The 18th Lok Sabha stands out in numerous aspects. For the first time in a decade, we have a strong opposition with an official leader of opposition (LOP). The absence of a single-party majority marks a return to the coalition era. These changes are crucial, considering how the parliament had been reduced to a rubber stamp in recent years with laws being passed without adequate debate or discussion. The opposition was rendered virtually non-existent and their demands to discuss critical national issues, like unemployment, border security, or internal security, were often dismissed as mere obstruction to the “smooth functioning” of parliament. In an article for the 61st souvenir session of the Indian National Congress in 1956, G.V. Mavlankar, the first speaker of Lok Sabha had said, “A successful parliamentary democracy depends on a basis of mutual respect, a spirit of tolerance and a desire to understand the differing points of views”.
In this context, a recent article by Harivansh Narayan Singh, deputy chairperson of the Rajya Sabha, caught our attention. Titled Are We Making a Mockery of the Parliament?, Singh argued that the opposition adopted an aggressive stance, beginning with the LOP’s speech and followed by disruptive actions. The article primarily blamed the opposition for their behaviour, suggesting that they unjustly refused to listen to the prime minister. However, we believe this perspective is partisan and overlooks parliamentary precedents and the proceedings of the last two Lok Sabha terms.
Singh’s article did not address the prime minister’s derogatory name-calling, through terms like ‘balak buddhi’ and parasite, directed at the LOP and the opposition. While obstructing the prime minister’s speech is condemnable, so is the heckling of the LOP by treasury bench members in the prime minister’s presence. Considering that the LOP’s speech marked the first instance of an opposition MP speaking in this session, the prime minister should have set a respectful tone and stopped his party members from heckling. The presence of an official LOP in the Lok Sabha after 10 years warranted a fair hearing of his speech and the issues he raised. Additionally, large parts of the speech that dealt with issues such as paper leaks, unemployment, the Agniveer scheme, rising inequality, unfair treatment of minorities, and were factual and clear criticism of the government, were expunged by the Lok Sabha Speaker.
We strongly agree with the point put forward by Singh that expression of dissent is central to the functioning of the parliament; however, whether that space has been provided to the opposition in the last two terms also warrants scrutiny. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which has been in power since 2014, has established a pattern of bulldozing important legislations through the Parliament, with minimal or no discussion, and running away from key debates whether it is unemployment, violence in Manipur or paper leaks. The following statistics demonstrate the decline in the functioning of India’s Parliament: the number of days Parliament sat for decreased from 331 in the 16th Lok Sabha (2014-19) to a record low of 274 in the 17th (2019-24). In Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s second term, half of the bills were passed with less than two hours of discussion, and only 16% were referred to standing committees. An unprecedented 146 MPs were also suspended during the 17th Lok Sabha’s Winter Session in 2023, and nearly 290 questions from these MPs were deleted.
Furthermore, the previous Lok Sabha deviated from the constitutional mandate and established norms regarding the election of a deputy speaker. Article 93 of the Constitution requires the Lok Sabha to choose both a speaker and deputy speaker as soon as a new session is convened. However, in both these terms, the House failed to elect a deputy speaker. This breaks with the longstanding tradition of electing an opposition member to this crucial post. The government has not shown signs of receptiveness, as the ruling party continues to deny the request of the opposition to make its pick for the post of deputy speaker.
Making parliament deliberative again
The solution lies in adopting healthy parliamentary practices. These include establishing a fixed annual calendar, empowering a minimum number of members to convene the parliament, allocating more time for Private Member’s business (legislative work introduced by MPs who are not part of the government), setting aside a specific number of days for the opposition to decide the business, instituting a prime minister’s ‘question day’ where the Prime Minister must respond directly to a set number of questions, and most importantly, appointing neutral presiding officers who do not act as spokespersons for the ruling party. These practices are already followed in countries such as the UK, US and Germany. Few of them were also substantially mentioned in the Congress’s manifesto, the largest opposition party in the Lok Sabha.
The notion that the opposition should not disrupt proceedings, even when the ruling party refuses to discuss key issues, should be seen as a red herring. As many parliamentarians have previously noted, the smooth functioning of the Lok Sabha depends significantly on the ruling majority and, more importantly, on the space they provide the opposition to raise critical issues. Parliament, even within its current framework, has several established practices such as the question hour, matters of urgent public importance, short duration discussions, half-hour discussions, and special mentions. These mechanisms can be effectively utilised by MPs, provided the speaker permits it, to address issues important to the people.
The presiding officer can thus play a pivotal role in implementing these reforms by ensuring that all important voices within Parliament are heard. It is crucial for our parliamentarians to engage in bipartisan solutions and provide space for diverse voices across India. Therefore, the parliament must engage in structural practices that ensure greater deliberation while adhering to and leveraging existing parliamentary norms and conventions to make our parliament truly deliberative once again.
Srijan Rai and Alfahad Sorathia are policy researchers and former LAMP fellows.