New Delhi: The prolonged vacancy of the Deputy Speaker’s office in India’s Lok Sabha, persisting since May 2019 through the entire 17th Lok Sabha (2019–2024) and continuing 10 months into the 18th Lok Sabha, has sparked widespread concern among constitutional scholars, political analysts, and citizens. This unprecedented lapse, described as a serious constitutional anomaly, threatens the resilience, procedural integrity, and democratic ethos of India’s parliamentary system.
Historical Evolution of the Deputy Speaker’s Office
The office of the Deputy Speaker in India traces its origins to 1921, established under the Government of India Act, 1919 (Montague-Chelmsford Reforms). Initially termed the Deputy President, Sachidanand Sinha was appointed as the first to hold this position in the Central Legislative Assembly. By 1935, the role was renamed Deputy Speaker under the Government of India Act. During the colonial era, the position was largely ceremonial, assisting the Speaker in presiding over legislative sessions.
Following India’s independence in 1947, the Constituent Assembly (Legislative) recognized the Deputy Speaker’s critical role in ensuring parliamentary continuity. This acknowledgment was formalized in the Indian Constitution, adopted in 1950. M.A. Ayyangar became the first elected Deputy Speaker of the First Lok Sabha in 1952, setting a precedent for the office’s institutional significance. Ayyangar’s elevation to Acting Speaker in 1956, following the sudden death of Speaker G.V. Mavalankar, underscored the Deputy Speaker’s role as a constitutional safeguard for leadership continuity.
The convention of offering the Deputy Speaker’s post to the Opposition began to take shape in 1969, when Independent MP G.G. Swell was appointed under Congress rule. This practice strengthened during the coalition era (post-1989), with notable examples including P.M. Sayeed (Congress) under the BJP-led NDA government (1998–99), Charanjit Singh Atwal (SAD) during UPA-I, and Kariya Munda (BJP) during UPA-II. However, recent deviations—such as appointing AIADMK’s M. Thambidurai, an NDA ally, in the 16th Lok Sabha (2014–19), and the complete vacancy in the 17th Lok Sabha—have raised alarms about the erosion of bipartisan norms.
Constitutional Mandates and Functional Roles
The Indian Constitution explicitly mandates the election of a Deputy Speaker under Article 93, which states: “The House of the People shall, as soon as may be, choose two members of the House to be respectively Speaker and Deputy Speaker….” The phrase “as soon as may be” implies urgency, not discretion, making the prolonged vacancy a clear violation of constitutional intent. Article 94 outlines provisions for vacation, resignation, or removal of the Deputy Speaker, requiring a resolution passed by an effective majority with 14 days’ notice. Article 95 empowers the Deputy Speaker to perform the Speaker’s duties during vacancies or absences, holding all associated powers and privileges. Article 96 restricts the Deputy Speaker from presiding over sessions discussing their removal, though they may participate and vote as a regular MP. Article 97 ensures their salary and allowances are charged to the Consolidated Fund of India, underscoring the office’s constitutional sanctity.
The Deputy Speaker’s functional roles are multifaceted:
- Presiding Over Proceedings: The Deputy Speaker maintains order, regulates debates, rules on points of order, and exercises a casting vote in case of ties when presiding. They preside over joint sessions of Parliament in the Speaker’s absence and represent the Lok Sabha in ceremonial and diplomatic engagements.
- Legislative Functions: As automatic Chairman of parliamentary committees (e.g., Private Members’ Bills Committee), the Deputy Speaker ensures diverse voices are heard. They share the Speaker’s workload in scheduling debates and votes.
- Constitutional Safeguard: The Deputy Speaker ensures continuity during emergencies, such as the Speaker’s resignation, death, or incapacitation, preventing a leadership vacuum.
- Quasi-Judicial Powers: When acting as Speaker, the Deputy Speaker can adjudicate anti-defection cases under the 10th Schedule and rule on breaches of parliamentary privilege.
- Participation in Debates: Unlike the Speaker, the Deputy Speaker can speak and vote as a regular MP when not presiding, enhancing their legislative engagement.
