Leader of opposition Rahul Gandhi’s reference to former Army chief General M.M. Naravane’s yet-unreleased memoir which provides a series of revelations including Chinese troop movement in August 2020, while quoting an article from The Caravan that includes lines from the book, led to an uproar from the Treasury benches on Monday (February 2). Three Union ministers – defence minister Rajnath Singh, home minister Amit Shah and parliamentary affairs minister Kiren Rijiju-led the charge in opposing any references to the book by quoting the article. Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla then referred to Rule 349 and Rule 353 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha to bar Gandhi from making any references to The Caravan article that quotes the book. Later, Rule 349 was also cited by Rijiju, to allege that Gandhi was not abiding by the Chair’s ruling and the rules of the House.In January 2024, The Wire had reported that Naravane’s memoir titled Four Stars of Destiny was “awaiting clearance” from the Union defence and external affairs ministries and had been delayed. When The Wire had asked Naravane about the final release date for the book, he said we should “check with publishers”. On Sunday, February 1, The Caravan quoted excerpts from the yet-unpublished book to highlight how the 2020 border clash with China was handled by the Modi government.Just a year ago, on February 4, Prime Minister Narendra Modi during his reply to the Motion of Thanks to the President’s address in the Lok Sabha referred to the book JFK’s Forgotten Crisis and sought to shed light on the discussions between former Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and former US President John F. Kennedy.According to former officers in the Lok Sabha secretariat who spoke to The Wire, Rule 349 does not prevent any member from quoting any material, while the Speaker may ask the member to authenticate it. The former officers also said that Rule 353 does not apply in this case.What does Rule 349 say?Prior to the Chair’s ruling, defence minister Singh and home minister Shah objected and demanded to know if the book had been published. Later, Singh said that as defence minister he can say that the book has not been published and objected to its references. However, Rule 349 makes no mention of published or unpublished material. Rule 349 (i) provides that whilst the House is sitting, “a member shall not read any book, newspaper or letter except in connection with the business of the House.”Former Lok Sabha secretary general and constitutional expert P.D.T Achary said to The Wire that the rule provides for any member to quote any newspaper or magazine if it is in connection with the business of the house.“Here the business of the house is the discussion on the Motion of Thanks to the President’s Address in which references have been made to global challenges. Therefore, the leader of opposition referring to a border incident becomes relevant to the business of the House, so he satisfies the rules,” he said. “Previous rulings by the Speaker have shown that the Speaker has allowed members to quote, and then asked them to authenticate. The purpose of authentication is that nothing should go into the house, which is not true,” he added.While Birla during the beginning of Gandhi’s speech had asked him to provide authentication, subsequent to repeated objections from the Treasury benches the Speaker cited Rules 349 and Rule 353 to stop him from quoting.“Debate on motion of thanks, followed by general discussion on general budget are the two debates where any and every subject under the sun is liberally allowed to be discussed. In fact, when opposition insists on short duration discussion etc on certain matters of urgent public importance, the ruling dispensation often requests them to utilise the debate on motion of thanks or general discussion on general budget,” said a former officer of the Lok Sabha Secretariat. “This happens in Business Advisory Committee meetings chaired by the Speaker/Chairman. Moreover, how can anyone be stopped from discussing issues concerning national security. Only caution advised is that the debate should not lead to strain in relationships with other countries.”What is Rule 353?Rule 353 provides that: “No allegation of a defamatory or incriminatory nature shall be made by a member against any person unless the member has given [adequate advance notice] to the Speaker and also to the Minister concerned so that the Minister may be able to make an investigation into the matter for the purpose of a reply: Provided that the Speaker may at any time prohibit any member from making any such allegation if the Speaker is of opinion that such allegation is derogatory to the dignity of the House or that no public interest is served by making such allegation.”Achary said that Rule 353 does not apply in this regard because it refers to allegations whether a member or an outsider.“The member has to give notice to the speaker, and the speaker will make an inquiry through the government. Only after the facts are available to the speaker, will he allow this. So it’s a different kind of situation,” said Achary. “It is making a personal allegation against someone. Here the member who is speaking in the House is not making a personal allegation against any individual. He’s saying that the government has acted in a particular manner. So that doesn’t come under 353.”Rule 353 was also invoked by Birla, when Gandhi sought to refer to Prime Minister Narendra Modi who was also present in the House.“Was the member really making an allegation by himself? If the member was merely bringing to the notice of the House a published report from a news magazine, even if it is construed as an allegation against someone in the government, the member can not be prevented from doing so and asking the government about veracity of such reports,” said the former officer in the Lok Sabha Secretariat. “If a member is reading from published text from a news magazine which s/he is ready to authenticate, it is not in accordance with the Rules of the House to prevent him/her from doing so. This Rule is applicable only when a Member directly makes allegations of defamatory or incriminatory nature on his own without prior notice,” the officer said.What happened in the House?Gandhi had begun his speech by saying that he is quoting from The Caravan article that contained excerpts from the book.“This is from the memoir of Army chief Naravane. I would like you to listen nicely and you will understand who is patriotic and who is not. This is about when four Chinese tanks were entering Indian territory, they were digging a ridge in Doklam, and the Army chief writes, and I quote from an article that is quoting his book. ‘The tanks were within a few hundred meters of the Kailash Range’,” said Gandhi while beginning his speech.Defence minister Singh said that “if the book has been published, it can be mentioned, but if it has not, then it cannot be mentioned.” Home minister Shah also stood up and demanded to know if Naravane’s book had been published. “A magazine can write anything, has the book been published or not, he (Gandhi) should clarify.”Birla said that no references can be made which refer to newspaper cuttings that are not authentic.“Naravane has said that the government is not allowing his memoir to be published. I only want to read five lines in which Naravane has spoken about Rajnath Singh and Modi,” said Gandhi.Shah then said that since the book has not been published, as stated by Gandhi, the book cannot be referred to in the House.“Even if it was published it could not have been referred to in the House,” said Birla.While Gandhi said that the President’s address related to India’s relationship with USA and China, and the The Caravan article he sought to quote was a “fundamental explanation” of India’s relationship with China, he was not allowed to read from the article.After repeated objections from Shah and Singh, Gandhi said that the government was scared.“They say they fight terrorism yet they are scared of one quote,” he said. “What is there in this that they are so scared of? What is written here that they are so rattled that they are not letting me read it,” said Gandhi.“If they are not scared they should allow me to read it. Why are they scared?” he asked.