Resolution against Lok Sabha Speaker to save Constitution, dignity of House: Congress MP Gogoi

New Delhi: In a scathing attack on Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla, Congress MP Gaurav Gogoi on Tuesday accused him of partisan behaviour, making "baseless" allegations against women MPs of the opposition and not allowing Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi to put forth "critical issues" before the House.

Initiating the debate on the resolution for the removal of Birla from the Speaker's post, Gogoi said the opposition was compelled to bring a resolution for Birla's removal as Lok Sabha Speaker to "save the Constitution" and the "dignity of the House".

Where is the freedom of speech now, the Congress deputy leader in the House asked as he slammed Birla for being "partisan".

He raised questions over the manner in which the Speaker presided over the House on February 2 when Gandhi had to speak on the motion of thanks to the president's address.

"There was an expectation that the chair would be neutral. But research of uncorrected versions would show the number of times the LoP was interrupted. While the LoP was on his feet, another member was called upon (to speak)," Gogoi said. "Is this Parliamentary tradition we want to show? Microphones are being used to silence MPs. It stands in direct contradiction with the rituals of this House."

"The same thing happened to MP Shashi Tharoor. He was speaking on February 9, and in the middle of his speech, his mic was switched off. It is said that the opposition must have its say... but how can we say when you switch off the mic? Tharoor stated that his mic was switched off, which has never happened before," he said.

Gogoi also cited the first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru's remarks that the Speaker represents the dignity of the House and becomes the symbol of the nation's freedom and liberty. "Where is the freedom of speech now?" he added.

The Congress MP from Assam's Jorhat said the objectives of women MPs are being questioned.

"When the PM had to speak on the motion of thanks to the president's address, the Speaker advised PM Modi not to come to the House, claiming credible information that certain women MPs would surround the PM's chair and create an unexpected situation.

"Shame, shame, shame, shame, shame, shame...The 2026 incident is legally distinct because the speaker preemptively advised the PM not to attend, and that is a complete breach of neutrality," the Congress MP said.

He said the charges against women MPs were baseless. Gogoi also alleged that a "paternalistic" tone is adopted in the House towards women MPs.

He said the LoP's remarks are often expunged, but when treasury bench members make baseless allegations against former PMs, it is allowed.

The Congress leader claimed that the environment of Parliament has become such that the LoP is not allowed to speak in the House because the leadership of the country is "weak".

Giving reasons as to why the opposition was compelled to bring the resolution, the MP from Assam's Jorhat said, "We stated that in February, when the LoP wanted to speak on the motion of thanks to the President's address, he was interrupted 20 times by the Speaker, members of the chairpersons' panel, senior members of the treasury benches. He was interrupted in a premeditated manner." "The Speaker did not allow the LoP to speak. The LoP was repeatedly interrupted while attempting to place a few critical issues mandatory to be known to the House and the people of the country," Gogoi said.

He pointed out that Gandhi wanted to speak about former army chief MM Naravane's remarks in his unreleased book, in which he reportedly talked about taking direction from the political leadership and the country's "mukhiya" told him "'Jo uchit samjho wahi karo" (Do what you feel is right).

At this point, Jagdambika Pal, who was in the chair, urged Gogoi to stick to the reasons for bringing the resolution against Birla.

Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju intervened, saying this was a discussion on the Speaker, and if the opposition is talking of other issues, they should not interrupt when "we reply".

Gogoi claimed that if a research of transcripts was done, Rijiju would be found to interrupt opposition members most often.

Home Minister Amit Shah then quipped that it is true that Rijiju has interrupted the most, but there has never been an opposition like the current one.

After several interruptions, Gogoi resumed his speech and said that Rahul Gandhi, in February, wanted to raise the issue of the ongoing investigation in the US against a businessman, which also mentions a minister, but was not allowed.

Gandhi also wanted to talk about the trade deals between the EU and the US with India. "He (Gandhi) asked what made India rush into a deal (with the US) and make concessions to the US that would be detrimental to our farmers," Gogoi said.

"When the leader of the opposition wanted to bring critical issues to light, the Speaker demanded authentication, and the LoP agreed to do so. However, treasury benches repeatedly opposed it and did not allow the LoP to speak," Gogoi said.

Earlier, the Congress MP cited the case of Nabam Rebia versus the deputy speaker, to state that the Supreme Court had said that the Speaker is expected to have a "sense of elevated independence, impeccable objectivity, irreproachable fairness and above all absolute impartiality".

"I want to ask, the Speaker set up the panel of chairpersons. But who decided who would preside over the proceedings on the resolution for the removal of the Speaker? Who appointed Jagdambika Pal ji to preside?" Gogoi asked.

He said all members have good relations with Birla on a personal level, and that is why the opposition members are saddened that they had to bring the resolution. "But it is our responsibility to protect the dignity of the House and save the Constitution. It is to protect the faith of the people in democracy," he said.

The Congress' K Suresh, Mallu Ravi and Mohammad Jawed moved the resolution against the Speaker, after which over 50 members stood up in support, and the resolution was admitted.

The speaker can be removed from office if a resolution is passed by the House by a simple majority. Article 94C of the Constitution has provisions for such a move. Article 96 allows the speaker to defend himself or herself in the House.

The language of the proposed resolution is usually examined by the deputy speaker, but since the present Lok Sabha does not have a deputy speaker, it may be examined by the senior-most member of the panel of chairpersons.

The panel helps run the House in the speaker’s absence.

The opposition resolution has alleged that Speaker Birla acted in a "blatantly partisan" manner in conducting the business of the House and "abused" the constitutional office he occupies.

Three Lok Sabha speakers - G V Mavlankar (1954), Hukam Singh (1966) and Balram Jakhar (1987) - faced no-confidence motions in the past, which were all negatived.