As Congress MP Shashi Tharoor took oath as an MP, he chanted the slogans ‘Jai Hind, Jai Samvidhan’. Following this, a few opposition MPs also chanted ‘Jai Samvidhan’. As Tharoor walked off after shaking hands with Birla, the Speaker said, “He is already taking oath on the Constitution.”
Soon after this remark, a few members of the opposition started to contradict his remarks while Deepender Hooda stood up from his seat to say the Speaker should not be objecting to this.
“Don’t give me advice on what I should or should not object to. Take your seat,” the Speaker rebuffed.
Later in the evening, Hooda shared a video of this on X and wrote: “Has it now become wrong to say ‘Jai Samvidhaan’ even in the country’s Parliament? The people of the country will decide whether it is wrong to say ‘Jai Samvidhan’ in Parliament or is it wrong to interrupt someone who says ‘Jai Samvidhan’.
Congress leader Priyanka Gandhi also came out in support of Hooda and wondered whether one cannot say ‘Jai Samvidhan’ in Parliament.
“People from the ruling party were not stopped when they raised unparliamentary and unconstitutional slogans in Parliament, but when the opposition MPs raised ‘Jai Samvidhan’ slogans, they were objected to,” she said in a post on X.
“The anti-Constitution sentiment that emerged during the elections has now taken a new form, which seeks to weaken our Constitution,” Priyanka said.
“Will the Constitution, on the basis of which Parliament functions, on which every member takes oath, which gives protection of life and livelihood, be opposed to suppress the voice of the opposition?” she asked.
Earlier, AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi had stroked controversy after chanting pro-Palestine slogan in the House. The BJP had criticised Owaisi and condemned his statement.
“The slogan ‘Jai Palestine’ given by AIMIM MP Asaduddin Owaisi in Parliament today is wrong. This is against the rules of the House. He does not say ‘Bharat Mata ki Jai’ while living in India,” Union minister G Kishan Reddy said.
Owaisi, however, rejected the criticism by maintaining that he had not violated the Constitution.