Manashimaya
A political uproar erupted in the Lok Sabha on Tuesday when AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi hailed a conflict-hit West Asian country after taking his oath as a member of the 18th Lok Sabha. Owaisi’s ‘Jai Palestine’ oath sparked controversy, leading to his remarks being expunged from the official record. This incident has ignited a heated debate about parliamentary decorum and freedom of expression.
Owaisi’s ‘Jai Palestine’ oath sparked controversy immediately after he completed his oath in Urdu, reciting a prayer before acknowledging Bhimrao Ambedkar, Telangana, and the AIMIM’s slogan for Muslims. The addition of “Jai Palestine” to his oath led to an uproar from the treasury benches. Radha Mohan Singh, who was presiding over the session, ordered that Owaisi’s remarks be expunged stating that anything beyond the official oath would not be recorded.
Despite the backlash, Owaisi defended his actions outside the House, stating that there was nothing wrong with his remarks. He asserted that other members had also made different statements during their oaths and questioned the constitutional provision prohibiting his words. Owaisi’s ‘Jai Palestine’ oath sparked controversy, yet he stood firm, highlighting Mahatma Gandhi’s historical support for Palestine and emphasising that the people of Palestine are oppressed.
Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju responded to the incident, noting that he had received complaints from some members regarding the mention of Palestine. He stated that while India does not have enmity with Palestine, the propriety of praising another country during an oath-taking ceremony needed to be examined. Rijiju’s remarks reflect the sensitive nature of Owaisi’s ‘Jai Palestine’ oath sparked controversy, especially within the context of parliamentary norms and international relations.
Union Minister G Kishan Reddy and BJP leader Amit Malviya criticised Owaisi’s remarks. Reddy questioned whether Owaisi could say “Bharat Mata Ki Jai” and argued that his actions were against parliamentary rules. Malviya went further, accusing Owaisi of engaging in anti-Constitutional work. These critiques underscore the political tension surrounding Owaisi’s ‘Jai Palestine’ oath sparked controversy, reflecting broader ideological divides within Indian politics.
The pro-tem Speaker Bhartruhari Mahtab reiterated the importance of adhering strictly to the official oath or affirmation, avoiding any additional invocations. This directive aims to maintain the solemnity and focus of the oath-taking process, ensuring that personal or political statements do not overshadow the constitutional commitment. The repeated emphasis on this rule highlights the disruptive potential of Owaisi’s ‘Jai Palestine’ oath sparked controversy.
Owaisi, who has been elected from the Hyderabad seat for his fifth term, remains a polarising figure. His decision to include “Jai Palestine” in his oath is seen by supporters as a principled stand for an oppressed people, while critics view it as a breach of parliamentary protocol. This incident has brought attention to the broader issue of what is deemed appropriate during official parliamentary procedures.
The incident surrounding Owaisi’s ‘Jai Palestine’ oath sparked controversy, adding to the ongoing discourse about the limits of free speech within the legislative framework. It raises questions about the balance between expressing personal or political beliefs and adhering to the formalities of parliamentary conduct. As the debate continues, the reactions to Owaisi’s remarks illustrate the diverse perspectives on nationalism, international solidarity, and the role of elected officials.
In conclusion, Owaisi’s ‘Jai Palestine’ oath sparked controversy in the Lok Sabha, leading to his remarks being expunged and a broader debate about parliamentary propriety and freedom of expression. As the political landscape evolves, this incident will likely continue to resonate, reflecting the complex interplay of personal conviction and public duty in Indian politics.
