The opposition's decision to escalate protests, including physical clashes with NDA MPs outside Parliament, is a counterproductive and irresponsible tactic that undermines democratic institutions. While raising issues is legitimate, disrupting the functioning of Parliament damages the very system the opposition claims to defend.
The confrontation outside Parliament was not a peaceful protest but a physical altercation that could have turned violent. Such behavior sets a poor example for public discourse and erodes respect for parliamentary norms. The opposition could have used other avenues, such as raising issues through proper channels or seeking a meeting with the Speaker.
By refusing to accept the government's offer of a debate—even without a vote—the opposition is blocking not just the Manipur discussion but also other legislative business. Bills on data protection, education, and governance reforms are stalled, hurting the very public the opposition claims to represent.
The government has argued that it is open to discussing Manipur but cannot allow a debate that disrupts the entire session. The opposition's insistence on a prime ministerial response is seen as a political tactic to corner the government rather than a genuine desire for a solution.
Furthermore, the repeated disruptions are costing taxpayers money and wasting parliamentary time. Each day of adjournment costs the exchequer millions. The opposition must ask itself whether its tactics are achieving anything beyond headlines.
In a democracy, the opposition has a right to dissent, but it also has a responsibility to allow the government to function. The current standoff benefits no one, least of all citizens who want their lawmakers to work on issues like inflation and employment. The opposition should reconsider its strategy and engage constructively instead of resorting to confrontation.