The Deputy Speaker holds the 10th position in India’s Order of Precedence, alongside the Deputy Chairman of Rajya Sabha, Ministers of State, and former Planning Commission members, reflecting its institutional weight.
Importance of the Deputy Speaker in Parliamentary Democracy
The Deputy Speaker is not a symbolic or optional office but a constitutional imperative designed to ensure continuity, stability, and procedural integrity. Constitutional expert S.C. Kashyap emphasizes that the Speaker cannot preside over all sittings continuously, making the Deputy Speaker a vital functionary for uninterrupted parliamentary proceedings. Beyond procedural backup, the Deputy Speaker chairs significant sessions, oversees sensitive debates requiring neutrality, and leads key committees.
The convention of appointing an Opposition Deputy Speaker, though non-binding, reinforces bipartisan norms and the non-partisan ethos of the Speaker’s office. This practice promotes consensus-based functioning, strengthens democratic checks, and prevents the centralization of procedural power with the Speaker, who is typically aligned with the ruling party. The Deputy Speaker’s role as a neutral arbiter and institutional safeguard is critical in maintaining legislative accountability and upholding constitutional democracy.
Implications of the Prolonged Vacancy
The vacancy of the Deputy Speaker’s post since May 2019 marks a historic lapse, unprecedented in Independent India’s parliamentary history. This anomaly has profound implications:
- Constitutional Violation: The delay contravenes Article 93’s mandate, normalizing non-compliance and eroding parliamentary norms.
- Centralization of Power: Procedural authority remains concentrated with the Speaker, eliminating the counterbalance traditionally provided by an Opposition Deputy Speaker.
- Erosion of Institutional Safeguards: The absence of a second-in-command undermines the Constitution’s intent for leadership redundancy and resilience.
- Risk of Leadership Vacuum: In emergencies like the Speaker’s sudden resignation or death, the lack of a Deputy Speaker could cause procedural confusion.
- Disregard for Parliamentary Conventions: The vacancy signals a broader disregard for the tradition of Opposition representation, sidelining consensus politics and limiting inclusivity.
- Damage to Democratic Ethos: The argument that there is “no urgency” to appoint a Deputy Speaker contradicts the principles of constitutional democracy, diminishing public confidence in Parliament.
- Procedural Disruptions: The Speaker alone must manage presiding duties, potentially affecting efficiency during long sessions.
- Judicial Scrutiny: Public Interest Litigations (PILs), such as Shariq Ahmed v. Union of India (2023), highlight the constitutional breach, with the Supreme Court emphasizing the post’s sanctity.
Globally, similar roles in UK and Commonwealth parliaments underscore the importance of institutional resilience, while India’s state assemblies (under Article 178) mirror the Lok Sabha’s mandate, reinforcing the Deputy Speaker’s pan-India significance.
Comparative Perspective: Deputy Speaker in Britain vs. India
In the UK, the Deputy Speakers of the House of Commons are elected to assist the Speaker and ensure procedural continuity. Like India, the role is constitutionally mandated and includes presiding over sessions, maintaining order, and representing the House. However, the UK adheres strictly to timely elections, with multiple Deputy Speakers appointed to share responsibilities. India’s prolonged vacancy contrasts sharply with this practice, highlighting a lapse in institutional accountability. Both systems value bipartisan representation, but India’s deviation from the Opposition convention undermines its democratic credentials compared to the UK’s consistent adherence.
Way Forward: Addressing the Constitutional Anomaly
To restore institutional credibility and uphold constitutional norms, the following reforms are essential:
- Mandatory Time Limit: Amend Article 93 or enact statutory provisions to mandate the election of a Deputy Speaker within 60 days of a new Lok Sabha’s first sitting, closing the loophole of delay.
- Codification of Conventions: Formally recognize the tradition of appointing an Opposition Deputy Speaker to strengthen bipartisanship and institutional balance.
- Judicial Clarification: The Supreme Court should interpret “as soon as may be” in Article 93 as a binding, time-bound obligation, enforcing compliance through constitutional benches.
- Empowering the Speaker’s Office: Amend the Rules of Procedure to mandate that the Speaker initiates the election process promptly, independent of political consensus.
