Union Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju recently launched a scathing critique of the Congress-led Opposition bloc, INDIA, following their submission of a no-confidence motion against Rajya Sabha Chairman and Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar. Rijiju accused the Opposition of undermining parliamentary decorum and politicising the office of the Chairman. He emphasised that the move was unjustified and disrespectful to the authority of Dhankhar, who, according to Rijiju, has consistently upheld the dignity of the House and worked tirelessly for the welfare of the public, particularly farmers.
Rijiju highlighted the significance of Dhankhar’s background, pointing to his humble beginnings and lifelong dedication to public service. "Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar Ji has always worked for the welfare of farmers and the people. We respect him deeply and appreciate the way he has been guiding the Upper House with fairness and wisdom," Rijiju stated. He also criticised the conduct of the Opposition, accusing them of persistently disregarding parliamentary norms and the authority of the Chair in both Houses.
The no-confidence motion, signed by over 70 MPs from parties including the Congress, Trinamool Congress (TMC), Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), Samajwadi Party (SP), Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), and Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), accuses Dhankhar of “partisan functioning” and bias in managing the proceedings of the Rajya Sabha. Congress leader Jairam Ramesh, in a statement shared on X (formerly Twitter), defended the motion as a necessary step in response to what he described as Dhankhar's “extremely partisan” conduct, including frequent interruptions during speeches by Congress President and Leader of the Opposition Mallikarjun Kharge.
Among the specific grievances raised by the Opposition are allegations that Dhankhar turned off microphones during critical addresses, made personal remarks against certain members, and favoured ruling party MPs during contentious debates. These actions, they argued, violated parliamentary conventions and undermined the spirit of democratic debate. The INDIA bloc viewed the motion as a formal expression of their collective dissatisfaction with the Chairman’s conduct and a bid to uphold the principles of impartiality in parliamentary proceedings.
The motion also comes amid heightened tensions in Parliament over various contentious issues. BJP MPs, led by party president JP Nadda, have alleged links between Congress leaders Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi and billionaire George Soros, whose foundation has reportedly funded a media organization critical of the government. These accusations have fuelled heated exchanges, with BJP members arguing that such links tarnish India’s image and pose national security concerns. Opposition parties, however, have dismissed the claims as baseless and accused the ruling party of using such allegations to divert attention from pressing issues.
These issues include widespread protests by farmers demanding an increase in the Minimum Support Price (MSP) and communal violence in Uttar Pradesh’s Sambhal district, topics the Opposition has repeatedly sought to bring to the forefront. They argue that the BJP’s focus on alleged links to Soros is a calculated attempt to avoid addressing these urgent matters.
Rijiju firmly defended Dhankhar’s leadership, describing him as a symbol of integrity and fairness. He dismissed the no-confidence motion as a politically motivated stunt by the Opposition to disrupt parliamentary functioning. “The NDA holds a clear majority in the Upper House, and this motion is bound to fail. It’s nothing but an attempt to deflect attention from the Opposition’s lack of a constructive agenda,” Rijiju asserted.
The submission of a no-confidence motion against a Rajya Sabha Chairman is unprecedented, underscoring the widening chasm between the government and the Opposition. The move highlights the increasing polarisation within Parliament, where ideological divides have often spilled over into disruptions and heated exchanges. As the motion sets the stage for intense debates, it brings to light the critical challenges of preserving parliamentary decorum and ensuring meaningful discussions on issues that affect the nation.
