Union Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju challenged Rahul Gandhi to produce evidence of a government order authorizing police firing on students during a Lok Sabha session on Friday.
The exchange underscores the deepening divide between the ruling administration and the opposition over the handling of civil unrest and the accountability of top government officials.
Rahul Gandhi alleged that the government had issued an order to fire on student protesters. He said that Amit Shah was responsible for the police action during the CJP-led agitation at Jantar Mantar.
Rijiju rejected these claims, describing the allegations as baseless. He said that only a magistrate can issue such an order and challenged the opposition leader to provide documentation for the claim.
"Show proof, or you will have to apologise," Rijiju said.
The confrontation occurred during a broader discussion in the Lok Sabha in New Delhi. Beyond the dispute over police orders, Rijiju criticized the conduct of the Congress party during the proceedings. He said that Rahul Gandhi was using abusive language during the session.
In an effort to pivot the legislative focus, Rijiju urged Rahul Gandhi to devote at least five minutes [1] of his speech to the merits of the anti-paper leak bill. This request came amid a series of heated exchanges where the minister questioned whether Rahul Gandhi or Arvind Kejriwal apologizes more frequently following legal controversies.
Rijiju maintained that the assertion regarding a ministerial order to fire on students was unfounded because of the legal protocols governing police force. He said that the authority to authorize such actions rests solely with a magistrate, not a union minister.
“"Show proof, or you will have to apologise"”
This clash highlights a tactical shift in the Lok Sabha, where procedural disputes over police authority are being used to challenge the credibility of opposition claims. By framing the issue around the legal impossibility of a minister ordering police fire, the government seeks to shift the burden of proof to the opposition, potentially forcing a public apology or a retraction of allegations against senior leadership.
