No-Confidence Motion Against Rajya Sabha Chairperson

In December 2024, the Opposition initiated a motion of no-confidence against Jagdeep Dhankhar, the Rajya Sabha chairperson. This marked a historic first in India’s parliamentary proceedings. Previous attempts to consider such a motion were made but not pursued. The current situation raises questions about the constitutional processes involved in the removal of the Vice President, who also serves as the chairperson of the Rajya Sabha.

Constitutional Framework

The process for impeaching the chairperson of the Rajya Sabha is outlined in the Constitution of India. According to Article 64, the Vice President is the ex officio chairperson of the Rajya Sabha. Article 67 provides the removal process. The Vice President serves a five-year term unless they resign or are impeached.

Impeachment Process

To remove the Vice President, a resolution must be passed by a majority of all members of the Rajya Sabha. This resolution must then be agreed upon by the Lok Sabha. Importantly, a minimum of 14 days’ notice must be given before moving such a resolution. After this notice period, the Rajya Sabha discusses the resolution.

Current Political Context

As of December 2024, the Winter Session of Parliament is set to conclude on December 20. This timeline creates uncertainty about whether the resolution can be considered before the session ends. Given the political arithmetic in Parliament, the likelihood of the resolution passing seems minimal. This motion appears to be largely symbolic, reflecting the Opposition’s discontent with the chairperson’s conduct.

Historical Background

The framers of the Constitution debated the language and requirements of Article 67. Concerns were raised about the ambiguity in the process for impeachment. H V Kamath suggested amendments for clarity, while Dr B R Ambedkar confirmed that a simple majority in the Lok Sabha was necessary for the resolution to pass.

Comparative Analysis with Presidential Impeachment

The impeachment process for the President is notably more stringent. Article 61 outlines that a resolution to impeach the President requires a two-thirds majority in both Houses. This discrepancy has been a topic of discussion among constitutional experts, denoting the differences in the roles and powers of the Vice President and the President.

Role of the Chairperson

The chairperson of the Rajya Sabha has a very important role in maintaining order and decorum during proceedings. The chairperson’s actions can influence the functioning of the House. The Opposition’s motion reflects concerns about perceived bias and partisanship in the chairperson’s conduct.

Future Implications

The outcome of this no-confidence motion could set a precedent in Indian parliamentary practice. It raises questions about the accountability of constitutional officers and the balance of power within the legislature. The discussions surrounding this motion will likely influence future political strategies and parliamentary proceedings.

Questions for UPSC:

1. Estimate the significance of the no-confidence motion in parliamentary democracy.
2. Critically discuss the differences between the impeachment processes for the President and Vice President of India.
3. Examine the role of the Rajya Sabha chairperson in the legislative process.
4. Point out the historical context that shaped the provisions of Article 67 in the Constitution of India.

Answer Hints:

1. Estimate the significance of the no-confidence motion in parliamentary democracy.

1. It serves as a tool for the Opposition to express dissent and challenge the ruling party’s authority.
2. Reflects the health of democracy by allowing checks and balances on power.
3. Encourages accountability of elected officials and constitutional officers.
4. Symbolizes the importance of parliamentary procedure and debate in governance.
5. Can influence public opinion and political dynamics within the legislature.

2. Critically discuss the differences between the impeachment processes for the President and Vice President of India.

1. The President’s impeachment requires a two-thirds majority in both Houses, while the Vice President needs a simple majority in the Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha.
2. Different procedural requirements highlight the varying levels of power and responsibility between the two offices.
3. The President’s impeachment involves a more rigorous investigation process compared to the Vice President.
4. Article 61 governs presidential impeachment, while Article 67 outlines the process for the Vice President.
5. Critics argue that the Vice President’s impeachment process is less stringent, raising questions about accountability.

3. Examine the role of the Rajya Sabha chairperson in the legislative process.

1. The chairperson maintains order and decorum during debates and discussions in the Rajya Sabha.
2. Acts as a neutral arbiter, ensuring fair representation of all parties in the House.
3. Influences legislative outcomes through decision-making on procedural matters.
4. Facilitates communication between the Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha, enhancing legislative efficiency.
5. Holds power in determining the agenda and priorities of the House.

4. Point out the historical context that shaped the provisions of Article 67 in the Constitution of India.

1. The debates in the Constituent Assembly revealed concerns about the clarity and fairness of the impeachment process.
2. H V Kamath’s proposals aimed at ensuring a clearer understanding of majority requirements.
3. Dr B R Ambedkar emphasized the necessity of a simple majority for Lok Sabha approval, reflecting the framers’ intent for accountability.
4. The historical context includes the need to balance power between different branches of government.
5. Discussions brought into light the differences in roles between the Vice President and the Speaker, influencing Article 67’s language and structure.