Even as INDIA bloc pushes for Parliament session on Pahalgam & Op Sindoor, fault lines evident
'The government is accountable to the Parliament, which is accountable to the people of India,' Trinamool Congress Rajya Sabha floor leader Derek O'Brien said to reporters after the meeting, adding that the decision to send the letter was taken by the heads of the opposition parties.
Leaders from five INDIA bloc parties, the Congress, Trinamool Congress, Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), Samajwadi Party (SP), and Shiv Sena (UBT) met at the Constitution Club of India Tuesday to finalise the draft of a joint letter being sent to Prime Minister Narendra Modi raising the demand.
New Delhi: At a time when voices from within are raising existential questions about the fate of the INDIA bloc, 16 members of the opposition alliance have joined hands to demand a special session of Parliament on the Pahalgam terror attack and Operation Sindoor.
Congress's Rohtak MP Deepender Singh Hooda and party General Secretary (Communications) Jairam Ramesh represented the Congress in the meeting—the first such Opposition huddle after Operation Sindoor—which was also attended by Sanjay Raut of Shiv Sena (UBT), RJD's Manoj Jha and Prof Ram Gopal Yadav of the SP.
The other parties which are signatories to the letter include both Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha MPs of the CPI, CPM, CPIML, RSP, DMK, National Conference, IUML, Jharkhand Mukti Morcha, Kerala Congress, VCK, and MDMK.
Speaking to ThePrint on condition of anonimity, a senior Congress functionary said that Rahul Gandhi spoke to SP chief Akhilesh Yadav, Abhishek Banerjee, DMK's T.R. Balu and Shiv Sena (UBT)'s Aaditya Thackeray to get them on board with the idea of a joint letter.
'Initially, both LoP Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi and LoP Rajya Sabha Mallikarjun Kharge wrote to the PM separately. But Rahul wanted the INDIA to coordinate on this matter. So, he called the leaders of some INDIA partners. Subsequently, Congress General Secretary (Organisation) K.C. Venugopal, Lok Sabha Deputy leader Gaurav Gogoi, Chief Ehip K. Suresh and whips Manickam Tagore and Mohammad Jawed reached out to the parties,' the leader said.
However, even as the leaders met, the fault lines within the coalition were all too evident. For instance, the AAP stayed away from the meeting and is writing to the Centre separately seeking a special session of Parliament.
Leaders who attended the meeting said that the AAP conveyed its unwillingness to share a platform with the Congress. The Left parties, which are signatories to the letter, were also not invited to the meeting that lasted around 40 minutes.
The NCP (SP) also did not attend Tuesday's meeting, with Sharad Pawar having previously announced that he was not in favour of holding any discussion on Operation Sindoor on an open forum.
Speaking at the launch of Congress leader Salman Khurshid's book last month, former Home Minister P. Chidambaram had said, 'I am not sure if the INDIA alliance is intact. If it's intact, I am very happy. It can be put together. There's still time.'
CPI general secretary D. Raja said to reporters that he was not aware of the meeting, but his party has been raising the demand for a special session.
The Left parties were excluded from Tuesday's meeting at the insistence of the TMC, which shifted its stance on the special session following political attacks by PM Modi and Union Home Minister Amit Shah on West Bengal's ruling party.
While the Congress had been demanding a special session of the Parliament since the 22 April Pahalgam attack, the TMC, which sends the third-largest contingent to the Lok Sabha from the Opposition, had initially not joined the principal opposition party in amplifying the demand.
TMC National General Secretary Abhishek Banerjee is among the members of the seven multi-party delegations sent to various world capitals to convey India's position on cross-border terrorism following Operation Sindoor.
According to TMC sources, the party felt that at a time Banerjee was conveying New Delhi's position very effectively, Shah's remarks that Mamata Banerjee 'opposed' Operation Sindoor were 'unwarranted'.
SP's Ram Gopal Yadav said if the government could send the multi-party delegations, there is no reason for it to not convene a special session of the Parliament.
In remarks along similar lines, Raut said, 'if you could announce a ceasefire based on US President Donald Trump's intervention, you should also accept the Opposition's demand to call a special session of the House.'
While at the press conference, Jha said, 'Donald Trump has said 13 times in the past fortnight that he brokered the truce. As a community, as a nation, we are hurt. Who will convey that message? It is the Parliament. If the Parliament is called, we will speak in one voice…The matter is of accountability. The government is accountable to the Parliament.'
