader of opposition but I am speaking for the majority”. Given the fact that the extended time period of the Winter Session expired at 12 midnight, AJ’s use of the word “choreographed” seem legitimate. The Parliament decides whether a Bill becomes an Act or not, it is the people’s representatives that decide what is best for the public. The Bill would have either been passed or killed, but the incident that unfolded in the Rajya Sabha is indeed a mockery of democracy, prompting political analyst Yogendra Yadav to describe the abrupt end as “match-fixing of the worst kind”

After all the drama, the fate of the anti-corruption bill can only be speculated. With all the considerations for, and against the bill debated in the floor of the House, what had happened was uncalled for, and presumably a blunder my UPA-II govt.. Going forth with the voting, despite the certainty of losing, would have given the govt. the much needed favor of the public, but its decision has marred the govt., and rebuilding its image before the next election will be a challenge, more so with Anna campaigning against them.

But why was the Chairman, Hamid Ansari not conclusive when asked whether the business of the House would remain in continuity post 12?