Why the no-confidence motion was null and void even before being introduced

The Opposition can claim to dislodge a government only if it has the strength to form a replacement government.

 |  3-minute read |   23-07-2018
  • ---
    Total Shares

The history of no-confidence motion is almost six decades old. Acharya Kripalani moved the first ever no-confidence motion on the floor of Lok Sabha in August 1963 after the disastrous India-China war.

The concept was first used outside India in West Germany but today too it is used in countries such as Spain, Hungary, Israel, Poland, Belgium, among others.

The peculiar and unique feature of the motion of confidence allows a Parliament to withdraw confidence from the head of any government only if there is positive majority for the prospective successor. The principle intends to ensure that a replacement head of government has enough parliamentary support to govern in case a government falls.

As far the no-confidence motion introduced at the initiation of Telugu Desam Party is concerned, it was null and void right from the word go because the Opposition parties never had the numbers to form a replacement government.

This brings us to the conclusion that if the very premise of the motion was flawed then the issues raised under it effectively meant nothing.

parliament690_072318012148.jpg

It is worthless to even get into the numbers because it was known to everyone that the Opposition was in no position to dislodge the BJP-led Narendra Modi government.

The only reason the motion was brought in is the 2019 Lok Sabha election. The Opposition parties were using the motion to show that they indeed stand united.

Overall growth in all sectors, farmer friendly schemes, timely withdrawal of the BJP from its alliance with the PDP in Jammu and Kashmir, GDP growth, and acceptance of the BJP by Muslims and Christians forced the Congress to create an artificial need to show that the government has lost the confidence of the House.

The Opposition, however, got a befitting reply in Parliament from Modi and his party colleagues.

So what did the motion end up achieving?

a) The Opposition ended up exposing itself in its bid to expose the Modi government. Even Chanakya had said, "Agyapi shobhate tawat yawat kinchit naa bhaste (ignorance can be hidden only till the ignorant person doesn't speak)."

b) The Congress and other Opposition parties might have forgotten that the grand old party's president, Rahul Gandhi, is not mature enough to face the strong, energetic and efficient team of Modi.

c) He scored an own goal by admitting that he was educated in Hinduism and Lord Shiva by the RSS and BJP.

d) His hug and wink are not even topics worth discussing as they go on to once again establish his casual and insincere approach to politics which has often caused deep embarrassment for the Congress. His wink only proved that not only was he trying to hoodwink Parliament, but also all Indian voters.

The drama is a blot on the history of parliamentary proceedings and will be remembered as a big joke by the generations to come.

Also read: India’s lynching mobocracy: Are we a nation prone to violence?

Writer

Sanjeev Uniyal Sanjeev Uniyal

Author is a Supreme Court advocate.

Like DailyO Facebook page to know what's trending.