E-Paper
‘Should be a limit to politics’: Jaishankar on Oppn boycotting new Parliament launch
External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar on Friday hit out at the opposition parties for boycotting the new Parliament building launch.
External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar on Friday hit out at the opposition parties for boycotting the new Parliament building launch on May 28, saying that there should be a “limit to doing politics” and that the inauguration should “not be made a subject of controversy.”
Also read: How will the new Parliament building be inaugurated? Top points
“Some people are trying to create controversy. But I believe that there should be a limit to indulging in politics. At least on such occasions, the entire country should come together and celebrate this festival,” S Jaishankar said, as quoted by news agency PTI.
The union minister - who is on a two-day visit to Gujarat, told the media that it is “unfortunate” if the inauguration is being turned into a controversy. “I believe that the inauguration of the new Parliament building should be taken as a festival of democracy and it should be celebrated in that spirit,” he added.
Also read: 'Sengol' brought to Delhi ahead of inauguration of the new Parliament
A war of words broke out between the BJP and opposition parties after over a dozen parties boycotted the inaugural ceremony of the new Parliament building contending that President Droupadi Murmu should do the honors and not Prime Minister Narendra Modi. In a counterattack to the opposition, the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) on Wednesday asked the opposition parties to reconsider their decision, and said that “the people of India will not forget their egregious insult to our democracy and to their elected representatives if they go ahead with their stand.”
Meanwhile, earlier in the day, the Supreme Court refused to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking a direction that the inauguration should be done by the President. A bench of justices JK Maheshwari and PS Narasimha told petitioner advocate Jaya Sukin that the court understands why and how this petition was filed, however, “it is not inclined to entertain this petition under Article 32 of the Constitution.”