- Promoting Political Consensus: Institutionalize pre-session dialogues between ruling and Opposition parties to ensure cooperative election of presiding officers.
- Strengthening Accountability: Introduce regular parliamentary reviews and committee reports to monitor compliance with constitutional mandates.
- Raising Public Awareness: Encourage civil society and media to highlight the Deputy Speaker’s constitutional importance, creating public pressure for adherence.
Conclusion
The prolonged vacancy of the Deputy Speaker’s office in the Lok Sabha is not merely a procedural oversight but a constitutional crisis that undermines India’s parliamentary democracy. By amending Article 93 to enforce a 60-day election deadline, codifying the Opposition convention, and empowering judicial and public oversight, Parliament can restore institutional balance and reaffirm its commitment to rule-based governance. The Deputy Speaker’s role, as a symbol of bipartisanship and a safeguard for continuity, is a test of India’s democratic resilience. Parliament must act swiftly to fill this void and uphold the constitutional mandate, ensuring that the world’s largest democracy remains a beacon of institutional integrity.
FAQs
1. What is the role of the Deputy Speaker in the Lok Sabha?
The Deputy Speaker of the Lok Sabha, mandated by Article 93 of the Indian Constitution, is a critical constitutional officer responsible for ensuring parliamentary continuity and balance. They preside over sessions in the Speaker’s absence, maintain decorum, rule on procedural matters, and cast tie-breaking votes. Additionally, they chair committees (e.g., Private Members’ Bills Committee), lead joint parliamentary sittings, and act as Speaker during vacancies or emergencies, such as resignation or death. The role also involves quasi-judicial functions, like adjudicating anti-defection cases, and supports bipartisan norms by traditionally being offered to the Opposition.
2. Why has the Deputy Speaker’s post been vacant since 2019?
The Deputy Speaker’s post has been vacant since June 23, 2019, through the entire 17th Lok Sabha (2019–2024) and into the 18th Lok Sabha (2024–present), marking a historic constitutional anomaly. This violates Article 93’s mandate to elect a Deputy Speaker “as soon as may be.” The vacancy stems from the ruling NDA’s reluctance to appoint an Opposition member, breaking the bipartisan convention. Despite Opposition demands and judicial scrutiny (e.g., 2023 PIL Shariq Ahmed v. Union of India), no consensus has been reached, centralizing power with the Speaker and undermining parliamentary norms.
3. How does the vacancy of the Deputy Speaker affect India’s parliamentary democracy?
The prolonged vacancy disrupts India’s parliamentary democracy by violating constitutional mandates and eroding institutional safeguards. It centralizes procedural power with the Speaker, often aligned with the ruling party, eliminating the Opposition’s role as a counterbalance. This risks leadership vacuums in emergencies (e.g., Speaker’s death), strains session management, and disregards the bipartisan tradition of inclusivity. The lapse diminishes public trust, invites judicial challenges, and tarnishes India’s global democratic image, contrasting with robust practices in countries like the UK.
4. What is the historical significance of the Deputy Speaker’s office in India?
Established in 1921 as the Deputy President under the Government of India Act, 1919, the office became Deputy Speaker in 1935 and was enshrined in the Constitution in 1950. Sachidanand Sinha was the first appointee, followed by M.A. Ayyangar, the first elected Deputy Speaker in 1952, who acted as Speaker in 1956. The Opposition convention began in 1969 with G.G. Swell and strengthened post-1996, with figures like P.M. Sayeed and Kariya Munda. The current vacancy since 2019 is unprecedented, marking the first full Lok Sabha term without a Deputy Speaker.
5. What reforms are proposed to address the Deputy Speaker vacancy crisis?
To resolve the constitutional crisis, experts suggest amending Article 93 to mandate Deputy Speaker elections within 60 days of a new Lok Sabha’s first sitting, codifying the Opposition convention, and empowering the Supreme Court to enforce compliance. Other proposals include mandating the Speaker to initiate elections promptly, fostering pre-session ruling-Opposition dialogues, introducing parliamentary reviews for accountability, and raising public awareness through media and civil society to pressure adherence to constitutional norms and restore institutional integrity.
