[In the sixteenth Lok Sabha, the largest party in "opposition" is the
Congress with 44 elected members, which is less than 10% of the total roll
strength of the House: 543.
This has given rise to an acrimonious debate whether the Congress is
entitled to be recognised as the "opposition party" in the Lok Sabha and
its leader as the "Leader of the Opposition".]

I/IV.
[An excerpt from 'THE SALARY AND ALLOWANCES OF LEADERS OF OPPOSITION IN
PARLIAMENT ACT, 1977 AND RULES MADE THEREUNDER' (As amended upto
18.12.2002): MINISTRY OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI, May, 2003.]

*Definition :*--In this Act, "Leader of the Opposition", in relation to
either House of Parliament, means that member of the Council of States or
the House of the People, as the case may be, who is, for the time being, the
Leader in that House of the party In opposition to the Government having
the greatest numerical strength and recognised as such by the Chairman of
the Council of States or the Speaker of the House of the People, as the
case may be.



Explanation .--Where there are two or more parties in opposition to the
Government, in the Council of States or In the House of the People having
the same numerical strength, the Chairman of the Council of States or the
Speaker of the House of the people, as the case may be, shall, having
regard to the status of the parties, recognise any one of the Leaders of
such parties as the Leader of the Opposition for the purposes of this
section and such recognition shall be final and conclusive.

[Source: <
http://web.archive.org/web/20100116211914/http://mpa.nic.in/actopp.htm>.]

II/IV.
http://www.theindianrepublic.com/featured/bjp-takes-harsh-stand-congress-lead-opposition-100039504.html

BJP Takes A Harsh Stand; Congress To Not Lead The Opposition

   - Thursday, 12 June 2014 12:55 New Delhi

Narendra Modi' government may abide by the rule stating that any party must
have a minimum of ten percentage of the total seats in the Lok Sabha
General Elections (i.e. at least 55 out of the total 543 seats), in order
for it to be awarded the status of the Opposition Party. This decision by
the Bharatiya Janata Party, which is the current ruling party of the Lok
Sabha, meant that Congress would not be the Opposition Party and that none
of Sonia Gandhi or her son Rahul Gandhi would be entitled to be the Leader
of Opposition.

This decision from the BJP has come following the initial indications from
Prime Minister Modi led government of the BJP that they may take a
not-so-harsh approach on letting the Congress Party enjoy the benefits of
being the Opposition Party, by letting Congress President Sonia Gandhi and
her close associates preside in the first session of the 16thLok Sabha. To
support the party's decision, a senior leader of BJP was quick to comment
that the Congress Party, on previous three occasions, had not let the other
parties take the Opposition post after the latter had failed to earn 10%
seats in the Lok Sabha.

Another minister of the BJP conveyed that the party was only following the
rules laid by the first speaker of the Lok Sabha, Ganesh Vasudev Mavlankar.
However, as the Congress Party is the one with the highest number of seats
after the ruling party, the post of the Public Accounts Committee of the
Parliament would be given to it. It has been known that no administrative
problems have occurred before when there was no Leader of Opposition or the
Opposition Party.

After the BJP had won with a clear majority in the Lok Sabha elections, it
was seen in the recently concluded LS session that the Congress Party and
the other parties, except the AIDMK and BJD, have started making up allies
amongst themselves to challenge the ruling party and to conquer the office
of the Opposition Party.
III/IV.
He [i.e. Rajiv Prata Rudy, a senior BJP MP in the Lok Sabha] also
highlighted [on June 10 during his speech in the Lok Sabha] the decimation
of the Congress in the national election - the party was saddled with its
worst defeat ever. "The Congress has just 44 seats, it has been reduced to
a  regional party. It is not entitled to the post of Leader of the
Opposition," Mr Rudy said.

[Source: <
http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/our-pm-has-a-big-heart-we-will-listen-to-all-mps-bjp-s-rudy-in-parliament-538956
>.]

IV.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/opinion/edit-page/Case-for-leading-the-opposition/articleshow/37098113.cms

Case for leading the opposition
Muhammad Khan & Mohan Parasaran | Jun 24, 2014, 12.08AM IST
Last week was witness to a series of debates about whether the 16th Lok
Sabha <http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/Lok-Sabha> will have a
leader of opposition. It was implied that the ruling party might follow G V
Mavlankar's formula to deny Congress its rightful claim. This formula
requires a quorum of 10% in the Lok Sabha before a party is considered as
the opposition. These arguments, in defiance of parliamentary convention,
are specious and at best naive.

