Letters to The Editor — February 5, 2026

About Parliament

There are serious concerns about parliamentary functioning and democratic accountability, as the ruckus in Parliament shows. While the Treasury benches have cited “unruly conduct” and procedural rules to highlight the conduct of the Opposition, the core issue remains the government’s refusal to address sensitive issues. There are matters of national security that deserve a transparent explanation, not procedural avoidance.

Further, the finalisation of the India-U.S. trade deal adds urgency to the need for clarity.

Parliament is the forum for debate on issues of national importance. Repeated adjournments and mass suspensions weaken the spirit of deliberation and risk turning the House into a site of confrontation rather than accountability. A vibrant democracy requires confidence in parliamentary scrutiny. Open debate, not suppression, is the true measure of national strength.

Vidyasagar Reddy Kethiri,

Warangal, Telangana

Business in Parliament seems to be a fine example of indiscipline and chaos. Such behaviour only makes one hang one’s head in shame. The Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha seems to be comfortable with unruly behaviour. The Opposition has a right to voice its grievances but there are protocols to be observed.

Ashok Jayaram,

Bengaluru

The fine print matters

It is only after the dust settles on the India-U.S. trade deal and the fine print is read that India can pat itself on the back for having successfully negotiated with someone like U.S. President Donald Trump (Front page, “U.S. deal will not include sensitive sectors: Goyal”, February 4).

Mr. Trump is someone who drives a hard bargain. Mr. Trump seems to have already decided that India has agreed to halt oil imports from Russia and would instead purchase oil from the U.S. and Venezuela. It is strange to have the Indian side maintain a stony silence (Inside pages, “No word on India stopping oil purchases, says Kremlin”, February 4). Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal may say that sensitive sectors such as agriculture and dairy are outside the deal but there needs to be confirmation of this by the U.S.

C.V. Aravind,

Bengaluru

Leading from the front

Without going into the details of the arguments made by the incumbent Chief Minister of West Bengal, Mamata Banerjee, the first for a sitting Chief Minister in India, in the Supreme Court of India, it is hard to look past the optics of it all. Ms. Banerjee has built her politics and brand TMC around a welfare state that cares for its citizens come what may. With elections round the corner, she did not go to court to win the case on SIR against the Election Commission of India. She went with the singular objective of convincing the electorate of Bengal, who are indeed facing harassment due to various procedural issues, including surname spellings, that she would leave no stone unturned to secure the well-being of Bengalis. Those behind the ill-advised SIR may have just handed Ms. Banerjee a major boost to her election campaign. Elections in India are also about sentiment and Ms. Banerjee may have cleverly used that.

Argha Mallick,

Bengaluru