Role of Opposition

Context: There is a consistent effort by the opposition parties in India to build unity but has failed in past two general elections.

The topic of the role of opposition in Indian democracy holds significant relevance for the UPSC CSE (Civil Services Examination) preparation as it is directly connected to the syllabus of GS Paper II (Parliament: Issues and Challenges). Understanding the functions and challenges faced by the opposition in a democratic system is essential for aspirants to have a comprehensive understanding of the functioning of the Indian polity.

The main parts of this article will delve into the crucial role played by the opposition in a democracy, the factors that hinder the growth of a robust opposition in India. Furthermore, the article will discuss the issue of formally recognizing opposition parties and the Leader of the Opposition (LoP) in the Lok Sabha under the Salary and Allowances of Leaders of Opposition in Parliament Act, 1977, and the implications of not recognizing the leader of the largest opposition party in the 16th Lok Sabha. The article will highlight the need to revisit this matter in the context of the 17th Lok Sabha, which witnessed a fiercely fought election and a decisive victory for the ruling alliance.

The crucial role played by the opposition in a democracy

In the context of Indian democracy, the opposition plays a crucial role as a check and balance on the ruling party or coalition. According to the principles of political science, the opposition serves as an important component of the democratic system, providing a counterforce to the government and serving as the voice of dissent and alternative policy proposals.

• The opposition acts as a “loyal opposition” by holding the government accountable for its actions, policies, and decisions. This involves engaging in constructive criticism, raising questions, and demanding transparency and accountability from the ruling party. The opposition plays a vital role in scrutinizing the government’s actions and policies to ensure that they are in the best interest of the people and in line with democratic norms and principles.
• The opposition serves as a “watchdog” by monitoring and critiquing the performance of the government. Through parliamentary debates, discussions, and other forums, the opposition brings attention to any shortcomings, failures, or irregularities in the government’s actions, policies, and implementation. This helps in maintaining transparency, integrity, and effectiveness in governance.
• The opposition acts as a “representative of diverse voices” by providing a platform for marginalized or underrepresented groups to voice their concerns and opinions. The opposition often represents different ideologies, interests, and perspectives, providing a forum for deliberation and debate on various issues affecting society. This helps in promoting inclusivity, diversity, and representation in the decision-making process.
• The opposition also plays a crucial role in “ensuring a competitive political environment” by offering an alternative vision and policy proposals to the ruling party. It acts as a catalyst for healthy competition, which is essential for a vibrant and dynamic democracy. The opposition also serves as a “potential alternative government” by presenting itself as a credible option to the ruling party, providing choices to the electorate during elections.

Hence we can see that the role of the opposition in Indian democracy, as per political science principles, includes holding the government accountable, acting as a watchdog, representing diverse voices, promoting competition, and offering alternative policy proposals. It serves as a crucial check and balance on the ruling party, contributing to the functioning and health of the democratic system.

Currently, we have a weak and divided opposition. Even Supreme Court Chief Justice NV Ramana recently lamented, “There used to be mutual respect between the government and Opposition. Unfortunately, the space for Opposition is now diminishing.” Some feel that the secret weapon

Factors that Hinder Growth of Robust Opposition

India is unable to produce robust Opposition parties or leaders due to several features of its system of government. At least six fundamental problems come to mind:

• First, by not giving Opposition parties any power whatsoever, our system ensures that they don’t last.
  • By design, and in the name of efficiency, the parliamentary system keeps the Opposition toothless. It can make speeches, ask questions in Parliament, or walk out. 
  • But it cannot pass legislation, affect government programmes, or influence executive officials. This makes the members of the Opposition useless to their constituents. Within a short while, they begin to lose support.
• Second, our system grants power to parties, not to individual MPs. This causes fragmentation of the Opposition. Ambitious Opposition leaders must form their own outfits to bargain with the ruling party and come to power. Small local and regional parties proliferate.
• Third, India’s system impairs the Opposition by driving them to vote banks and extremism. To stay relevant and avoid breakups, parties begin to represent one special interest, caste, or religion. They inflame the feelings of their constituents, make outrageous promises, and breed hatred of other groups. Since in the parliamentary system, there are no nationwide elections, parties don’t have to come together on a centrist programme.
• Fourth, our system also doesn’t help Opposition parties acquire good leaders or become strong organisations. Most parties stay small due to the reasons cited above, and thus remain one-man shows.
• Fifth, our system doesn’t provide Opposition parties with institutions to hone their skills. Unlike the UK, India’s Opposition is not offered a shadow Cabinet, or opportunities to pass private member bills. So the Opposition always lacks an agenda, and its members become party hacks adept only at bluster.
• And last but perhaps worst, India’s system allows the ruling party to scare the Opposition into submission. The use of the CBI, tax, and other government agencies against Opposition leaders is commonplace. This harms their reputation and scares good people away from politics.

