Kiren Rijiju’s Controversial Stand on Lok Sabha Pro Tem: A Look at the Row

Kiren Rijiju, the Union Minister of Law and Justice, has been embroiled in a controversy surrounding his statement on the Lok Sabha Pro Tempore. His comments, made on July 17, 2023, sparked a debate about the constitutionality of his position and the role of the pro tem speaker.

The Controversy:

Rijiju stated that the Pro Tem Speaker was a “convention” and not a constitutional provision, adding that the “pro tem speaker has never been challenged.” This statement drew criticism from opposition parties and legal experts who argued that the Pro Tem Speaker’s position is constitutionally recognized and plays a crucial role in the smooth functioning of the Lok Sabha.

Background:

The Lok Sabha Pro Tempore is appointed by the President to preside over the first session of the newly elected Lok Sabha. Their primary duty is to administer the oath of office to the newly elected Members of Parliament (MPs) and ensure the smooth transition of power.

Constitutional Basis:

The Constitution of India, under Article 93(1), clearly states that the “House of the People shall, as soon as may be, choose two members of the House to be respectively Speaker and Deputy Speaker”. While the Constitution doesn’t explicitly mention a Pro Tem Speaker, the convention of appointing one has been established over time.

Arguments for and Against:

Arguments supporting Rijiju’s stance:

Some argue that the Pro Tem Speaker’s position is based on convention and not a constitutional provision.
They also point out that the Pro Tem Speaker’s role is limited to the first session and doesn’t involve any long-term decision-making powers.

Arguments against Rijiju’s stance:

The opposition and legal experts argue that the Pro Tem Speaker’s position is constitutionally recognized through Article 93.
They argue that the Pro Tem Speaker plays a critical role in ensuring the continuity and functioning of the Lok Sabha, especially in the absence of a permanent Speaker.

Impact:

This controversy has raised questions about the separation of powers and the interpretation of constitutional provisions. It has also highlighted the need for a clear understanding of the role of the Pro Tem Speaker in the parliamentary system.

Conclusion:

The controversy surrounding Kiren Rijiju’s statement on the Lok Sabha Pro Tempore has brought to light the importance of understanding the constitutional framework and the role of conventions in the parliamentary system. The debate underscores the need for a clear and consistent interpretation of the Constitution, ensuring the smooth functioning of the Lok Sabha and upholding the principles of parliamentary democracy.

Keywords: Kiren Rijiju, Lok Sabha Pro Tempore, Pro Tem Speaker, Constitution, Convention, Controversy, Parliament, Parliamentary Democracy, Separation of Powers, India.

This article provides an objective analysis of the controversy surrounding Kiren Rijiju’s statement on the Lok Sabha Pro Tempore, presenting both sides of the argument and exploring its implications for the Indian parliamentary system.