Latest revision as of 14:32, 14 June 2023

[edit] Performance: 1952-2007

From the archives of The Times of India 2007, 2009

Parliamentary system: Good, bad & ugly

Parliament has been an effective check on the executive. But absenteeism and chaotic scenes have hurt its prestige

Rajeev Deshpande

The Times of India May 5, 2007

How Parliament functions depends to a considerable extent on the nature of the mandate of a particular Lok Sabha. This is an obvious, if unavoidable, aspect of Parliament keeping in mind the coalition verdicts that have been the order of the day since 1996 and which cannot be ruled out in the future as well.

In 2004, the NDA was comprehensively ousted from power but proved to be a poor loser, somehow convinced that it had been cheated out of a rightful victory. The numbers on the side of the victors were indisputable butCongress looked just like the first among equals as it returned 145 seats to BJP’s 138.Congress’s alliances clicked while NDA failed.

The 14th Lok Sabha was never peaceful. In its first half, NDA repeatedly played disrupter, attacking UPA and its leaders like PM Manmohan Singh and Sonia Gandhi as well as UPA partners like Lalu Prasad. The introduction of the ministry was marred by slogan-shouting over “tainted” ministers. UPA was equally aggressive, hitting back at BJP for losing the polls.

If the UPA-NDA exchange was a bit like the “we won the game, you won the shame” cries that mark children’s games, it was not surprising. The unsettled equations meant BJP refused to recognize the legitimacy of theCongress-led government. Debate was the casualty. It didn’t help matters that Somnath Chatterjee, as Speaker himself, was spoiling for a fight with members.

The presiding officer matters a lot in such circumstances. P A Sangma’s “arrey baba baith jao” during the 1996-98 United Front government perhaps proved much more effective. With a mix of humour and stern mien, Sangma managed a highly fractious House where rivalries were as sharp as they were unsettled.

This time around, despite some disruptions, the 15th Lok Sabha has been more business-like, the reason possibly lying in the unambiguousCongress victory with 206 seats. BJP, too, has been reconciled to sitting it out on the Opposition benches. Though issues of the day can very well plunge the House into disorder, there has been more debate than in the past even though government business so far has been limited.

While taking a longer look at whether Parliament has proved an effective institution in reflecting people’s aspirations and ensuring accountability of the executive, the complexion of successive Lok Sabhas provides a clue or two. Though Parliament has become much more representative than it was in its upper caste-dominated form in 1952, its culture still appears to be work in progress. Bipartisan respect for norms is yet to fall in place that can ensure a certain sense of continuity. This may also be because of a fractured polity that has seen over 35 parties represented in Parliament. This has made Parliament more diverse, but can at times add to the chaos, particularly when regional issues rise to the fore as they did over Telangana. State rivalries can also get enhanced play as national parties have no option but to cater to such demands.

All this does not mean that Parliament is not effective in acting as check on the executive and a barometer of popular opinion. Parliament was at its best debating the India-US nuclear deal, with discussions adding to public knowledge about the pact and also becoming a useful bargaining chip in the UPA government’s negotiations with the US.

The standing committee system has also delivered good results with in-camera non-partisan discussions often yielding a consensus that party politics will not allow. Standing committees have done good work, delivering well-argued reports on science, health, defence, education, agriculture and finance. They have given an opportunity for the more serious MPs, even though there are increasing number of “conflict of interest” cases involving members who choose a panel related to their business.

There are troubling discipline issues like attendance where the two Houses often wear a depleted look in afternoons. Attention is centred on Zero Hour proceedings and there have been shocking instances of MPs skipping questions in Question Hour. Collapse of Question Hour during last year’s winter session brought out the degree of cynicism that has crept into the parliamentary system.

Here, there is a need to make debates and discussions more inclusive so that more MPs can participate. The expose of MPs in the previous Lok Sabha — accepting money for putting up questions — confirmed the worst about parliamentarians. Asking questions for a consideration or for a particular business interest is no longer an occasional instance. While MPs are protected by rights to privilege, there is a case for more accountability in their dealings as parliamentarians.

