New Delhi: The no-confidence motion brought against Lok Sabha speaker Om Birla was defeated by a voice vote on Wednesday (March 11) amid an uproar by opposition benches demanding an apology from Union home minister Amit Shah for using unparliamentary language.While the motion was brought by opposition MPs accusing Birla of being “partisan”, the treasury benches, including Shah in his reply, focused much of their speeches in attacking leader of opposition Rahul Gandhi. Prime Minister Narendra Modi was not present in the house during both days of the debate.Shah, who delivered the reply to the debate, did not make any mention of Modi’s absence, sought to focus on Gandhi’s low attendance in parliament and foreign trips during parliament sessions, and said that he is not present in the House but alleges he is not allowed to speak.He also defended Birla citing his “high moral ground” and said that the BJP had never, even while in the opposition, brought a no-confidence motion against the speaker.Shah during his reply inadvertently used the word “saala”, leading to uproar from the opposition benches.In December while speaking during the debate on electoral reforms Shah had let the same word slip.While BJP MP Jagdambika Pal was presiding over the proceedings on Wednesday, it was only after Shah himself said that if he had used any unparliamentary words they may be expunged that Pal said he would have it removed.Opposition members raised slogans demanding an apology from Shah and the motion against Birla was subsequently defeated in the din by a voice vote.During the debate, opposition members referred to various instances when Birla as speaker acted in a “partisan” manner, including the unprecedented suspension of 100 MPs in December 2023, not allowing opposition members to speak, muting their microphones and not allowing discussions in the House.While the treasury benches had the numbers to defeat the motion, opposition MPs said it was being brought to safeguard the Constitution.In his reply, Shah said that the opposition’s speeches focused on the government instead of the speaker. Responding to the opposition’s uproar the day before over the post of the deputy speaker lying vacant for seven years, he said that unlike the Congress, the BJP government had at least left the post unoccupied.“Eighty percent of the opposition’s speeches were not against the speaker but against the government. There are several Rules under which one can criticise the government,” said Shah.On Tuesday, the House saw an uproar when the motion was moved in the absence of a deputy speaker, with opposition members accusing the government of “creating a constitutional vacuum” and raising objections to members of the panel of chairpersons presiding over the proceedings, as they had been nominated by the speaker himself.Although Shah did not provide any explanation for why the constitutionally mandated post had been left vacant, he accused the Congress of appointing deputy speakers from its own party.“Yesterday they said there is no deputy speaker. In 1954 and 1966, when no-confidence motions were brought, the deputy speaker was from the ruling party, the Congress. You don’t have the right to raise the fact that the post is now vacant. We have at least kept the post vacant but you did not even keep the post vacant, you gave the post to your own party,” he said.Shah said that while there have been three instances of no-confidence motions brought against the speaker earlier – in 1954, 1966 and 1987 – they were never brought by the BJP and referred to Birla’s “high moral ground”.“The constitutional provision to remove the speaker cannot be used at any time. In all three times that a motion to remove the speaker has been brought, the speaker continued to sit in the House for up to 14 days even though the constitution provides that the speaker cannot preside over the House,” he said.“But Birla has taken a high moral ground and not presided over the House. He has the right to participate in the proceedings but he did not. There can be no higher moral ground than this.”Shah focused the majority of his speech in attacking Gandhi, focusing on his foreign trips, attendance in the parliament, participation in debates and the hours given to the opposition to speak in comparison to the treasury benches.“The coincidence is that whenever there is a budget session or an important session of parliament, his foreign schedule is set. And then he says he is not allowed to speak. How will you speak here from abroad? How will a person in Germany, England or Singapore speak here in parliament?” said Shah after listing out Gandhi’s foreign trips during recent parliament sessions.Shah also cited Gandhi’s parliamentary attendance record in the 17th, 16th and 15th Lok Sabhas and said it was below the national average at 51%, 52% and 43%. He said that as part of the 17th Lok Sabha Gandhi did not participate in the Motion of Thanks to the President’s Address in 2019, 2020 and 2021, or in discussions on the budget in 2019, 2020, 2022 and 2023.“He did not even speak in this debate on the no-confidence motion against the speaker brought by his own party,” he said.Shah’s speech did not however make any mention of why Modi was not present in the house, and the prime minister’s own infrequent appearances in parliament.Earlier during the debate, Congress MP K.C. Venugopal had questioned whether the debate was about Gandhi or Birla.“Is this no-confidence motion against the Speaker or LoP? This motion is against the speaker, not the LoP,” said Venugopal.Pal however said that Shah was only referring to Gandhi’s attendance and that was only “factual”.Earlier Gandhi had also interjected during BJP MP Ravi Shankar Prasad’s speech, and said that his name was being used multiple times and vile things are being said about him while the debate was on the speaker’s role.Shah also referred to Birla’s statement in the House that he had advised Modi not to come to give his reply to the Motion of Thanks to the President’s address because women MPs had surrounded his chair. Though opposition members had questioned whether security had been informed if there was a threat to Modi as Birla had alleged, Shah did not address this aspect.“Women MPs cannot come close to the prime minister’s chair,” said Shah.While opposition members including the Congress’ Gaurav Gogoi had said that opposition MPs’ speeches were expunged routinely, Shah said that unparliamentary words cannot remain in the records and invoked the Emergency under former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.“Some raised questions about expunging remarks. Should unparliamentary words remain in parliamentary records? The House does not function like this. The list of unparliamentary words has not been made today but has been made from the beginning of parliament. You have been given powers by the Constitution. But you don’t have special powers. This is not the Emergency,” he said.