Lok Sabha under the Salary and Allowances of Leaders of Opposition in Parliament Act, 1977

• After the election of the Lok Sabha Speaker, the question of a formally recognised Opposition party and Leader of the Opposition (LoP) of the Lok Sabha under the Salary and Allowances of Leaders of Opposition in Parliament Act, 1977, will arise. 
• The Act extends to LoPs in the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha the same official status, allowances and perks that are admissible to Cabinet Ministers. In the case of the Lok Sabha, however, this is subject to recognition of the leader by the Speaker. In the 16th Lok Sabha, the largest party in the Opposition, the Congress, had 44 seats. After careful consideration, it was decided not to recognize the party’s leader as LoP. Now, the matter needs to be revisited in the context of the 17th Lok Sabha.
• The election to the 17th Lok Sabha was the most fiercely and bitterly fought one in the history of the Republic. The decisive victory of the ruling alliance and its leadership has been widely welcomed as being in the best interests of the polity and the people. Above everything, the nation needs a stable government and a strong leader capable of taking firm decisions to ensure security, development and good governance within the rule of law. 
• However, for the success and survival of democracy, an effective Opposition is also a categorical imperative. It is said that if no Opposition exists, one may have to be created. Also, if there is no Opposition outside, there is every danger that it may grow within.

Leaders of Opposition over time

• The 1977 Act defines LoP as that member of the House who is 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.” 
• The Speaker’s decisions in this regard have so far been determined by Direction 121(c) which laid down one of the conditions for recognition of party or group as having “at least a strength equal to the quorum fixed to constitute a sitting of the House, that is one-tenth of the total number of members of the House”. 
• The Leaders and Chief Whips of Recognised Parties and Groups in Parliament (Facilities) Act, 1998 also refers to a recognised party in the Lok Sabha as a party that has not less than 55 members.

The Speaker’s discretion

• Since there is no constitutional provision, the 1977 law does not provide for the requirement of 55 members as an essential pre-requisite. As it all depends on the Speaker’s directions and discretion, it may be hoped that rightful action will be taken. The simple way out is to substitute ‘pre-poll alliance’ for ‘party’ or say ‘party or pre-poll alliance’. In any case, pre-poll alliances are a fact of our political life and are already being extended credibility and legitimacy in the matter of the President and Governors deciding on who to call first for forming the government in cases where no party secures a clear majority support in the House.
• Incidentally, what is decided in the matter of recognition of the LoP, and in treating pre-poll alliances at par with parties, may hold tremendous potential for the growth of a sound two- or three-party (or alliance) system. It could end the present system, a preposterous one, of more than 2,000 parties being registered with the Election Commission. If and when the much-awaited law for political parties is enacted, it may provide for candidates of an alliance contesting on a common symbol and an agreed common minimum programme with only national alliances or parties contesting for the Lok Sabha. These aspects, however, call for separate in-depth analysis, consideration and debate.

In conclusion, the role of the opposition in Indian democracy is of paramount importance in ensuring a healthy and functioning democratic system. The opposition acts as a check and balance on the ruling party, holding the government accountable, acting as a watchdog, representing diverse voices, promoting competition, and offering alternative policy proposals. However, there are several factors that hinder the growth of a robust opposition in India, including the lack of power, fragmentation, reliance on vote banks, absence of strong leaders and institutions, and the use of government agencies against the opposition.

The issue of formally recognizing opposition parties and the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha under the Salary and Allowances of Leaders of Opposition in Parliament Act, 1977 is a matter of significance. The absence of a recognized leader of the opposition can weaken the functioning of the parliamentary system and diminish the space for dissent and accountability. In light of the challenges faced by the opposition in India, there is a need to revisit this matter in the context of the 17th Lok Sabha, which has witnessed a fiercely fought election and a decisive victory for the ruling alliance.