New Delhi [India] March 12 : Ahead of the Budget session of the Delhi Legislative Assembly, Aaam Aadmi party leader and Leader of Opposition of the House, Atishi, wrote a strongly-worded letter to Speaker Vijender Gupta, calling for a fair and impartial approach to the proceedings.
In the letter, Atishi condemned the conduct of the previous legislative session, accusing the Speaker of fostering a biased environment that side-lined the opposition. She highlighted several incidents of unfair treatment, urging the Speaker to address these concerns to restore democratic norms in the House.
Atishi in her scathing criticism of the Speaker's role, stated, "In a parliamentary democracy, the Speaker serves as the impartial custodian of legislative debate."
She emphasized that it was the Speaker's responsibility to maintain decorum, ensure every voice was heard, and uphold the principles of fairness.
She argued that under Gupta's leadership, these responsibilities were ignored, and actions were taken that were "arbitrary" and "blatantly partisan."
One of Atishi's primary grievances was the allocation of speaking time. She argued that during the previous session, opposition MLAs were given significantly less time to speak compared to BJP members.
"While BJP MLAs were granted ample speaking time, some even speaking uninterrupted for more than 20 minutes, opposition MLAs, including myself, were restricted to just 3-4 minutes each," she said.
She referred to the discussion on the CAG report, where the BJP had 18 speakers who spoke for a total of 190 minutes, while the opposition, with only five speakers, was given a mere 33 minutes. Atishi argued that this was not in proportion to the number of seats held by each party in the Assembly.
"According to the proportion of our seats, the AAP should have received 32% of the speaking time, yet we were allotted only 14%," she noted. "This imbalance severely undermines the ability of the opposition to effectively participate in legislative debates."
Atishi also pointed out the disparity in how the Speaker handled disruptions and the behavior of members in the House. She claimed that opposition MLAs were subjected to punitive measures when they raised their voices or expressed dissent, but no action was taken against ruling party members who engaged in similar or worse behavior.
"During the LG's address on 25.02.2025, both opposition and ruling party MLAs raised slogans. The opposition raised 'Jai Bheem', while the ruling party chanted 'Modi, Modi, Modi.' While all opposition MLAs were marshalled out, not a single ruling party MLA faced any consequences for their actions," Atishi stated.
"Such actions create a sense of inequality, as it is clear that the Speaker is favoring one side over the other."
Furthermore, Atishi raised concerns about the unprecedented denial of access to the Assembly premises for opposition MLAs.
"For the first time in the history of the Delhi Assembly, opposition MLAs were barred from entering the Assembly premises after being suspended," she stated. "When we tried to enter on February 26, we were stopped by a large contingent of police officers." Atishi argued that this action violated parliamentary norms, as the suspension of an MLA typically only extends to the House's precincts, not the entire Assembly premises.
"Rule 277 of the Rules of Procedure clearly states that suspension applies only to the Assembly Hall and related areas, not the lawns or the Leader of Opposition's office," she said. "Despite our protests, the Speaker refused to rectify this blatant illegality, which is without precedent in independent India."
In her letter, Atishi also criticized the Speaker for his failure to intervene when ruling party members used offensive language in the House.
"BJP MLAs repeatedly used words such as 'chor,' 'neech,' and 'gunde' during the proceedings. Yet, the Speaker did nothing to stop this," she wrote. "However, when I quoted data from the CAG's report, you asked for the facts to be struck off the record. This double standard is unacceptable and goes against the impartial nature expected of a Speaker." Atishi further emphasized that during her speech, she was interrupted repeatedly by the Speaker, who also switched off her microphone in the middle of her address.
"As the Leader of the Opposition, I should be allowed sufficient time to present my views, but instead, my voice was silenced, and the ruling party's disruptions went unchecked."
Atishi also brought up the issue of the Speaker's failure to treat both parties equally in matters of decorum and parliamentary procedure.
"Whenever the ruling party created a ruckus during the speech of an opposition MLA, the Speaker did not take any action. But when an opposition MLA deviated slightly from the topic, they were immediately interrupted," she wrote. "Such actions show that the Speaker is acting in a partisan manner, instead of being impartial as required by the Constitution."
Atishi made several demands aimed at ensuring fairness and restoring respect for democratic processes. She requested that suspended MLAs be allowed to remain in the premises and peacefully protest in the Assembly lawns, that future sessions ensure a fair allocation of speaking time-based on the number of MLAs in each party, and that the Speaker apply the same standards to both the ruling and opposition parties regarding disorderly behavior. "A functioning democracy requires a Speaker who is impartial and who fosters fairness in the House," she wrote. "I urge you to restore fairness and respect in the upcoming Budget session."