[edit] 2014- 2023, May: Six deviations

Derek O’Brien, May 27, 2023: The Indian Express

Parliament is not just a new building; it is an establishment with old traditions, values, precedents and rules — it is the foundation of Indian democracy. Prime Minister Narendra Modi doesn’t get that. If he did, why would he have brazenly mocked Parliament for the last nine years. Let me present six instances of dubious firsts that have only happened between 2014 and 2023 inside the most important, historic building of India’s parliamentary democracy.

MPs denied their right to vote by “division”: When a Bill is being passed in the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha, every member has the right to ask for a vote by “division”. Even if one MP (yes, just one) stands up in her seat and says “division”, the presiding officer is duty-bound to ask for voting on the issue. This needs to be recorded electronically or on paper slips, making it distinctly different from a voice vote in which MPs express their votes (verbally) saying either Aye or No.

During the passing of the three farm laws in 2020, a voice vote was conducted in the Rajya Sabha even though several members exercised their right and called for a “division” — this was not granted. The presiding officer (the then Vice President Venkaiah Naidu was not on the Chair) bypassed every rule and overturned every precedent. This was not an isolated incident. Members are frequently denied a vote by “division”. On July 27, 2021, CPM’s Elamaram Kareem demanded a vote by “division” on the Marine Aids to Navigation Bill. On July 28, 2021, DMK’s Tiruchi Siva asked for “division” on the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Amendment Bill. On August 3, 2021, many members demanded a vote by “division” on the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Bill. The Bills got bulldozed through, the MPs were denied their right. Unprecedented.

Renomination of a Nominated MP for the same term: A gentleman was appointed as a nominated member to the Rajya Sabha in 2016 (12 members can be nominated by the President of India). Five years into his six-year term, he was declared a BJP candidate for the 2021 West Bengal elections. He resigned his nominated Rajya Sabha seat. A few weeks after losing the Assembly election, fighting on a BJP ticket, the same gentleman was re-nominated by the President back to the Rajya Sabha for the same seat that he had vacated less than three months ago. This was the first time a person had been nominated twice for the same term, while fighting an election in between. Unprecedented.

Treasury Benches shout slogans and disrupt: After the Budget Session reconvenes for its second leg, the Lok Sabha discusses the Demand For Grants for five ministries. The budgets for these are discussed in detail, while the remaining ministries are clubbed (guillotined) and voted on together. This year, this was passed for all ministries with no discussion. This also happened in 2004-05 and 2013-14, but there was a huge difference. A no-confidence motion was passed against the government in 2004-05. In 2013-14, the decision to guillotine the whole budget was taken by the Business Advisory Committee of the Lok Sabha, in view of impending state elections.

However, the reason for the guillotine this year is inexplicable. It was not the Opposition benches, but the Treasury benches who were shouting slogans in the Rajya Sabha, leading to the Budget session being a washout. Unprecedented.

No Deputy Speaker in Lok Sabha: B R Ambedkar, while opposing a proposal to have the Speaker’s resignation submitted to the President, stressed the importance of the Deputy Speaker’s role in maintaining the Speaker’s independence from the executive branch. Article 93 of the Constitution states that the Lok Sabha must select a Speaker and Deputy Speaker promptly after a government takes charge. Four years and still no Deputy Speaker. Unprecedented.

Passing non-money matters in Finance Bills: Each year during the Budget Session, the Finance Bill is presented and passed. It is categorised as a Money Bill and is only voted on by the Lok Sabha and is not sent to any committee for scrutiny. The Rajya Sabha does not vote on the Bill and cannot move any amendments to it.

This Union government has started the unholy practice of sneaking non-money related matters into the Finance Bill. This devious tactic allows such legislation to avoid parliamentary scrutiny. For instance, the Finance Bill of 2016 included provisions for amending the Reserve Bank of India Act of 1934. The 2017 Finance Bill included provisions related to structural changes to existing tribunals and amendments to various acts to pave the way for the Electoral Bond Scheme. And around half of the provisions in the 2018 Finance Bill were unrelated to taxation. Unprecedented.

No Railway Budget: In 2017, another precedent was set aside by the BJP. For the first time, the Railway Budget was subsumed into the Union Budget. This had never happened before. The (separate) Railway Budget on the floor of Parliament has now been consigned to the dustbin. But then, are we surprised? With the inauguration of the new Parliament building, Team Modi is even converting Central Hall, the tabernacle of Parliament, into a museum.