(Edited by Zinnia Ray Chaudhuri)
Also read: Congress says Modi govt 'misled' nation on Op Sindoor losses, demands Kargil-like review
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
25 minutes ago
- Mint
US attacks on Iran: ‘Well done', Donald Trump gets praise from Republicans, sole Democrat John Fetterman
US-Iran war updates: United States President Donald Trump has recieved 'immediate praise' from Republicans in Congress and at least one Democrat, for bombing three nuclear sites in Iran. Dissenting from his fellow party-mates, Pennsylvania's Democract Senator John Fetterman, joined Republicans in praising Donald Trump for joining Israel's offensive against Iran, according to an AP report. Posting on social media platform X (formerly Twitter), South Carolina's Republican Senator Lindsey Graham wrote: 'Well done, President Trump'. Congressional Republicans — and at least one Democrat — immediately praised President Donald Trump after he said Saturday evening that the U.S. Further, Senator John Cornyn, the Republican rep of Texas called the US military bombing three sites in Iran a 'courageous and correct decision.' And Alabama Senator Katie Britt, also Republican, called the bombings 'strong and surgical'; while Oklahoma's Republican Senator Markwayne Mullin posted: 'America first, always.' The Senate Armed Services Committee chairman, Roger Wicker of Mississippi, said Trump 'has made a deliberate — and correct — decision to eliminate the existential threat posed by the Iranian regime.' Wicker posted on X that 'we now have very serious choices ahead to provide security for our citizens and our allies.' The quick endorsements of stepped up U.S. involvement in Iran came after Trump had publicly mulled the strikes for days and many congressional Republicans had cautiously said they thought he would make the right decision. Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Saturday evening that 'as we take action tonight to ensure a nuclear weapon remains out of reach for Iran, I stand with President Trump and pray for the American troops and personnel in harm's way.' Thune and House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., were briefed ahead of the strikes on Saturday, according to people familiar with the situation and granted anonymity to discuss it. Johnson said in a statement that the military operations 'should serve as a clear reminder to our adversaries and allies that President Trump means what he says.' House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rick Crawford, R-Ark., said he had also been in touch with the White House and 'I am grateful to the U.S. servicemembers who carried out these precise and successful strikes." Breaking from many of his Democratic colleagues, Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, an outspoken supporter of Israel, also praised the attacks on Iran. 'As I've long maintained, this was the correct move by @POTUS,' he posted. 'Iran is the world's leading sponsor of terrorism and cannot have nuclear capabilities.' Both parties have seen splits in recent days over the prospect of striking Iran. Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie, a Republican and a longtime opponent of U.S. involvement in foreign wars, posted on X after Trump announced the attacks that 'This is not Constitutional.' Many Democrats have maintained that Congress should have a say. The Senate was scheduled to vote as soon as this week on a resolution by Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine requiring congressional approval before the U.S. declared war on Iran or took specific military action. Connecticut Rep. Jim Himes, the top Democrat on the House intelligence panel, posted on X after Trump's announcement: 'According to the Constitution we are both sworn to defend, my attention to this matter comes BEFORE bombs fall. Full stop.'
Hindustan Times
32 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
War Powers Act vs. Article II: Is the US bombing of Iran constitutional? Could Trump be impeached?
On Saturday night, President Donald Trump took to Truth Social to announce that the United States had conducted what he described as a 'very successful attack' on three Iranian nuclear facilities—Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan. Donald Trump said US had conducted 'successful attack' on three Iranian nuclear facilities.(AP) 'We have completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran, including Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan. All planes are now outside of Iran air space. A full payload of BOMBS was dropped on the primary site, Fordow. All planes are safely on their way home," Trump wrote. "Congratulations to our great American Warriors. There is not another military in the World that could have done this. NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE! Thank you for your attention to this matter,' he added. The announcement reignited a constitutional debate, with critics pointing to a June 16 post on X by Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), who called such strikes unconstitutional. 'This is not our war. But if it were, Congress must decide such matters according to our Constitution. I'm introducing a bipartisan War Powers Resolution to prohibit our involvement,' he had tweeted. Also Read: Iran Israel war news LIVE updates: US strikes on Iran a 'spectacular military success,' says Trump What Is the War Powers Act? Enacted in 1973 over President Richard Nixon's veto, the War Powers Resolution (WPR) was designed to limit the president's ability to engage US forces in military conflicts without congressional approval. It followed public outrage over Nixon's secret bombing of Cambodia during the Vietnam War, which resulted in significant civilian casualties and sparked widespread protests. The WPR requires the president to: Notify Congress within 48 hours of deploying U.S. forces into 'hostilities' or situations where hostilities are imminent. End military actions within 60 days (or 90 days in emergencies) unless Congress approves continued engagement through a declaration of war or specific authorization. Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Rep. Massie have argued that Trump's strikes on Iran violate the WPR, as they were launched without congressional approval. What does Article II say? Trump's supporters, citing Article II of the Constitution, argue that as 'Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy,' the president has broad authority to direct military operations. 'The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment,' the article states. However, this power is constrained by Article I, Section 8, which grants Congress the authority to 'declare war' and regulate the armed forces Legal scholar John Yoo, speaking to Fox News Digital, defended Trump's actions. He argued that a limited airstrike does not constitute 'war' in the constitutional sense and thus doesn't require congressional approval. 'As a legal matter, the president doesn't need the permission of Congress to engage in hostilities abroad. But as a political matter, it's very important for the president to go to Congress and present the united front to our enemies,' he told Fox News Digital. Also Read: US bombs Iran: 10 key developments after strikes on nuclear sites Can Trump be impeached? Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution allows impeachment for "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." If Congress determines that violating the WPR or bypassing its constitutional war powers constitutes a 'high crime,' impeachment could be pursued.
Time of India
34 minutes ago
- Time of India
Rahul Gandhi says English is 'empowering'
English is "empowering" not "shameful" and it is a tool to break the chains, Congress leader Rahul Gandhi has said following home minister Amit Shah 's reported remarks on English. On Friday, Rahul on X also said, "English is not a chain - it is a tool to break the chains." "In today's world, English is as important as one's mother tongue because it will provide employment and boost one's confidence," Rahul said. "Every language of India has soul, culture, knowledge. We have to cherish them ," he said.
