19 Feb 2026·Source: The Hindu

5 min

Polity & GovernanceNEWS

Panel Considers Curbing No-Confidence Motions Before Elections

Joint Parliamentary Committee deliberates on barring no-trust motions close to elections.

Photo by Skytech Aviation

The Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) examining the Bill on simultaneous elections is considering a provision that would bar the introduction of a no-confidence motion against an incumbent government if only one year of its term remains. The Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill, 2024 to enable simultaneous elections was introduced in the Lok Sabha on December 17, 2024, and immediately referred to the committee. The panel has held 16 meetings in Delhi so far and travelled across the country.

Mr. Chaudhary said the panel is deliberating whether to introduce a time-bar on moving a no-confidence motion. He noted that several states have similar restrictions for Panchayati Raj institutions.

He maintained that such a restriction is legally plausible, he acknowledged that the final decision must be a political one. Mr. Chaudhary conceded that there are infirmities in the current formulation of the Bill, and noted that addressing these gaps is precisely what the panel is attempting to do.

Key Facts

The Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) is examining the Bill on simultaneous elections.

The committee is considering barring no-confidence motions if only one year of the government's term remains.

The Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill, 2024 was introduced in the Lok Sabha on December 17, 2024.

The panel has held 16 meetings in Delhi and travelled across the country.

UPSC Exam Angles

GS Paper 2: Parliament and State legislatures - structure, functioning, conduct of business, powers & privileges and issues arising out of these.

GS Paper 2: Constitutional Amendments, Significant provisions of the Constitution and basic structure

Connects to the ongoing debate on electoral reforms and the need for stable governance.

In Simple Words

Right now, a group of politicians is thinking about changing the rules for how governments can be removed from power. They're considering making it harder to get rid of a government in its last year. This is all happening because there's talk about holding elections for everything at the same time.

India Angle

Imagine a village council (Gram Panchayat). If they can't remove the head (Sarpanch) easily near the end of their term, it affects how things get done in the village. Similarly, this change could affect how stable our governments are and how they make decisions.

For Instance

Think of a company where the CEO can't be fired in the last few months before their contract ends. It gives them more security to finish projects, but it also means they might not be as accountable.

This could change how our government works. It might make governments more stable, but it could also make them less responsive to what people want.

Less no-confidence, more confidence... maybe, but at what cost?

Visual Insights

Evolution of No-Confidence Motion and Simultaneous Elections Debate

Timeline showing key events related to no-confidence motions and the simultaneous elections debate in India.

The debate around no-confidence motions and simultaneous elections has evolved over decades, reflecting concerns about political stability and governance efficiency.

1963First No-Confidence Motion against Jawaharlal Nehru's government
1967End of simultaneous elections in India
197642nd Amendment to the Constitution
1999Successful No-Confidence Motion against Atal Bihari Vajpayee government
2018No-Confidence Motion against Narendra Modi government (defeated)
2022Law Commission supports simultaneous elections
2023Government forms committee to explore 'one nation, one election'
2024Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill introduced in Lok Sabha
2026JPC considers curbing no-confidence motions before elections

More Information

Background

The no-confidence motion is a parliamentary procedure used to test the confidence of the Lok Sabha in the Council of Ministers. Article 75(3) of the Constitution states that the Council of Ministers is collectively responsible to the Lok Sabha. This means that the government must enjoy the support of a majority of the members of the Lok Sabha. If the government loses the confidence of the Lok Sabha, it must resign. The rules regarding no-confidence motions are outlined in Rule 198 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha. Any member can move a motion of no-confidence against the Council of Ministers. The motion must be supported by at least 50 members to be admitted. If admitted, the Speaker allots time for the discussion of the motion. After the debate, the motion is put to vote. If the motion is passed by a majority of the members present and voting, the government is defeated and must resign. The purpose of a no-confidence motion is to hold the government accountable to the legislature. It allows the opposition to challenge the government's policies and performance. The threat of a no-confidence motion can also act as a check on the government's power, ensuring that it remains responsive to the concerns of the Lok Sabha. The current discussion about limiting no-confidence motions before elections raises questions about balancing accountability with governmental stability.

Latest Developments

In recent years, there has been increasing debate about the frequency and impact of elections on governance and development. The idea of simultaneous elections, or "one nation, one election," has gained traction as a potential solution to reduce the disruptions caused by frequent elections. Several committees and commissions, including the Law Commission of India, have examined the feasibility of holding simultaneous elections to the Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies. The NITI Aayog has also supported the idea of simultaneous elections, arguing that it would reduce election expenditure, free up security forces for other duties, and allow governments to focus on policy-making and governance. However, the proposal has faced opposition from some political parties, who argue that it would undermine the principles of federalism and regional representation. Concerns have also been raised about the practical challenges of implementing simultaneous elections, such as the need for constitutional amendments and the potential for voter fatigue. The Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill, 2024, which aims to enable simultaneous elections, is currently under examination by a Joint Parliamentary Committee. The committee is tasked with addressing various concerns and challenges associated with the proposal, including the potential impact on the stability of governments and the representation of diverse interests.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What is a no-confidence motion, and why is it relevant to the current discussion?

