Defeated by numbers, vindicated by nothing: LS rejects motion to remove Speaker Om Birla

The Lok Sabha on Wednesday defeated a no-confidence motion against Speaker Om Birla by voice vote, only the fourth such motion in independent India's history. The NDA's majority of around 293 MPs made the outcome inevitable, but the opposition's decision not to demand a formal division vote, rushing to the Well instead to demand an apology from Home Minister Amit Shah, framed the episode as symbolic protest rather than a serious parliamentary challenge.

The motion had a troubled procedural history before it reached the floor. The notice was submitted with errors twice, the opposition disrupted proceedings on March 9 when the debate was listed with their own consent, and yet Birla allowed them to correct and resubmit the notice both times, a patience the government cited as evidence of the Speaker's fairness.

The opposition's substantive grievances deserved more engagement than they received. Eight opposition MPs had been suspended after allegedly throwing papers toward the Speaker's chair. Gandhi alleged he had been stopped from speaking "multiple times," including when he raised questions about former Army Chief M.M. Naravane's book, the Adani controversy, and the Epstein list. "Our Prime Minister has been compromised," he told the House. "This House does not represent one party; it represents the whole country." These specific allegations were never directly addressed during the debate.

Instead, Shah chose to contest the opposition's credibility rather than its arguments. He cited Gandhi's attendance, 51 per cent in the 17th Lok Sabha against a House average of 78 per cent, and foreign trips coinciding with key sessions across Germany, Vietnam, and the UK. "The fact is he doesn't want to speak in the Lok Sabha," Shah said flatly. On speaking time, Congress with 52 members received 157 hours in the 17th Lok Sabha against the BJP's 349 hours for 303 members. The numbers are real, but the framing deserves scrutiny, opposition parties structurally need more time per member. That is not generosity; it is basic constitutional logic.

Congress responded sharply on multiple fronts. Jairam Ramesh noted that one of Shah's remarks had been expunged from the record, pointing out it had been expunged previously on December 10, 2025, and drew a parallel to a word used by the Prime Minister in the Rajya Sabha in February 2020 that was similarly struck out. "G2 are masters of abuse and defamation," he posted on X, invoking Congress's term for Shah and Modi, both from Gujarat. K.C. Venugopal recentred the argument: "The issue is the unconstitutional and anti-democratic conduct of the Speaker, not whether the LoP is in the House or not." He alleged the Prime Minister had missed not just this session but also the vote of thanks to the President, the GST Bill vote, and the Triple Talaq Bill vote. "Does that not show how little he cares about parliamentary democracy?" he asked. Priyanka Gandhi noted pointedly that Shah's objectionable remarks had not been stopped by the Chair, and reminded the House that the no-confidence motion was against the Speaker, not the Leader of the Opposition.

On Thursday, Birla returned to the Chair for the first time since February, thanked members who spoke both for and against him, and was unambiguous on the microphone allegation: "I don't have a switch to turn the mic on or off." He reaffirmed that no member, including the Prime Minister, may speak without the Chair's permission, and committed to impartiality going forward.

Both sides argued past each other. Gandhi raised serious allegations that deserved answers. Shah responded with attendance sheets. The opposition disrupted proceedings rather than building a documented case. Parliament, and the citizens watching, carry the cost of that impasse.