Current Affairs Topics Archive
International Relations Economics Polity & Governance Environment & Ecology Science & Technology Internal Security Geography Social Issues Art & Culture Modern History

What is a Substantive Motion, under which BJP MP is seeking Rahul Gandhi’s disqualification

February 13, 2026 4 min read Polity & Governance GS2 (Parliament and State Legislatures Constitutional Provisions)
On This Page ▼

What Happened

  • A Lok Sabha member submitted a substantive motion seeking the cancellation of another member's parliamentary membership, bringing renewed attention to the procedural mechanisms available for MP disqualification.
  • A substantive motion is an independent, self-contained proposal in Parliament that requires admission by the Speaker and passage by a majority to take effect.
  • The motion invokes parliamentary rules to argue that certain conduct warrants loss of membership, distinct from the automatic disqualification routes under the Constitution and the Representation of the People Act.
  • The Speaker must first decide whether to admit the motion; if admitted, it would be debated and put to vote in the House.
  • The move has drawn attention to the distinction between disqualification (under Article 102), expulsion by the House, and the anti-defection provisions under the Tenth Schedule.

Static Topic Bridges

Parliamentary Motions: Types and Procedures

  • Substantive Motion: A self-contained, independent proposal dealing with a very important matter (e.g., impeachment of a judge, removal of the Speaker). It requires notice, admission by the presiding officer, and majority vote.
  • Substitute Motion: Moved in place of the original motion, proposing an alternative proposition on the same subject.
  • Subsidiary Motion: Dependent on the original motion; includes amendments, closure motions, and adjournment motions.
  • No-Confidence Motion: Under Rule 198 of Lok Sabha, requires support of at least 50 members for introduction. If passed, the Council of Ministers must resign.
  • Privilege Motion: Moved when a member believes that the privileges of the House or any member have been breached.
  • Motions for disqualification or expulsion are distinct from censure or no-confidence motions, as they target individual membership rather than government accountability.

Connection to this news: The substantive motion used in this case is a procedural tool to bring a specific question of membership before the House. Unlike automatic disqualification under constitutional provisions, this mechanism requires active deliberation and majority approval by the House, making it a political as well as constitutional exercise.

Disqualification of Members of Parliament (Article 102)

  • Article 102(1): A person is disqualified if they hold an office of profit under the Government of India or any state government (other than exempted offices), are of unsound mind declared by a competent court, are an undischarged insolvent, are not a citizen of India or have acquired foreign citizenship, or are disqualified under any law made by Parliament.
  • Article 102(2): Disqualification on grounds of defection under the Tenth Schedule, decided by the Chairman (Rajya Sabha) or Speaker (Lok Sabha).
  • Representation of the People Act, 1951 (Section 8): Provides for disqualification upon conviction for specified offences; a sentence of 2 years or more leads to automatic disqualification and a 6-year bar after release.
  • Article 103: Any question on whether a member has become subject to disqualification under Article 102(1) is referred to the President, whose decision (on the advice of the Election Commission) is final.
  • Expulsion by the House: Parliament has the inherent power to expel a member for contempt or gross misconduct, but this is exercised through a motion and majority vote, and is rare.

Connection to this news: The substantive motion route bypasses the Article 103 referral mechanism and instead invokes the House's own authority to decide on a member's continuing eligibility. This raises important questions about the interplay between constitutional disqualification provisions and the House's self-regulatory powers.

Privileges and Powers of Parliament

  • Article 105(1): Freedom of speech in Parliament -- no member can be questioned in any court for anything said or any vote given in Parliament.
  • Article 105(3): The powers, privileges, and immunities of Parliament shall be defined by law from time to time; until so defined, they are those that existed before the Constitution (44th Amendment) Act, 1978.
  • Parliament has the power to punish for breach of privilege or contempt, including imprisonment, suspension, and expulsion.
  • The Lok Sabha expelled members in the Cash-for-Query scandal (2005), demonstrating the House's residual power to remove members through a vote.
  • The Supreme Court in Raja Ram Pal v. Speaker, Lok Sabha (2007) upheld Parliament's power to expel members, subject to judicial review on grounds of violation of constitutional provisions.

Connection to this news: The substantive motion for disqualification draws on these parliamentary privileges. The House's power to determine its own membership is a recognized privilege, though it must be exercised within constitutional bounds, as established by the Supreme Court's jurisprudence.

Key Facts & Data

  • Article 102: Constitutional grounds for disqualification of MPs (office of profit, unsound mind, insolvency, citizenship issues, defection)
  • Article 103: President decides disqualification questions on Election Commission's advice
  • Tenth Schedule: Anti-defection law -- Speaker/Chairman decides defection-based disqualification
  • Section 8 of RPA, 1951: Conviction with 2+ year sentence leads to automatic disqualification
  • Rule 198 of Lok Sabha: Governs no-confidence motions (50-member threshold for introduction)
  • Raja Ram Pal v. Speaker (2007): Supreme Court upheld Parliament's expulsion power with judicial review safeguard
  • Cash-for-Query case (2005): 11 MPs expelled by Lok Sabha through majority vote