Home arrow Archives arrow Political Diary arrow Political Diary 2014 arrow No Leader Of Opposition: GOVT BITEN MORE THAN IT CAN CHEW?, By Poonam I Kaushish, 23 Aug, 2014
 
Home
News and Features
INFA Digest
Parliament Spotlight
Dossiers
Publications
Journalism Awards
Archives
RSS
 
 
 
 
 
 
No Leader Of Opposition: GOVT BITEN MORE THAN IT CAN CHEW?, By Poonam I Kaushish, 23 Aug, 2014 Print E-mail

No. 175 Vol. XXXIII                                      Not To Be Published Before 26 August 2014

 

Political Diary

No Leader Of Opposition

GOVT BITEN MORE THAN IT CAN CHEW? 

By Poonam I Kaushish

 

Has the nascent Modi Sarkar bitten of more than it can chew? Perhaps, unwittingly so, when the Government landed itself in a soup with the Supreme Court, over the delay in appointment of the Lokpal.  When asked for an explanation, the Government stated it was due to the absence of a Leader of Opposition (LoP) in the Lok Sabha, mandatory in the selection of head of statutory bodies.  Raising a moot point: Has the Government spread itself thin on ego?

 

Asserted Chief Justice RM Lodha, “Now we are confronted with a situation where there is no LOP. How does the Government propose to have effective consultations with a “voice” distinct from those in power when it comes to appointment of an anti-corruption ombudsman?”

 

Adding, “Parliament never visualised such a situation, the Leader of Opposition is very important and necessary for the purposes of working of the Constitution…The composition of the decision-making process and for effective consideration in the appointment of the Chief Vigilance Commission, Lokpal, National Human Rights Commission and the Central Information Commission etc. 

 

Worse, the Court made plain it might be left with no option but to intervene, thereby indirectly questioning the Lok Sabha Speaker Sumitra Mahajan’s decision to avoid naming an LOP in the Lok Sabha. It is another matter that this issue has further raised temperatures ahead of another likely confrontation next week over petitions challenging the National Judicial Appointments Bill passed by Parliament recently and the question of judicial freedom.

 

The new legislation, underpinned by the Executive's push to gain greater influence over the judiciary, seeks to set up a National Judicial Appointments Commission which will take over the judges’ selection and appointment process, till date the sole prerogative of the judiciary since 1993. Ironically, the LoP needs to be consulted on NJAC membership as well.

 

According to Parliamentary rules dating to the 1950s also known as the first Speaker ‘Mavlankar rules’, a Party needs to have a minimum of at least 10 per cent of Lok Sabha seats for its leader to claim the status of the Leader of Opposition. Though, the Congress has the largest contingent 44 MPs among Opposition Parties, it falls short of the required 55 in the 543-member House.  Resulting in no LoP.

 

Predictably a war of words has broken out between arch rivals Congress and BJP. The Grand Dame feels vindicated by the Supreme Court observation and cites the Salary and Allowances of the Leader of Opposition under Parliament Act, 1977 to reiterate it claim that the single largest party should be given the LoP post as no other rules could override a statute.

 

Counters the Saffron Sangh, “It’s a case of the pot calling the kettle black, there is no precedence. Has the Congress forgotten that during its Prime Ministers Jawaharlal Nehru, Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi's tenure there was no Leader of Opposition? 

 

Adding for good measure, seven times, there has not been a LoP, this is the eighth time that such a thing has happened. Recall, a similar situation arose in the 7th and 8th Lok Sabhas', from August 1979 to December 1989, 10 years when the House was devoid of a LoP.

 

Undeniably, the word democracy entails divergence of opinions, give-and-take between its proponents and detractors to function smoothly. Opposition is an essential part of democratic governance. For any Government to rule successfully it needs to consult the Opposition and build a consensus. What is expected from an Opposition is effective criticism.

 

By extension, it is also necessary to have a Leader of the Opposition as he is the collective voice of dissent. His duty is the major check on corruption and defective administration. It is his right to be heard by which individual injustices could be prevented.

 

Indeed the LoP job is one of responsibility. He, among other things, watches for encroachments on the rights of minorities, demands debates when the Government is trying to slide away without Parliamentary criticism. He must be in his place even more constantly than the Prime Minister and familiar with tricks of skilled Parliamentarian.

 

Importantly, the LoP real role lies in his being a sounding board for the Prime Minister in matters relating to Parliamentary business. The Prime Minister meets the convenience of the Leader of Opposition and vice versa. Enjoying the rank of Cabinet Minister with attending perks and salaries he is given an office in Parliament House and accorded protocol precedence aka “Prime Minister-in-waiting”.

 

It is excellent training for future occupants of the Treasury Bench and essential for the effective operation of democratic Government. In performing his duties and obligations, the Leader of the Opposition has to take into account not only what he is today but what he hopes to be tomorrow.

 

Especially against the backdrop of our first-past-the-post democratic credentials wherein the Party with the highest number of MPs forms the Government notwithstanding that it got only 30 to 45 per cent of the votes polled. In fact, the combined Opposition votes’ percentage is higher.

 

The time has come for our democracy to follow in Britain’s footsteps given that we follow its Westminster Parliamentary system whereby the Leader of the Party with the highest number of MPs’ after the ruling Party is recognized as the LoP. This should be the norm in India too. The rules should be changed to make it democratic.

 

In sum, if there is a will there is a way. The Government should forsake its ego, repair its fault lines and find a way out. It needs to recognize that as it goes about its business it should be prepared for criticism not by secret police and concentration camps but by rational argument.

 

The process of Parliamentary Government would break down if there was absence of mutual forbearance. Moreover, Parliamentary democracy would suffer and many key appointments could be pushed through in an authoritarian manner by a Government backed by an absolute majority.

 

In the words of renowned British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan: “There is, I suppose, no position more difficult and in some ways more unrewarding than that of a Leader of an Opposition. Equally, he has a very special responsibility to Parliament and to the nation.

 

At moments of danger, moments specialty of foreign danger, and particularly also in matters affecting the security and safety of the realms. While he remains a critic he must in a sense be, a partner and even a. buttress of the Government to which he is opposed. This dual responsibility he must discharge with fidelity”. Madam Speaker, please heed. ----- INFA

 

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)

New Delhi

23 August 2014 

< Previous   Next >
 
   
     
 
 
  Mambo powered by Best-IT