Relying on Mavlankar's formula is problematic for two reasons. First, it
was articulated as a specific arrangement to accommodate the then
prevailing political climate (Mavlankar was the first Speaker of the Lok
Sabha where no opposition per se existed). Second, it was applied at a time
when no legislation had been enacted on the subject. The formula, if ever
it could be recognised as such (since it was based more on necessity than
principle), has been eclipsed by a statute.

A deeper review of the subject's legislative history shows, conclusively,
that the post of leader of opposition is not a product of subjective
discretion.

There exists clear legislation which recognises the creation of such a
post. The Salary and Allowances of Leaders of Opposition in Parliament Act,
1977, grants statutory recognition to the post of leader of opposition. Section
2 of the law states that a ''leader of opposition is defined as a Lok Sabha
member who is the leader of the party in opposition to the government,
having the greatest numerical strength''. No other conditions are specified.

To understand the intention with which Parliament passed the law one only
needs to see its statement of object and reasons according to which: "In a
parliamentary democracy, the leader of opposition has an important role to
play. In the UK, Australia and Canada
<http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/Canada>, the leader of opposition
has been accorded statutory recognition. Having regard to the important
role of the leader of opposition in a parliamentary democracy, it is
considered that the leaders of opposition in the House of the People and
the Council of States should be accorded statutory recognition." The intent
as laid out explicitly and the extensive degree of ceremony which the
statute prescribes, clarifies, beyond doubt, the key role intended to be
played by the individual holding the post in the functioning of Parliament.

Those arguing against the creation of this post have cited Rule 121 of the
directions by the Speaker under the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of
Business in Lok Sabha which specifies a 10% quorum to be recognised as a
political party.

It is a founding principle of law-making that rules cannot add conditions
not intended by the parent legislation. The Speaker's directions are
subordinate to the 1977 law passed by Parliament. If there is conflict
between a statute passed by Parliament and rules or directions framed by
the Speaker then there is no doubt the latter will prevail.

It would also be pertinent to draw attention to the Supreme Court's
observations in Sanjeev Coke vs Bharat Coal Ltd (1983): "No one may speak
for Parliament and Parliament is never before the court. After Parliament
has said what it intends to say, only the court may say what Parliament
meant to say. None else." The laboured interpretations being offered by
commentators presuming to interpret what Parliament should do would be wise
to take note of this.

Even British parliamentary practice, to which our courts look for guidance
in such matters, demonstrates otherwise. The 1937 Ministers of the Crown
Act, the inspiration for our own law, confirms that the office of leader of
opposition means "that member of the House of Commons
<http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/House-of-Commons>who is for the
time being the leader in that House of the party in opposition to His
Majesty's government having the greatest numerical strength in that House".
Again, no requirement for satisfaction of a quorum is laid down.

The leader of opposition is a recognised and essential member (under other
statutes passed by Parliament) on selection committees of various bodies:
chairman of the National Human Rights Commission
<http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/Human-Rights-Commission>, Central
Vigilance Commission, Lokpal and Chief Information Commissioner etc. Did
the legislature intend for this role to be perfunctory or dispensable? If
yes, then the language suggests otherwise.

Two of these laws go even further and specify that in the absence of
recognition of a leader of opposition in Lok Sabha, the leader of the
single largest group in opposition in the Lower House shall be considered
as leader of opposition.

Thus, if there is no leader of opposition, invaluable checks and balances
intended to be instituted by Parliament would be rendered null and void: an
idea preposterous to the objects intended by the legislature.

The Speaker has simply not been vested with the power (or the option) of
not recognising a leader of opposition. His discretion is invoked only if
there is a tie i.e. two parties in opposition have the same number of
members.

BJP has been given a historic mandate by the world's largest democracy.
Diluting the structures that have helped it achieve this victory will not
be a worthwhile addition to their legacy.

*Mohan Parasaran is a former Solicitor General and a senior Supreme Court
advocate. Muhammad Khan is an advocate, Supreme Court.*

-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to