BJP MPs protest parliament panel inviting Prakash Raj, Medha Patkar; meeting cancelled

A parliamentary committee meeting ended abruptly on July 1 as Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MPs protested against the panel's decision to hear activist Medha Patkar and actor-turned-activist Prakash Raj.

The Standing Committee on Rural Development and Panchayati Raj, headed by Congress MP Saptagiri Sankar Ulaka, had called Patkar and Raj to hear her views on the implementation and effectiveness of the land acquisition law enacted by Parliament when the Congress-led UPA government was in power in 2013.

Patkar had led protests against raising the height of Sardar Sarovar Dam in Gujarat and is accused by the ruling party of working against the country's development interests in the name of public and environmental causes.

BJP MP Parshottam Rupala protested

Former Union minister and BJP MP Parshottam Rupala was joined by other lawmakers from his party as they walked out of the meeting, with some dubbing Patkar as "anti-national". A BJP MP wondered if leaders from Pakistan could also be called to such a meeting, news agency PTI said,

Ulaka, the panel's chairperson, however, defended the decision, saying that it is standard practice for a parliamentary committee to hear civil society members and other stakeholders on various issues.

"We wanted to hear their views on the land acquisition law. We wanted an opinion from everyone, but they (BJP) didn't allow it," he told news agency PTI.

Out of the 29 members of the committee, 14 members, including the chairman, were present, and a majority of them were from the BJP and its allies.

The meeting's agenda was to hear from different stakeholders on the implementation and effectiveness of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, a UPA-era Act.

Representatives of the Department of Land Resources (Ministry of Rural Development), the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC), the Ministry of Tribal Affairs, non-government organisations (NGOs), experts, and other stakeholders were to speak before the panel.

Among those invited before the panel were officials from the Environment and Forest Ministry and activists, including Patkar and Prakash Raj, also an actor who has often criticised the BJP's politics.

Former prime minister HD Deve Gowda also attended the meeting, according to PTI.

A BJP MP said they were not told about the decision to ask Patkar to share her views with the committee. Generally, sources said, it is the chairman's prerogative to pick names, though members can make suggestions.

A BJP member said their primary objection was to calling Patkar, who was the face of the 'Narmada Bachao Andolan' protest against a determined push by the Gujarat government, headed then by Narendra Modi as chief minister, to raise the height of Sardar Sarovar Dam.

The state government's views finally prevailed, and Modi, who took over as prime minister in 2014, has often spoken about the efforts to stall the project since its foundation in the 1960s.

As the BJP MPs walked out, Ulaka said he decided to end the meeting due to a lack of quorum.

'If PM of Pakistan could also be called'

"As per rule, a quorum of 10 members is required. When the BJP MPs walked out, there was no quorum, and the meeting ended," he said.

BJP MPs objected to Patkar appearing before the panel, and called her “anti-national,” according to sources quoted by news agency PTI. A miffed MP also wondered if the prime minister of Pakistan could be called for questioning by the panel, the news agency report said.

When the meeting started, opposition MPs were of the opinion that Patkar should be heard, to which the BJP MPs did not agree.

Asked about the incident, Patkar said she was invited to appear before the panel, and while she and others were waiting, they saw some MPs leave.

She added that later, they were informed that the meeting had ended. Patkar said she had also appeared before parliamentary committees earlier.

"I have never experienced anything like this before. It is important to talk about the land acquisition law," she said.

(With agency inputs)