A no-confidence motion is a parliamentary procedure to test if the Lok Sabha has confidence in the government. Article 75(3) of the Constitution says the Council of Ministers is responsible to the Lok Sabha. The current discussion involves potentially limiting these motions close to elections.

2. What are simultaneous elections, and how does the proposed bill relate to them?

Simultaneous elections mean holding Lok Sabha and State Assembly elections at the same time. The Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill, 2024, aims to enable these simultaneous elections. The bill is being examined by a Joint Parliamentary Committee.

3. What is the key proposal being considered by the Joint Parliamentary Committee regarding no-confidence motions?

The Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) is considering barring the introduction of a no-confidence motion against a government if only one year of its term remains. This is part of their examination of the Bill on simultaneous elections.

4. What are the potential benefits and drawbacks of limiting no-confidence motions before elections?

Potential benefits include greater stability for the government in its final year and reduced disruption from political maneuvering. Drawbacks might include limiting the opposition's ability to hold the government accountable and potentially shielding a failing government from legitimate challenges.

5. Why is the idea of 'one nation, one election' gaining traction?

The idea of 'one nation, one election' has gained traction as a potential solution to reduce the disruptions caused by frequent elections on governance and development. Several committees and commissions have examined its feasibility.

6. What is the significance of Article 75(3) of the Constitution in the context of no-confidence motions?

Article 75(3) of the Constitution states that the Council of Ministers is collectively responsible to the Lok Sabha. This is the constitutional basis for the no-confidence motion, as it implies the government must maintain the support of a majority of Lok Sabha members.

7. What are the key dates and numbers associated with the Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill, 2024?

The Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill, 2024 was introduced in the Lok Sabha on December 17, 2024. The Joint Parliamentary Committee has held 16 meetings so far. The next general elections are expected in 2029.

8. How might limiting no-confidence motions impact the balance of power between the government and the opposition?

Limiting no-confidence motions could potentially shift the balance of power in favor of the government, reducing the opposition's ability to challenge the government's actions, especially towards the end of its term. This could affect accountability.

9. What are the recent developments regarding the Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill, 2024?

The Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill, 2024 was introduced in the Lok Sabha on December 17, 2024, and immediately referred to the Joint Parliamentary Committee. The committee is currently examining the bill and considering various provisions, including limiting no-confidence motions.

10. What is the role of P.P. Chaudhary in the context of the Bill on simultaneous elections?

P.P. Chaudhary is associated with the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) examining the Bill on simultaneous elections. He has mentioned that the panel is deliberating on introducing a time-bar on moving a no-confidence motion.

Practice Questions (MCQs)

1. Consider the following statements regarding a No-Confidence Motion in the Indian Parliament: 1. A No-Confidence Motion can only be moved in the Rajya Sabha. 2. The motion needs the support of at least 100 members to be admitted. 3. The Constitution explicitly mentions the procedure for a No-Confidence Motion. Which of the statements given above is/are NOT correct?

A.1 and 2 only
B.2 and 3 only
C.1 and 3 only
D.1, 2 and 3

Show Answer

Answer: D

Statement 1 is INCORRECT: A No-Confidence Motion can only be moved in the Lok Sabha as the Council of Ministers is collectively responsible to it (Article 75(3)). Statement 2 is INCORRECT: The motion needs the support of at least 50 members, not 100, to be admitted as per Rule 198 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha. Statement 3 is INCORRECT: The Constitution does not explicitly mention the procedure for a No-Confidence Motion. The procedure is detailed in the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha.

2. Which of the following statements accurately reflects the current consideration by the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) examining the Bill on simultaneous elections?

A.The JPC is considering a provision to allow no-confidence motions only in the first year of a government's term.
B.The JPC is considering a provision to bar no-confidence motions against an incumbent government if only one year of its term remains.
C.The JPC is considering a provision to mandate no-confidence motions every six months.
D.The JPC is considering a provision to abolish no-confidence motions altogether.

Show Answer

Answer: B

3. Assertion (A): Simultaneous elections can potentially reduce the disruptions caused by frequent elections and allow governments to focus on policy-making. Reason (R): Simultaneous elections may undermine the principles of federalism and regional representation. In the context of the above statements, which of the following is correct?

A.Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A.
B.Both A and R are true, but R is NOT the correct explanation of A.
C.A is true, but R is false.
D.A is false, but R is true.

Show Answer

Answer: B

Both Assertion (A) and Reason (R) are true. Simultaneous elections can indeed reduce disruptions and allow governments to focus on policy-making. However, it is also true that simultaneous elections may raise concerns about federalism and regional representation. Reason (R) is a valid concern regarding simultaneous elections, but it is not a direct explanation of why simultaneous elections can reduce disruptions.