The Communist Party of India Thursday opposed any ordinance to re-define 'offices of profit' while the Communist Party of India-Marxist was not forthcoming on the issue saying only Parliament was empowered to legislate on the matter.

• Cabinet meets, but no word on ordinance

The stand of the Left parties assumes significance in the context of reports that government was planning to bring an ordinance to re-define the 'office of profit', which the opposition allege was aimed at saving Sonia Gandhi [Images] from "a certain disqualification" as member of Parliament.

CPI leader D Raja, who met CPI-M general secretary Prakash Karat in New Delhi, later told reporters that "we are not for the ordinance route. Parliament is empowered to decide and only it should decide".

The CPI-M politburo issued a statement saying, "Under the Constitution, Parliament is empowered to decide on the definition of 'office of profit' and to exempt any office from disqualifying its holder under the 'office of profit' clause."

To repeated questions, CPI-M politburo member Sitaram Yechury refused to say whether the party was opposed to the ordinance and whether the Budget Session should be re-convened for enacting a legislation.

"Parliament has to urgently and immediately take up the issue. It is up to the government to see how they do it. Parliament will have to enact the law. Eventually, even it (ordinance) will have to come to Parliament," he told reporters.

He said there was an urgent need to redefine the 'office of profit' act as members of all major political parties would be affected by it. "The list cuts across all the parties, at least all the major political parties," he said.

"This is not about one party or another. This is something that concerns the future of Parliament and democracy," he added.

Yechury said the "flaws in the law have to be rectified urgently" and the party was ready for consultations with the government on this issue.

"Government can consult political parties before taking a decision. We are prepared for consultations," he added.

Asked why the party was favouring redefinition of the act now while it had kept mum during the Jaya Bachchan episode, Yechury said he had raised the issue in Parliament at least two weeks back and had demanded that loopholes in the act be plugged.

The politburo statement said the party was "of the view that Parliament should immediately undertake legislation in order to put certain offices held by members outside the purview of the 'office of profit' until the Parliament comprehensively defines what is an 'office of profit'".

"It is necessary for members of Parliament to discharge various responsibilities as part of public service. It will not be proper to bring all such positions under the 'office of profit' definition," it added.

Describing as unfortunate the disqualification of Jaya Bachchan, the party's apex body said, "It is imperative that Parliament immediately take up this issue and adopt necessary legislation so that disqualification under the 'office of profit' of Article 102 of the Constitution is not applied sweepingly and indiscriminately."

Yechury said the present law was "incomplete" and needed to be modified.