Explained: This article explains the political background, key decisions, and possible outcomes related to Explained : Upholding Democracy or Partisanship? India’s Presiding Officers Fail the Test of Impartiality and Its Impact and why it matters right now.
Now that Prime Modi has recently inaugurated both the Commonwealth Presiding Officers’ Conference and the national conference, he should consolidate himself and his powers by strengthening these institutions, which will further enhance his prestige.
Even as India is wrapping up the 28th Conference of Speakers and Presiding Officers of the Commonwealth in New Delhi, the 86th All India Presiding Officers’ Conference kicked off in Lucknow on January 20, 2026. Predictably, the announcement in national newspapers has Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Uttar Pradesh chief minister Adityanath with the legislative assembly building in the background. The leader of the opposition either in Lok Sabha or in the Uttar Pradesh assembly is not visible anywhere. Does that complete the deliberation?
Prime Minister Modi said in the Commonwealth meet that ‘last-mile delivery has come to define democracy in the country, and it is in India that “democracy delivers”,’ stressing that India has transformed diversity in a way that ‘democratic institutions and democratic processes provide stability, scale and speed to its development.’
Interestingly, while outlining the strength of Indian democracy, neither the prime minister nor either of the presiding officers of the parliament uttered a word regarding the role being performed by them in either house. Both important constitutional offices have been under controversy for their partisan behaviour for over a decade despite their constitutional significance from the beginning of the Westminster model democracy since 1952 in India.
The Westminster Model
Sir Ivor Jennings (p. 63) thus described the British Parliament in his classical study:
“His (Speaker’s) power to protect is very narrowly limited. If a motion is properly proposed he has no option but to put it to the vote; and if it is passed he has no alternative but to see that it is carried out. But motions which deliberately interfere with minority rights are not moved; and Mr. Speaker can warn the House of the consequences of motions which do not directly but might indirectly affect those rights. As often happens in British institutions, the Speaker’s authority is greater than his power. The House takes great care to maintain and even to enhance his prestige.”
Obviously, several of the traits of the speaker and the practices that the office performs are valid for any system of government. Soon after election as the presiding officer, the elected person is endowed with non-partisanship, which must be practised zealously. No wonder, in the Westminster model, the speaker quits party membership and, if willing, his or her election in the next poll is unopposed. Jennings affirms the need for ensuring “impartiality over the debates of the House.” Chosen from among the government majority, Gladstone insisted in 1871 that a speaker ought not to be taken from the Treasury Bench (pp. 63–64).
Impartiality, described by Jennings, is the trait insisted upon by the Westminster model for the speaker of the House of Commons:
“The House itself has done its best to make the Speaker impartial. His salary of £5000 a year, free from all deductions and taxes, and his official residence, are provided for by permanent legislation. They are consequently not voted every year and no opportunity arises for criticism except on a formal motion. In the House he is restrained by usage from taking part in debate. When the House is in committee he may do so according to numerous precedents; but the last instance quoted by May was in 1870, and the right may perhaps be regarded as having fallen into desuetude. (p. 69)”
India adopts
Despite adopting, adapting, and following the Westminster model, the presiding officers of the parliament and the state legislatures evolved within the British framework. The leaders who ran the institutions since 1950 kept the spirit of Westminster alive. However, as the spirit diluted over the years with the weakening of institutions and fierce power games, the robustness of the institutions came under debate. The informed and learned members of the Constituent Assembly had keenly debated the system of government to follow and selected the Westminster model with which they were familiar.
After studying the available constitutional models, an elected speaker and deputy speaker for the Lok Sabha, the ex-officio (vice president) chairman and an elected vice chairman for the Rajya Sabha were preferred to ensure impartiality. The state assemblies too received presiding officers, and many functioned well.
G.V. Mavalankar, the first speaker of the Lok Sabha, left behind a healthy tradition not only for parliament but also for state legislative assemblies to be followed by posterity. A tenure of 3 years and 288 days was long enough to endow the Lok Sabha with a healthy lineage, which he indeed did. He was succeeded in March 1956 by M. Ananthasayanam Ayyangar, who presided over the Lok Sabha for six years and 22 days and only strengthened the tradition. From Sardar Hukum Singh in 1967 to Om Birla since 2019, it has been an uneven path travelled by fifteen speakers.
During this period, the decline in Indian politics did not spare this august institution. Yet, the strength of parliamentary traditions still remained strong with G.S. Dhillon, Balram Jakhar, Rabi Ray, Shivraj Patil, P.A. Sangma, and Somnath Chatterjee. Jakhar, Patil, Sangma, and Chatterjee strengthened the institution of the speaker with rules, procedures, institutional reforms, and the use of technology.
The advent of the NDA government since 2014, with Om Birla presiding over the Lok Sabha and Jagdeep Dhankar over the Rajya Sabha, proved more loyal than expected. Dhankar soiled two offices – that of the vice president and the chairman of the Rajya Sabha. They were not merely happy with a visible tilt; they virtually crawled to prove their loyalty to the powers that be. Their partisanship in allotting time to parties and MPs in the opposition and restraining them over comments was too starkly visible in the glare of television cameras to need further comment.
In both houses, the presiding officers would block criticism by opposition members from being recorded. A regular comment used to be, more frequently in the Rajya Sabha by the then chairman/vice president, “nothing will go on record.” Clearly, any researcher studying parliamentary debate of this era would draw the erroneous conclusion that the opposition members allowed the ruling party to proceed with their speeches and comments without challenge. Even constructive criticism of legislative measures by the opposition was blocked.
Naturally, the restive members of the opposition resorted to shouting, jumping into the well of the House, and stalling proceedings. The most scandalous move was the suspension of opposition elected members from both houses by the presiding officers in 2023. One hundred and forty-three members, including Rahul Gandhi, who was unofficially leading the opposition, were suspended by the speaker and the chairman. This compromised the people’s will and the dignity of parliamentary institutions. Relief came from the judiciary, which also compromised both the supremacy and dignity of parliament. Even such aggressive support of the government could not prevent Vice President Jagdeep Dhankar from being asked to resign in July 2025.
Prime Minister Modi, who has been a strong and popular leader of the country since he came to power in 2014, has had a strong role to play in strengthening parliament and parliamentary institutions such as the presiding offices. Now that he has recently inaugurated both the Commonwealth Presiding Officers’ Conference and the national conference, he should consolidate himself and his powers by strengthening these institutions, which will further enhance his prestige.
Ajay K. Mehra is a political scientist and a visiting professor at the Centre for Multilevel Federalism. Earlier, he was Atal Bihari Vajpayee Senior Fellow, Nehru Memorial Museum and Library, New Delhi, 2019-21 and Principal, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Evening College, Delhi University (2018).
This article went live on January twentieth, two thousand twenty six, at one minutes past six in the evening.
The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.