First session of the 18th Lok Sabha: A Critical Analysis | P. S. Jayaramu

July 9 2024

The first session of the 18th Lok Sabha ended a few days ago. Led by the Prime Minister, the Treasury benches were combative from the very beginning, indicating that they had learnt nothing from the drubbing they received by the wise and mature electorate. The Opposition, which after ten long years has an impressive strength in the Lok Sabha, was determined to take on the Government aggressively. I intend making a critical analysis of how the Government and the Opposition conducted themselves during the first session.

A few preliminary, yet important, observations which are in order, at the outset. The BJP as a Party and the Modi-Government should have adopted a conciliatory approach from the beginning towards the Opposition starting with the choice of the Pro-tem Speaker. Harping on a purely technical ground, it rejected the demand of the Opposition to appoint the eight-term Congress member of Parliament Mr. K. Suresh, arguing that there was break in his career as an MP and appointed the BJP member Mr. Brathruhari Mahtab with seven consecutive terms as the Pro-tem Speaker to administer the oath of office to the new members of the Lok Sabha.

On the issue of the Speaker of the House also, the Modi-led Government did not want to accede to the Opposition’s demand for simultaneously deciding on the Deputy Speaker issue, earmarking it to the Opposition. The Government wanted to delink the two issues stating that the Speakership question be decided first. Not just that. Modi was bent on proposing the name of Om Birla who did his bidding during the 17th Lok Sabha. PM Modi wanted a continuity, not just of the Speaker, but the manner in which he would conduct the House to the advantage of the Treasury benches. The numerical advantage that the NDA Coalition had in its favour was used to have its way. The Opposition had no choice but to put up Mr. Suresh, as its candidate, but finally did not press for a vote and allowed the election of Mr.Om Birla in a unanimous manner.

If one goes by newspaper reports, the Government may not like to have an election to the post of Deputy Speaker in the near future. And, if the Opposition presses for it, the Government may give the position to its ally, the TDP. The Opposition INDIA bloc is likely to be very firm in demanding the post for itself and has reportedly decided to propose the name of the Samajwadi Party MP from Faizabad Mr. Awadesh Prasad. Ideally, the Government should accede to the Opposition’s proposal as a good Parliamentary gesture. But, going by the manner in which PM Modi has run the House on his terms and to his advantage, he may not yield to the Opposition’s proposal.

The first session analysed :

Instead of setting the tone for a congenial ambience for the first session of the 18th Lok Sabha, the Prime Minister deliberately tried to vitiate the atmosphere by referring to the Emergency imposed by Mrs. Indira Gandhi 49 years ago, describing it as a dark chapter in India’s democracy. Clearly, it was something unnecessary if one goes by his call for a constructive Opposition and consensus in decision-making pleaded by the PM in his address to the media outside the Parliament before the commencement of the session. Modi’s objective was clearly to embarrass the Opposition Congress, whose leaders, Rahul Gandhi in particular, flagged the Constitution during the elections and at the oath-taking ceremony. The President too made a reference to the Emergency in her address to the joint session of the two Houses of the Parliament. Well, she had no choice but to read out the speech prepared by the Government. She also referred to Modi Government’s previous ‘achievements’ and his pet theme of ‘Viksit Bharat’ by 2047, which remains a pipe dream.

That Narendra Modi laid down the norms for the others to follow was evident in the Speaker also making a reference to the Emergency in his speech. Perhaps, his speech too was drafted by the PMO! Following the Speaker, the senior ministers too referred to the Emergency in a competitive manner to appease the Prime Minister. None of them thought it fit to talk about the pressing issues craving for attention. The Education Minister who initially denied any paper leaks in the NEET examination, later on admitted to it when evidences started coming out glaringly in the public. He routinely promised to punish the guilty. The Supreme Court which is hearing petitions relating to the NEET UG examinations has strongly objected to the manner in which the question papers were leaked, hinting at string punishment to the guilty.

The debate on the President’s address to the joint-session witnessed a no-holds barred attack between the Treasury benches and the Oposition INDIA bloc. Leading the debate, the newly appointed Leader of Opposition( LoP) Rahul Gandhi came down heavily on the Government accusing it of systematically assaulting the Idea of India, and its liberal and pluralist ethos. He referred to the practice of non-violence in India’s religious tradition by displaying the picture of Lord Shiva in the House, which was objected to by the Speaker. His references to the BJP as not being the true Hindus, were expunged by the Speaker later. Rahul Gandhi’s strong references to the scrapping of the Agniveer scheme and non-payment of compensation to the Agniveer martyrs were contested by the Defence Minister. Perhaps, Mr. Gandhi should have done multiple fact-checks on the issue. He strongly deplored the NEET examination scam, the year-old civil war-like situation in Manipur and the utter unwillingness of the Prime Minister to visit Manipur even once. Similar sentiments were expressed by the Congress MP from Manipur Prof. Bimol Akoijam.

Clearly, Rahul Gandhi wanted to convey a strong message to the Prime Minister that he would keep on exposing the Government on the floor of the House and press for its accountability. Other INDIA bloc leaders like Mohua Moitra and Akhilesh Yadav also made forceful speeches against the Government. It is a sad commentary on the shape of things to come as the Treasury benches kept on disrupting the opposition leaders during the entire duration of their speeches.

In his motion of thanks to the President’s address, Prime Minister Modi spoke for over two hours. Most parts of his speech were a tirade against the Congress Party and Rahul Gandhi, though of course, he did not name him. He also went about, needlessly, talking about the defeat of the Congress Party in several States in the Lok Sabha elections, the percentage of votes it got, calling the Party a parasite, etc. He made no reference to the Manipur issue in the Lok Sabha (he spoke of the FIRs being lodged against the perpetrators of violence in the Rajya Sabha). As for the NEET scam, the Prime Minister made a one-sentence statement that the guilty will be punished. The Opposition disrupted the House during the entire duration of the PM’s speech, while in the Rajya Sabha they heard the PM, but finally walked out in protest.

The major takeaways :

Some of the major takeaways are as follows: 1. Neither the Treasury benches nor the Opposition INDIA bloc were prepared for a harmonious qualitative debate in the Parliament. Both were bent on denigrating the other. The atmospherics was reminiscent of the campaign speeches during the Lok Sabha elections.

2. Since it is the responsibility of the Government to create a congenial atmosphere for the running of the Parliament, it failed, perhaps deliberately, in doing so. Indeed unfortunate. The BJP, as a Party, and the Prime Minister in particular, did not show that their failure to obtain a majority on their own, (leave alone reaching the ‘chaar say paar’ mark) made them to be humble at any point of time during the entire session.

3. By remaining mostly silent during the deliberations of the House, the major NDA partners conveyed the impression that they would play a second fiddle to the Prime Minister in return for the economic packages they hope to get.

4. Both the Speaker of the Lok Sabha Mr. Om Birla and the Deputy Chairman of the Rajya Sabha Mr. Jagdeep Dhankar behaved in a partisan way. It is time they function as the true custodians of the two Houses.

4. In the days to come, Mr. Rahul Gandhi as the Leader of the Opposition, would do well to provide concrete policy prescriptions instead of merely opposing the Government.

(Author: Dr. P. S. Jayaramu is former Professor of Political Science and Dean, Bangalore University and former Senior Fellow, ICSSR, New Delhi)