Skip to main content

Suspension of MPs from Lok Sabha is replication of Modi's undemocratic mindset during his rule in Gujarat

By Shaktisinh Gohil*
What happened in Parliament yesterday was unprecedented event in the history of India – it was an effort to tarnish the country’s Parliamentary tradition. The ruling party has the primary responsibility to see to it that Parliament functions normally by holding constructive dialogue with the opposition.
In the past, when the Bharatiya Janata Party was in the opposition, for days together Parliament would not be allowed to function normally, yet the speaker would never suspend anyone. Yesterday’s order by the speaker to suspend 25 members of Parliament from the Lok Sabha took the entire country by surprise.
What happened in the Lok Sabha actually reflects the mindset of Prime Minister Narendra Modi during his chief ministership in Gujarat, when he sought to establish a similar unparliamentary practice. In the Lok Sabha, Modi only replicated a Gujarat model which he had propped up through undemocratic ways.
Between 2002 and 2013, as chief minister of Gujarat, there was not one budget session of the state assembly when he did not suspend opposition MLAs. Earlier, there weren’t any such instances of suspending opposition MLAs with such frequency. During the Congress rule, a senior BJP MLA crossed the floor, snatched a document which chief minister Amarsinh Chaudhury was reading, tore it to pieces, and threw it on him.
Yet, this MLA was not suspended for long, nor was any punishment proposed against him. Breaking this high parliamentary tradition, Modi would use his brute majority in Gujarat to suspend the entire opposition several times over during assembly budget sessions. Despite the existence of the speaker’s chair, it was clear from his behariour as to who was pulling the strings.
On March 2, 2012, as Leader of Opposition of the Congress legislative party, when I sought to place before the House certain details of how Modi uses corrupt ways to favour certain selected industrialists, the treasury benches created a furor and made a plea to suspend me.
My behaviour was fully in line with best parliamentary traditions, nor did I indulge in sloganeering or rush in well, hence the speaker was not ready to suspend me. At this point, Modi – acting through a proposal by minister, seconded by another minister – ensured my unlawful suspension for the entire budget session.
According to Gujarat state assembly rules, first the speaker should name an “unruly” MLA, and even after this he refuses to keep quiet, he should be asked to go out. Only after this if he refuses to obey can a proposal be brought in against the MLA to for suspension.
Despite this clearcut provision in the rules, Modi went against the law, and he suspended the opposition leader. It seems clear that Modi wants to repeat his unplarliamentary ways in the national Parliament.
In the past, raking up a large number of issues -- including the telecommunications scandal in which Sukhram was an accused, or the 2G scam, or Railway Minister Bansal, against whom where were no proof and was totally innocent – the BJP, when in opposition, would not allow Parliament to function normally for days together.
This type of behaviour was justified by Arun Jaitley, who said that it was a “tactic of the parliamentary practice”. Now that the BJP is in power, why adopt a totally different stance?
We are witnessing yet another Gujarat model here: The BJP, when in opposition, would hinder Parliamentary work till the resignation of a certain minister, against whom there was no proof, was solicited. But now, when it is in power, it is refusing to seek the resignation of its chief ministers against whom there is clear enough evidence.
A Gujarat minister, who was found guilty by a lower court of stealing crores of rupees worth of minerals, was allowed by Modi to continue in the council of ministers, even though he was a convict and a criminal. Modi also allowed another minister to remain in his council of ministers, though he was a TADA detainee under section 302, and also involved in several other criminal offences. Modi and moral have been irreconcilable entities in Gujarat – this is the Gujarat model he wishes to implant on India.
The speaker’s job is not to teach opposition a lesson, but to manage and regulate the ruling party. In Gujarat, Modi always tried to work out ways so that the speaker violated parliamentary practice. It seems Modi wants to repeat this model in the country’s parliament, too.
It hasn’t ever happened that the ruling party indulges in sloganeering and the opposition members are not allowed to speak. Yet, in Gujarat, after Modi became chief minister, when several senior MLAs were speaking on tribal issues, he instigated certain ruling party MLAs to indulge in sloganeering, so that they could not speak in the assembly. This is another Gujarat Modi, which one may witness in the country’s Parliament, too.
Under Modi’s rule in Gujarat, the state assembly met for the least number of days compared to previous years, yet Congress MLAs were suspended frequently. Data of 10 years under Modi rule show that as many as 259 MLAs were suspended from the state assembly.
If the country’s people and concerned citizens do not wake up to the despicable event in Parliament, Modi wouldn’t hesitate to further strangle the democratic traditions of the country.
---
*National spokesperson, Congress

