Practice MCQs
Article 93 mandates that the Lok Sabha shall “as soon as may be” elect a Speaker and a Deputy Speaker.
The office of the Deputy Speaker has remained vacant throughout the 17th Lok Sabha (2019–2024) and continues into the 18th.
Constitutional experts assert this delay is not a procedural lapse but a serious constitutional anomaly.
Deputy Speaker ensures continuity of House proceedings in the absence of the Speaker, safeguarding procedural neutrality.
Historically, the Deputy Speaker’s office has promoted bipartisanship, often held by the Opposition.
Detailed Insights:
Constitutional Importance:
Article 94 ensures the Deputy Speaker remains in office till removal, resignation, or ceasing to be an MP.
Institutional Balance:
Deputy Speaker plays a crucial role in committee leadership, presiding over sensitive debates and providing neutrality.
Has been a mechanism to represent the Opposition, fostering trust and non-partisan ethos in Parliament.
Democratic Erosion:
Non-appointment signals a disregard for parliamentary conventions, undermining inclusive governance.
Centralises power excessively in the Speaker’s hands, damaging the principle of checks and balances.
Call for Reform:
Proposes statutory mechanism or time-bound mandate to ensure timely election of Deputy Speaker.
Example: a rule requiring appointment within 60 days of first Lok Sabha sitting.
Significance:
Absence of a Deputy Speaker disrupts democratic norms and weakens parliamentary functioning.
Reflects executive overreach and poor commitment to constitutional propriety.
Appointment is essential for ensuring institutional stability, neutrality, and opposition representation.
Signals need for parliamentary reform to enforce compliance with constitutional mandates.
Mains Mock Question:
"The prolonged vacancy of the Deputy Speaker’s office in the Lok Sabha is a constitutional failure, not a procedural lapse. Critically evaluate in light of parliamentary conventions and democratic accountability."