Noting that the Opposition MPs have already demanded the same, the letter stated 11 reasons justifying the need for the special session.
Published Jun 12, 2025 | 2:39 PM ⚊ Updated Jun 12, 2025 | 2:39 PM
Pahalgam terror attack
Synopsis: Over 300 citizens have urged the government to convene a special Parliament session to debate the Pahalgam attack and Operation Sindoor. Citing constitutional duty, rising communal violence, lack of transparency, and misuse of power, the letter emphasizes public accountability. It also highlights declining parliamentary sittings and insists that a dedicated session is essential for meaningful debate and democratic scrutiny.
Over 300 Indian citizens from across the country have written the government of India demanding a special session of Parliament at the earliest, for a debate on the terror attack in Pahalgam and India’s response to the same.
Noting that the Opposition MPs have already demanded the same, the letter stated 11 reasons justifying the need for the special session.
Among the signatories, Tushar A Gandhi, president of Mahatma Gandhi Foundation, retired ambassador of India Madhu Bhaduri, social activist Shabnam Hashmi, All India Secular Forum members Ram Puniyani, Jagdeep Chhoker, former MP Hannan Mollah, former MLA and president of Kisan Sangharsh Samiti Dr Sunilam, are the prominent ones.
Among the 11 reasons mentioned in the missive, the first one cites the Article 75(3) of the Constitution, which categorically holds that the Council of Ministers is collectively responsible to the House of People. Noting the same, the letter noted, “Therefore, the Government of India is under a constitutional obligation to convene a Parliament session at the earliest so that it can place before the people, via the Parliament, all the facts related to the Pahalgam attack and Operation Sindoor.”
Further congratulating the defence forces for their valour and achievements within a short period of four days, the letter notes that, “It is important for our democracy to ensure that the operational success of our defence forces is not hijacked by the political executive for their ulterior electoral motives.”
“Further, since the truce was first announced by the American President, the assertions by the United States that the truce was achieved because of trade deals contrast sharply with what the MEA has been saying,” the letter further read.
Calling for accountability, it adds, “In terms of the military action, we still do not know what exactly has been achieved strategically, how much losses we suffered militarily and why. With respect to the Pahalgam attack itself, we need to fix accountability for any security or intelligence lapses that led to the attack.”
Recalling the rise in communal violence against Kashmiris and Muslims across the country following the attack, the letter called out the collective punishment towards families of supposed militants, and heightened tensions between nuclear-armed nations.
“We also note the harassment of those advocating for peace, misuse of the law to suppress dissent, irresponsible media coverage surrounding the attack, and politicisation of military action. The government must address these issues in Parliament,” the letter demanded.
Reiterating the need for answerability from government, the letter notes, “If the Prime Minister can speak to the nation about Operation Sindoor, and various politicians can comment at events, even the Chief of Defence Staff can speak to international media, then there’s no reason the government should avoid answering questions in Parliament.”
Appreciating the multi party delegations of MPs to other countries, the letter emphasised on the need for a dialogue between the government and elected representatives on the floor of Parliament under full public and media glare.
It further stated that the all-party meetings behind closed doors do not meet the constitutional threshold of public accountability and transparency.
Citing similar examples where the legislative bodies have stepped up, the letter reads: “It must be noted that within a week of the terror attack, a one-day special session of the newly formed Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly was called and even a resolution was passed. During the 1962 India-China war, Atal Bihari Vajpayee had demanded a special session of Parliament and the then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru had agreed for the same. It is only befitting that given the extraordinary circumstances, the present Indian Parliament also rises up to the occasion and urgently convenes to place before the people of India all facts.”
The missive also called on the government to help the civilians, military personnel, and government workers, injured during the military actions in the border areas, to rebuild their lives and ensure their safety.
“It also must protect the rights of all citizens, especially those expressing dissent or criticism. The government is failing on all these counts and must face public scrutiny in Parliament,” it added.
Recalling the special sessions called, the letter claimed that such sessions are neither a novel concept, nor inconvenient for the government to immediately organise.
Calling out the government’s reluctance to face questions and its dismissive attitude toward parliamentary democracy, the missive noted, “The Cabinet Committee on Parliamentary Affairs decides when sessions happen, and the opposition has shown willingness to participate.”
Further noting the regressive trend of decreasing number of Parliament sittings, the letter said this will be an opportunity for the government to reverse the same. “In the first two decades since independence, Parliament would sit for an average of 120 days in a year. In the 17th Lok Sabha (2019–24), this came down to only 55 days on average in a year.”
“Since Parliament sessions are getting shorter, the government’s argument that whatever questions have to be raised about Operation Sindoor can be raised in the Monsoon Session does not stand.”
Reasoning the need for special session, the letter concluded in it’s final reason: “In any session of Parliament, even in the absence of any extraordinary situation, there are hundreds of questions and issues to be raised from all across the country. Opportunities to engage in longer and complicated debates and deliberations have shrunk already, and ordinarily MPs barely get a few minutes to speak on issues of public importance. Therefore, a special session focused on raising questions and debating the issues elaborated in this letter is the need of the hour.”
(Edited by Sumavarsha)
