Opposition Demands Parliament Debate on Anti-Defection Law, Cauvery Water Dispute

New Delhi: Opposition members in both the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha have moved notices seeking suspension of regular parliamentary business to discuss key issues, including reforms to the Anti-Defection Law and the ongoing Cauvery water dispute.

Ahead of Wednesday’s proceedings, Congress MP Manish Tewari submitted an adjournment motion notice in the Lok Sabha, calling for a detailed discussion on the need to introduce a revised Anti-Defection Law. He argued that the existing framework requires major changes to prevent political defections motivated by personal gains while ensuring lawmakers have the freedom to express genuine disagreement.

In his notice addressed to the Secretary General of the Lok Sabha, Tewari proposed suspending Question Hour, Zero Hour and other scheduled business to deliberate on creating a legal framework that can prevent large-scale defections without restricting legitimate dissent within Parliament and state legislatures.

The Congress leader highlighted that the current anti-defection provisions have failed to address situations where elected representatives switch sides due to political calculations rather than ideological differences. He stressed the need for a balanced law that protects democratic stability while allowing lawmakers to raise independent voices.

Meanwhile, in the Rajya Sabha, MP Praveen Chakravarthy submitted a notice under Rule 267, seeking an immediate discussion on the Cauvery water dispute. He alleged that a recent response by the Ministry of Jal Shakti regarding the river-sharing issue was misleading and required clarification from the government.

Chakravarthy sought suspension of the day’s listed business to discuss the ministry’s reply concerning the Cauvery dispute and the directive issued by the Cauvery Water Regulation Committee asking Karnataka to release 4 TMC feet of water immediately.

The Rajya Sabha member pointed out an alleged contradiction between the ministry’s latest response and a statement made by the then Union Jal Shakti Minister in 2021 regarding permissions required for projects on the Cauvery river.

According to Chakravarthy, the ministry’s reply to an unstarred question stated that the Supreme Court’s 2018 judgment did not require Karnataka to seek consent from lower riparian states, including Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Puducherry, before constructing structures across the river.

He claimed that this position differed from the stand presented by the Centre in Parliament in August 2021, when the government had stated that permission for preparing a Detailed Project Report (DPR) for the Mekedatu project was conditional and involved the interests of all states sharing the Cauvery basin.

The MP questioned the reason behind what he described as a change in the government’s position and said the issue had serious implications for farmers and water security in Tamil Nadu’s Cauvery delta region.

He further argued that the matter had become more urgent following the Cauvery Water Regulation Committee’s order directing Karnataka to release additional water, with uncertainty over implementation of the directive.

Chakravarthy said the concerns affecting farmers’ livelihoods and interstate water management required immediate attention and a detailed debate in the Upper House.

The notices come amid Opposition efforts to raise several issues during the ongoing parliamentary session, with demands for discussions on governance, constitutional reforms and regional concerns. The government’s response to these motions and whether the debates will be taken up will depend on the decision of the respective House authorities.