New Delhi, March 11 (NationPress) In a dramatic intensification of the ongoing tensions within Parliament, Congress leader and MP KC Venugopal fervently defended the Opposition's no-confidence motion directed at Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla during a fiery debate.

This motion, supported by approximately 118 Opposition MPs, charges the Speaker with conducting Parliament sessions in a grossly biased manner, significantly undermining the fundamentals of democracy.

As he took the floor to discuss the motion, Venugopal voiced his deep apprehension over the alarming decline of democracy in India. He pointed to a consistent deterioration since 2019, asserting that the respect for the Lok Sabha has been gradually undermined through systematic silencing of Opposition voices. "Never before has a Leader of Opposition faced such blatant suppression," he remarked, referencing the treatment of Rahul Gandhi.

He contended that the ruling party grows uneasy with Gandhi's candid critiques and his readiness to confront uncomfortable realities, prompting targeted restrictions against him.

Venugopal outlined several practices he categorized as unfair: arbitrary suspensions of Opposition MPs, sudden microphone cut-offs during their remarks, and Sansad TV cameras deliberately avoiding coverage of the Opposition benches.

In a stark contrast, he alleged that BJP MPs enjoy unrestrained freedom to hurl insults, disregard rules, and disseminate falsehoods without repercussions.

The Congress MP stressed that a parliamentary majority does not grant the ruling party the authority to violate established democratic norms.

"What constitutes a severe breach of Constitutional integrity is this double standard," he articulated. The Opposition, he clarified, was compelled to resort to this drastic measure—not out of choice, but necessity—because no democracy can flourish if its highest legislative body operates with such overt bias.

Venugopal called for a Speaker who truly exemplifies fairness, impartiality, and an unwavering commitment to democratic principles. "To protect our democracy, we require a Speaker who embodies true fairness, impartiality, and dedication to democracy," he concluded.

The debate unfolded amidst additional controversies, including the absence of a Deputy Speaker for seven years—a "constitutional void" attributed to the government, according to Venugopal—which complicated the proceedings as a member from the Speaker-appointed Panel of Chairpersons presided over the motion.

This uncommon challenge to the Speaker's authority mirrors the escalating divisions within Parliament, with the Opposition framing it as a battle to uphold the integrity of the House.