On Wednesday, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha admitted a no confidence motion against the Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Government. This will be the 27th time a no confidence motion will be introduced and debated in the Lok Sabha. Though there is no explicit mention of a motion of no confidence in the Constitution of India, it comes under the Rule 198 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha. The rule says that the motion would be accepted only if 50 Members support it. Ideally, the vote of no confidence serves as a crucial mechanism of checks and balances in between the government tenure to control the government excess and to ensure the Prime Minister and his ministers enjoy the confidence of the members of the house. The motion becomes important especially when there is a coalition government in the house.
The first ever no confidence motion was brought against PM Jawaharlal Nehru in August 1963 after the India-China war. The debate went on for four days. Eventually, Nehru defeated the motion brought by Acharya Kriplani by 347 votes to 67 votes meaning Kriplani didn’t really have the numbers in his favour but he still decided to go ahead and bring in the motion knowing very well that it will be defeated. And since then, the motion has only on three out of the 26 times succeeded in the fall of the government VP Singh in 1990, HD Dewe Gowda in 1997 and Atal Bihar Vajpayee in 1999 which he had lost by a single vote after J Jayalalitha withdrew support (except PM Moraraji Desai in 1979, who resigned without any voting). Regardless all the four times, it was the government of coalitions which fell.
The trend seems to suggest the motion has been exploited by the Indian National Congress when in opposition, and introduced a session or two before the Lok Sabha elections
So eventually, the motion serves more as a strategic political tool, often with little regard for genuine concerns about the government’s performance or the numbers of support. It has become tool in the hands of the opposition parties for political manoeuvring than a desire to address critical national issues and bring about a change in the government. The trend seems to suggest the motion has been exploited by the Indian National Congress when in opposition and introduced a session or two before the Lok Sabha elections.
Setting the Agenda before Lok Sabha
The Opposition uses the motion to set the agenda for the next elections. In the absence of Presidential debates likes in the US, the vote of no confidence serves as an opportunity for the opposition to highlight the failures of the government and set the agenda before the upcoming lok sabha elections. The trouble in Manipur has given the Congress an issue which it will try and make an agenda for the upcoming Lok Sabha elections. The last two motions were introduced in 2018 and 2003 respectively – exactly less than a year to go for the next general elections. Both times, the BJP was in power and Congress in the opposition. Though it can be said the Congress succeeded in setting the agenda in 2003, it was a different ballgame in 2018 when PM Narendra Modi used the opportunity to set the agenda for the next elections himself and ripped apart the opposition famously predicted a similar move five years down the line.
Diversionary Tactics
It is less than nine months to go for the next general elections, and it seems with an exception of Manipur as an issue, there is hardly any chink the opposition can find in the BJP’s armour. The BJP was trying to start its public campaign by restarting the UCC debate, which exposed the cracks in the opposition as Shiv Sena and AAP appeared jittery and pledged their support to UCC. The Congress thus took this opportunity to divert attention of the voters and allies, and also to avoid an embarrassing scenario where the party is forced to take a solitary stand on the subject, like in the case of article 370, where several Congress MPs and allies supported the government.
The Congress knows this momentum would be carried further in winter as two major states – Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh—will go to vote. This will be followed by the opening of the Ram Temple in January and an array of announcements and project launches in the coming months. Hence the Congress doesn’t want the BJP to gain momentum and use this disruptive strategy as a diversion from the fact that it has failed as an opposition to catch the imagination of the voters.
Move to Check Opposition Unity
The Congress clearly knows that it cannot win the vote of no confidence as the BJP on its own has over 300 members in the houses. It knows the motion is bound to be defeated, so regardless of Manipur it would have still introduced the motion a year before Lok Sabha like it had in 2003 and 2018 because the motion will also serve as an opportunity to check if its own house is in order especially after its ambitious I.N.D.I.A. project which saw cracks even before its official announcement with the chunk of NCP walking out, joining the BJP led NDA and mocking the opposition alliance.
Though how much this motion will help the Congress is yet to be seen but the politicisation of the motion of no confidence in the Parliament is a concerning. The political use of the no-confidence motion not only disrupts parliamentary proceedings and undermines the democratic process with the opposition prioritising political gains over the interests of the nation by grandstanding and stalling of Parliament, disallowing discussions and deliberations on important matters but also inflicts financial burden on the hardworking taxpayers. To preserve the essence of democratic governance, it is crucial for all political stakeholders to use this provision judiciously and responsibly, focusing on constructive debates and discussions that benefit the country as a whole.
