Lok Sabha Update: Owaisi raises constitutional objections during Speaker no-confidence debate

In the Lok Sabha, Asaduddin Owaisi raised a detailed constitutional point of order during the ongoing no-confidence motion against the Speaker. Citing Articles 95 and 96 of the Constitution, Owaisi questioned the legality of the proceedings, arguing that once a notice for the Speaker’s removal is submitted, the Speaker should not exercise adjudicatory or discretionary powers related to the motion. He referred to the Supreme Court’s Nabam Rabia judgment, emphasizing that the Speaker’s direct personal interest disqualifies him from presiding over such proceedings. Owaisi further highlighted the absence of a Deputy Speaker for the past seven years, creating a “constitutional vacuum,” and stressed that under Rule 10 and the Rules of Procedure, the House must formally determine which member is authorized to preside during the Speaker’s absence. He challenged the authority of the current presiding officer, asserting that the House’s sense should be taken before continuing. Parliamentary Affairs Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad and other members responded, noting that the procedural provisions under Rule 10 and Article 95(2) ensure that a duly appointed panel member has full authority to preside. The Chair reiterated that the matter had been clarified previously, and the House is procedurally ready to begin discussion on the no-confidence motion. The exchange underscores the complex constitutional and procedural issues involved in a no-confidence motion against the Speaker, especially in the absence of a Deputy Speaker.