An Invitation On Public Debate To Rahul Gandhi And PM Modi
A meaningful and civil debate on issues that matter—that is the call for Prime Minister Narendra Modi and senior Congress leader Rahul Gandhi. Retired Justices Madan B Lokur, Ajit P Shah, and senior journalist N Ram have invited both the political leaders to a public debate with each other on key issues of the upcoming Lok Sabha election. The invitation letter addressed to them is delivered to their respective offices and shared on social media.
They began the joint-letter by stating that the proposal that is going to put forward is “non partisan and in the larger interest of every citizen.” Since General Elections have reached midpoint, during the election campaigns and public addresses, both the ruling party, BJP and the principal opposition, Congress has raised important questions pertaining to the core of “our constitutional democracy”. When Prime Minister challenged Congress on topics including reservations, Article 370, and wealth redistribution, latter attacked former on possible mutilation of the Constitution, Electoral Bond scheme and the government”s response to China. Aside from this, both raised arguments in matters relating to their respective Manifestos, as well as on the social justice.
Don’t miss this invitation to a civil and meaningful debate on issues that matter in this election and beyond — an invitation from three of us that has been just delivered to the PMO and to Mr Rahul Gandhi’s Office. pic.twitter.com/vXnJQKAcug
— N. Ram (@nramind) May 9, 2024
But, three opines that aside from allegations, meaningful responses have not traced from both front. “As members of the public, we are concerned that we have heard only allegations and challenges from either side, and not heard any meaningful responses,” it said. Continuing further, they held that since the digital world is entrenched with “misrepresentation, and manipulation,” for the public to exercise an “informed choice at the ballots” it is pertinent to be well educated about all aspects of the debate.
In such circumstance, citizens would be highly benefitted by listening directly from political leaders, the letter argues. Through a public debate, people not only hear the questions on each side, but also the responses. “We are of the view that this would help to strengthen our democratic process immensely,” it adds. Besides, the debate would enable to project the true image of a “healthy and vibrant democracy”.
Before conclusion, they mentioned in the letter that venue, duration, moderators and format for the debate can be set in the pattern acceptable to both sides. If either of the parties are unavailable, they can nominate a representative to the debate, they said.
