Au Parlement hier, Maya Hanoomanjee fait voler en éclat l’éditorial de Touria Prayag et exige des excuses

Il s’agit d’un «breach of priviledge of the House». C’est du moins ce qu’estime la Speaker de l’Assemblée nationale. Maya Hanoo¬manjee a réagi, hier, à l’éditorial de la rédactrice en chef du magazine Weekly, en date du 28 avril, intitulé Catch me if you can. Et à la fin de la séance des ques¬tions parlementaires, elle a invité Touria Prayag à pré¬senter ses excuses à l’As¬semblée nationale. Au cas contraire, a-t-elle prévenu, elle agira en conséquence.

STATEMENT OF MADAM SPEAKER, HON MAYA HANOOMANJEE

Honourable Members,

My attention has been drawn to the “Editorial” of the weekly magazine, the “Weekly” issue No 193 for the week 28 April to 4 May entitled “Catch me if you can”.

For record purposes, I have deemed it fit to reproduce certain extracts of the article, (I quote) – With the scant respect for the normal parliamentary practices being displayed week in and week out in our national assembly, I suggest we close it and allow the honourable members to do what they do best; travel a bit more at our expense and carry on with any deals they wish to engage in no questions asked.

Our national assembly has become grotesque in its intolerance of accountability on almost all issues. And the Speaker seems to be unwittingly helping in the muzzling of MPs every time ministers find themselves in a tight spot over key issues.

On Tuesday, our Speaker, shrieking at the top of her voice, was quick at stopping opposition members from asking supplementary questions about the National Insurance Company………

The article further continues:- I quote Before the opposition had the opportunity to challenge that, the Speaker decided it was time to move to the next question! After barely two supplementary questions instead of four! And when the Speaker decides, you obey. (end of quote)

I am, furthermore, laying a copy of the article on the Table of the Assembly.

Honourable Members, in my view, it is clear that the article constitutes a deliberately tendentious and motivated attack on the National Assembly, the highest institution of the Republic.

I must say that being personally targeted by these disparaging remarks places me in a delicate situation. Besides being perverted and grossly misrepresentative of the proceedings of the House, the article, in its reference to the Chair, also displays ignorance of certain basic rules governing parliamentary practice and procedure.

In so doing the author does not only thrust indignities on the House but also categorically accuses the Chair of partiality.

Honourable Members, as guardian of the Standing Orders and Rules of the National Assembly, I have no alternative than to submit myself to the provisions of the Standing Orders governing breaches of privilege.

Honourable Members, according to Erskine May, (I quote) – “reflections on the character of the Speaker and accusations of partiality in the discharge of his duties may be held to constitute breaches of privilege or contempt. ….…… The Speaker’s actions cannot be
criticised incidentally in debate or upon any form of proceeding, except a substantive motion.” (end of quote).

In an impugned article, of a similar nature in India, in 2005, a Journalist made allegations against the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, to the effect that he, I quote: “is partisan, has no sense of prestige, is highhanded in his behaviour and has no sense of fair play”

The then Speaker Somnath Chatterjee, concluded, (I quote): “according to me, the position in law is beyond any doubt and to anyone concerned with the parliamentary system, it is clear that the impugned article not only reeks of malice but is highly contumacious in its conception and in its contents as it deliberately accuses the Speaker of partiality and reflects on his character and actions as Speaker which amounts to gross breach of privilege of the Speaker and also of the House.”

Similarly, I am of opinion that the impugned Editorial is tantamount to a breach of privilege of the House.

Honourable Members, such unwarranted criticism coming from no one less than the Editor in Chief herself, should, in my opinion, be viewed with the greatest concern.

I would like to stress that I am unequivocally attached to the liberty of the press. The role of the media to air, report and publish the workings, including debates, questions and other proceedings of the House is essential in a modern democracy and its right to comment and to fair, albeit fierce, criticism cannot and should not be negated.

Moreover, the importance of a good working relationship between Parliament and the Media cannot be underscored. I believe that a good working relationship between the media and the legislature should be based on mutual respect and the recognition of our respective role.

The press is rightly described as the fourth pillar of our democracy and has been referred to, as the common man’s last hope. Without a free press, democracy would be in danger. However, this freedom should not be taken as a license to make gratuitous and motivated attacks on great institutions of the Republic.

Having said so, I would like to reiterate my commitment to continue fostering the good professional relationships which have always existed between our two institutions and to even further strengthen them.

To that effect, my office does not hesitate to provide updated facilities to the press to help them discharge their obligations in the best possible manner. We are also in the process of adopting new technologies which will further enable journalists to capture parliamentary information in real time.

Honourable Members, As Speaker, I am duty-bound to protect the privileges of the House and at the same time to see to it that our noble institution is not denigrated.

Keeping in mind the long standing professional relationships between the media and the National Assembly and in recognition of the fact that both are essential actors in a working democracy, I am inviting the Editor in Chief to tender her unreserved apologies to the Chair and to the House.

In case no apologies are received within a week, I shall come back to the House to have the matter dealt with as appropriate.

Posted by Minority Voice on May 25 2016. Filed under Actualités, En Direct, Featured. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry