As reported on August 21, 2020 there has been a tussle between chairman of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Information Technology, Shashi Tharoor and BJP member Nishikant Dubey over the former summoning Facebook representatives on September 2 to depose before it on the subject ‘safeguarding citizens’ rights and prevention of misuse of social/online news media platforms, including special emphasis on women security in the digital space. It was also alleged that Facebook did not apply hate speech rules on BJP leaders.
The BJP MP Nishikant Dubey has accused the Congress party’s Shashi Tharoor, of violating Committee rules when he wrote to Facebook asking it to appear before the committee. He has argued that Tharoor did not follow the rule that an order signed by the Secretary-General of Lok Sabha is required to summon a witness. Tharoor has rejected as ‘extraordinary’ the idea that the panel should not take up a matter of ‘such great public interest.’
—————box—
Parliamentary Committees The Parliamentary committees increase the efficiency and expertise of Parliament. Given the volume of work and the limited time at their disposal, legislators are unable to scrutinise every matter in detail on the floor of the House. Some of this work is entrusted to Committees, which are composed of groups of Members of Parliament (MPs). Parliament deliberates on matters that are complex, and therefore needs technical expertise to understand such matters better. These Committees review proposed laws, oversee activities of the executive branch, and scrutinise government expenditure. Their reports allow for informed debate in Parliament. Committees also provide a forum to build consensus across party lines, help develop expertise in subjects, and enable consultation with independent experts and stakeholders.
In India, there are broadly two kinds of committees: (a) Standing Committees; and (b) Ad-hoc Committees. Both Houses have a similar committee structure, with few exceptions. Their appointment, terms of office, functions, and procedure for conducting business is regulated as per Rules of Business of each House.
Standing Committees, whose tenure is continuous throughout the tenure of the House, are appointed or elected by the House or nominated by the Lok Sabha Speaker or Rajya Sabha Chairman. They work under the direction of the presiding officers. There are 24 department/ministry-related Standing Committees of which 16 are serviced by Lok Sabha and eight by Rajya Sabha.
The IT Committee chaired by Tharoor has 20 more MPs from Lok Sabha and nine from Rajya Sabha. The ruling BJP has a majority representation in most of the committees. The 30-member IT panel has 15 MPs from BJP, four from Congress including Tharoor, two each from Trinamool Congress and YSRCP, two independents, and one each from Shiv Sena, TRS, CPM, LJSP and DMK.
Committees formed to see that Parliament functions effectively, discuss Bills referred to them by the presiding officers. These MPs assemble during and between sessions, invite officials as well as experts, and are not bound by the party whips when it comes to discussion of a Bill, unlike in the House. Department-related Standing Committees consider demands for grants for the ministry, and take up any subject based on Annual Reports and long-term policy documents relating to the ministries/departments under their jurisdiction. The Committee on IT, which was constituted in April 1993 (then the Committee on Communications), has jurisdiction over subject matters dealt with by the Ministry of Communications including the Department of Posts, Department of Telecommunications, Ministry of Electronics & IT, and Ministry of Information and Broadcasting.
————————
Power of the Committee in Question
The committee has the powers to send a letter to Facebook—or any institution—asking it to appear and give an explanation on a subject. The committee or chairman does not have executive powers, but calling a particular person or an institution as witness is possible. An invitation to appear before a Parliamentary Committee is equivalent to a summons from a court: If one cannot come, he or she has to give reasons which the panel may or may not accept. However, the chairman should have the support of the majority of the members. Any member can call for a meeting to discuss this, and if the majority of the members do not agree, the chairman may have to cancel the summoning. In the past, there were instances when the chairman summoned an individual or an institution, but with the ruling party having a majority, it was presumed that the majority was in his/her favour. The situation is different here — the BJP with the majority of members is opposing it.
The BJP argues that Tharoor neither took the consent of the Committee nor got approval from the Lok Sabha Speaker for his move.
Rule 269 (1)—Rule 269 in Parliamentary Rule Book deals with the functions of the standing committee – says: ‘A witness may be summoned by an order signed by the Secretary-General and shall produce such documents as are required for the use of a Committee.’
The Argument Going by rulebook, the BJP is right in their argument. But as experts point out, the panel chairman can take decisions, especially when the House is not in session or when a meeting is not to take place in the immediate future, and especially when the matter is of great public interest as Tharoor has argued. But again, members can object and the majority can press the chairman to cancel the summons. The rule says, a Committee shall have power to send for persons, papers and records, provided that if any question arises whether the evidence of a person or the production of a document is relevant for the purposes of the Committee, the question shall be referred to the speaker whose decision shall be final. So, in this case the speaker can support or reject Tharoor’s move.
The Issue
Tharoor has argued that the matter is of great public interest. In fact, Parliamentary panels across the world have expressed concern over the role of social media giants like Facebook, WhatsApp, Twitter, etc., over the dissemination of disinformation and fake news on these platforms. Parliamentary panels in the UK, US, Singapore, etc., have summoned these social media giants over online disinformation and the use of social media tools for political campaigns.
The Wall Street Journal alleged that the Facebook’s top public policy executive in India had opposed applying hate-speech rules to BJP politicians because it could damage the company’s business prospects in India.
During the tenure of the previous Lok Sabha, the IT panel – then headed by BJP’s Anurag Thakur — had summoned Twitter India and asked it to submit its views on the subject of ‘safeguarding citizens’ rights on social/online news media platform after a volunteer group wrote to the committee, alleging the company was biased against right-wing Twitter accounts.