Speaker's expulsion

The reasoning put out by the CPM for the expulsion of Mr. Somnath Chatterjee from the party is curious. If the Speaker who is a veteran parliamentarian continues to be bound by the party discipline and is expected to relinquish office the moment the latter withdrew outside support to the govt., he should have been consulted when the strategy to pull down the govt. was being formulated. The manner in which his name was included in the list submitted to the President without his consent, it is clear that the party took his consent for granted and undermined the office of the Speaker since, once elected, the Speaker is constitutionally above party politics . While publically maintaining that it was up to the Speaker to decide whether to resign or not, the younger members of the politburo continued to exert pressure on him indirectly. Elevation of Mr. Chatterjee by a unanimous vote brought honor to CPM and not vice versa. But little else can be expected from a party, which denied the prime minister ship to Mr. Jyoti Basu at the insistence of the same politburo, which was described as a "historic blunder" later. What is more interesting is that only half of the members ("available politburo") were present to take the historic decision and the procedure adopted was totally undemocratic since no show cause notice was given nor an opportunity given to Speaker to defend himself. CPM can legitimately claim that it was an internal matter of the party. However, a party, which claims to be democratic and demanded access to the text of an international agreement before its finalization in the name of transparency should seriously examine its own record of functioning. Charity after all, begins at home