UP assembly’s monsoon session concludes abruptly
Mohammad Alamullah | Clarion India
NEW DELHI — The monsoon session of the Uttar Pradesh Assembly commenced on July 29 and concluded abruptly on August 1. Several significant bills, including those concerning life imprisonment for terror-related crimes, the Nazul Bill, and the SCR Bill, were tabled. However, the session was marred by Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath’s pointed criticism, particularly targeting Muslims and Yadavs, which drew mixed reaction and notable silence from opposition leaders.
In a highly charged speech, Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath highlighted three specific incidents that stirred controversy. The first involved the alleged rape of a 12-year-old girl in Ayodhya. The chief minister named Moeen Ali, associated with a Samajwadi Party MP from Ayodhya constituency, as the accused, questioning the party’s inaction against him.
The second incident cited was of Virendra Yadav from Hardoi, against whom there are 28 criminal cases. Yogi criticised the Samajwadi Party for electing Yadav as their district president despite his extensive criminal record. He highlighted a recent incident where Yadav allegedly killed a lawyer, sarcastically questioning if such criminals should be celebrated instead of being prosecuted.
The third incident revolved the recent heavy rains in Lucknow causing extensive damages.
Despite the inflammatory nature of Yogi’s remarks, the opposition leaders, particularly from the Samajwadi Party, remained conspicuously silent.
Samarpal, a member of the assembly, expressed his dismay. Talking to Clarion India, he criticising the chief minister’s focus on religious and caste identities. He lamented the absence of Akhilesh Yadav, Samajwadi Party supremo, whose presence, he believed, would have prompted a stronger opposition response.
Mata Prasad Pandey, a senior opposition leader, chose not to object to the chief minister’s speech, a decision that puzzled many. Samarpal noted that while other assembly members are restricted from speaking without the Speaker’s permission, the leader of the opposition has the right to raise objections but did not exercise this right.
Kamal Akhtar, Samajwadi Party MLA, voiced his frustration with the government’s approach to social issues in the state. Speaking to Clarion India, Akhtar accused the government of evading accountability by resorting to communal rhetoric. He highlighted the truncated working period of the House, arguing that the opposition’s efforts to address state problems were being systematically ignored.
Many Samajwadi Party members, speaking anonymously, criticised the chief minister’s selective naming of individuals based on their religion and caste. They pointed out that during the incident in Lucknow’s Gomti Nagar, over a hundred young men were involved, yet only Muslim and Yadav names were mentioned. This selective focus, they argued, underscored a communal bias.
The chief minister’s pointed remarks have deepened the rift between the ruling party and the opposition, particularly the Samajwadi Party. By singling out Muslims and Yadavs, the chief minister’s speech is perceived as an attempt to consolidate his base by appealing to communal sentiments. This strategy, while galvanising support among certain voter segments, risks alienating others and stoking communal tensions.
The public reaction has been polarised. Supporters of the chief minister applaud his tough stance on crime and his willingness to name and shame alleged perpetrators. Critics, however, view his remarks as divisive, accusing him of scapegoating specific communities for political gain.
Media coverage has mirrored this divide. Pro-government outlets have praised the chief minister’s speech as a bold and necessary move to combat crime and corruption. Conversely, independent and opposition-aligned media have criticised the speech for its communal undertones and the opposition’s failure to respond effectively.
The abrupt end to the monsoon session of the state assembly left many bills unattended and questions unanswered. Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath’s controversial speech has sparked a significant debate about the role of religion and caste in political discourse. The silence of opposition leaders, particularly from the Samajwadi Party, has also been a focal point of criticism, highlighting the internal challenges within the opposition ranks.