Comments

TRENDING

Countrywide protest by gig workers puts spotlight on algorithmic exploitation

By A Representative   A nationwide protest led largely by women gig and platform workers was held across several states on February 3, with the Gig & Platform Service Workers Union (GIPSWU) claiming the mobilisation as a success and a strong assertion of workers’ rights against what it described as widespread exploitation by digital platform companies. Demonstrations took place in Delhi, Rajasthan, Karnataka, Maharashtra and other states, covering major cities including New Delhi, Jaipur, Bengaluru and Mumbai, along with multiple districts across the country.

CFA flags ‘welfare retreat’ in Union Budget 2026–27, alleges corporate bias

By Jag Jivan  The advocacy group Centre for Financial Accountability (CFA) has sharply criticised the Union Budget 2026–27 , calling it a “budget sans kartavya” that weakens public welfare while favouring private corporations, even as inequality, climate risks and social distress deepen across the country.

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

'Gandhi Talks': Cinema that dares to be quiet, where music, image and silence speak

By Vikas Meshram   In today’s digital age, where reels and short videos dominate attention spans, watching a silent film for over two hours feels almost like an act of resistance. Directed by Kishor Pandurang Belekar, “Gandhi Talks” is a bold cinematic experiment that turns silence into language and wordlessness into a powerful storytelling device. The film is not mere entertainment; it is an experience that pushes the viewer inward, compelling reflection on life, values, and society.

From water scarcity to sustainable livelihoods: The turnaround of Salaiya Maaf

By Bharat Dogra   We were sitting at a central place in Salaiya Maaf village, located in Mahoba district of Uttar Pradesh, for a group discussion when an elderly woman said in an emotional voice, “It is so good that you people came. Land on which nothing grew can now produce good crops.”

The Epstein shock, global power games and India’s foreign policy dilemma

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat*  The “Epstein” tsunami has jolted establishments everywhere. Politicians, bureaucrats, billionaires, celebrities, intellectuals, academics, religious gurus, and preachers—all appear to be under scrutiny, even dismantled. At first glance, it may seem like a story cutting across left, right, centre, Democrats, Republicans, socialists, capitalists—every label one can think of. Much of it, of course, is gossip, as people seek solace in the possible inclusion of names they personally dislike. 

Paper guarantees, real hardship: How budget 2026–27 abandons rural India

By Vikas Meshram   In the history of Indian democracy, the Union government’s annual budget has always carried great significance. However, the 2026–27 budget raises several alarming concerns for rural India. In particular, the vague provisions of the VBG–Ram Ji scheme and major changes to the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGA) have put the future of rural workers at risk. A deeper reading of the budget reveals that these changes are not merely administrative but are closely tied to political and economic priorities that will have far-reaching consequences for millions of rural households.

Michael Parenti: Scholar known for critiques of capitalism and U.S. foreign policy

By Harsh Thakor*  Michael Parenti, an American political scientist, historian, and author known for his Marxist and anti-imperialist perspectives, died on January 24 at the age of 92. Over several decades, Parenti wrote and lectured extensively on issues of capitalism, imperialism, democracy, media, and U.S. foreign policy. His work consistently challenged dominant political and economic narratives, particularly those associated with Western liberal democracies and global capitalism.

Gujarat No 1 in Govt of India pushed report? Not in labour, infrastructure, economy

By Rajiv Shah A report by a top Delhi-based think tank, National Council of Applied Economic Research (NCAER), prepared under the direct leadership of Amitabh Kant, ex-secretary, Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP), Government of India, has claims that Gujarat ranks No 1 in the NCAER State Investment Potential Index (N-SIPI), though there is a dig. N-SIPI has been divided into two separate indices. The first one includes five “pillars” based on which the index has been arrived it. These pillars are: labour, infrastructure, economic conditions, political stability and governance, and perceptions of a good business climate. It is called N-SIPI 21, as it includes a survey of 21 states out of 29.