Lok Sabha passes Motion of Thanks without PM's reply amid opposition protests
Contents4
Livemint - Politics · 16 Feb 2026 · 2 min read
Prelims · Polity Mains · GS2 Polity and constitution High relevance
The Lok Sabha passed the Motion of Thanks on the President's address without Prime Minister Narendra Modi's customary reply, marking the first such instance since 2004, amid vociferous opposition protests and walkouts.
Key points
Motion of Thanks: The Lok Sabha passed the Motion of Thanks to the President for her address to both Houses of Parliament on 28 January, without the Prime Minister's reply, a rare occurrence since 2004.
Opposition Protests: The opposition, led by Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge, accused the government of preventing Lok Sabha LoP Rahul Gandhi from speaking, leading to heated exchanges and sloganeering.
Speaker's Role: Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla put the opposition amendments to the Motion of Thanks to a vote, which were rejected, and then read out the Motion, which was passed by a voice vote.
Historical Context: This is the first time since 2004 that the Motion of Thanks has been passed without the Prime Minister's reply, with the last instance involving then-PM Manmohan Singh during the budget debate.
Parliamentary Democracy: The incident raises questions about the functioning of parliamentary democracy, with opposition leaders emphasizing the right of the LoP to speak and initiate debates.
[GS2-Governance] The disruption highlights the need for better parliamentary decorum and mechanisms to ensure constructive opposition participation in legislative processes.
Way Forward: India should consider establishing a time-bound framework for opposition speeches in Parliament, enhance the role of the Speaker in mediating disputes, and institutionalize bipartisan committees to address procedural deadlocks.
Key terms
- Parliamentary Privileges
- Special rights and immunities enjoyed by members of Parliament to enable them to perform their duties effectively, as outlined in Articles 105 and 122 of the Constitution. These include freedom of speech and immunity from legal action for statements made in Parliament.
- Motion of Thanks
- A parliamentary procedure where members of both Houses of Parliament debate and vote on a motion thanking the President for the address to the joint sitting. It is a constitutional convention under Article 87, reflecting the government's accountability to the legislature.
- Leader of Opposition (LoP)
- The leader of the largest opposition party in the Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha, recognized under the Salary and Allowances of Leaders of Opposition in Parliament Act, 1977. The LoP plays a crucial role in parliamentary democracy by representing alternative viewpoints and ensuring government accountability.
- Voice Vote
- A method of voting in Parliament where the Speaker decides the outcome based on the volume of 'Ayes' and 'Noes', without a formal count. It is used for non-controversial matters but can be challenged by demanding a division vote under Rule 367 of the Lok Sabha Rules.
Practice question
The recent passage of the Motion of Thanks in the Lok Sabha without the Prime Minister's reply has raised concerns about parliamentary democracy. Critically analyze the implications of such disruptions on the functioning of Indian parliamentary institutions. (250 words, 15 marks)
GS2 15 marks 250 words Mains
Key terms to include: Motion of Thanks Parliamentary Privileges Leader of Opposition (LoP) Voice Vote Article 105 Article 122 Parliamentary Democracy Speaker's Role
Answer framework
Introduction
Briefly introduce the Motion of Thanks and its significance in parliamentary democracy. Mention the recent incident where it was passed without the PM's reply due to opposition protests.
Impact on Parliamentary Democracy
Undermines the tradition of constructive debate and accountability, as the PM's reply is a key part of the Motion of Thanks.
Raises questions about the right of the opposition to voice concerns, especially the Leader of Opposition (LoP).
Role of the Speaker
Highlights the Speaker's responsibility in maintaining decorum and ensuring fair participation of all parties.
Criticism of the Speaker's decision to proceed with a voice vote without addressing opposition demands.
Historical Context and Precedents
Compare with the 2004 instance involving PM Manmohan Singh, noting similarities and differences.
Analyze whether such disruptions are becoming more frequent, affecting legislative efficiency.
Way Forward
Need for institutional mechanisms to mediate disputes, such as bipartisan committees.
Time-bound frameworks for opposition speeches to ensure their participation without disrupting proceedings.
Conclusion
Emphasize the need for balancing opposition rights with parliamentary decorum to uphold democratic values. Suggest reforms to enhance constructive debate.
Fact check
All facts verified