The role of the Leader of the Opposition in holding the executive accountable on foreign policy matters has been underutilised in Indian parliamentary practice. Discuss with recent examples.

Q. The role of the Leader of the Opposition in holding the executive accountable on foreign policy matters has been underutilised in Indian parliamentary practice. Discuss with recent examples. (15 marks, 250-350 words)

The Leader of the Opposition (LoP) is a statutorily recognised office under the Salary and Allowances of Leaders of Opposition in Parliament Act, 1977 [1], intended to make the Opposition an institutional check on the executive. Yet in foreign affairs — an executive prerogative with no ratification requirement — that check has remained largely rhetorical rather than deliberative.

Avenues available to the LoP - Parliamentary instruments: Question Hour, calling-attention motions and short-duration discussions on foreign policy. - Committee route: the Departmentally Related Standing Committee on External Affairs scrutinises the MEA's Demands for Grants and policy [2] — a bipartisan, evidence-based forum. - Consensus-building role: participation in all-party meetings and delegations, which lends India's positions abroad a national, not partisan, character.

Why it stays underutilised - The norm of bipartisan consensus on external affairs discourages sustained scrutiny, converting silence into deference. - Shrinking deliberative time: sittings and Question Hour productivity have declined sharply, squeezing space for foreign-policy debate [3]. - No treaty ratification requirement means executive agreements escape legislative examination. - The office lay vacant for a decade (2014–2024) for want of a party with the required strength, weakening the convention itself.

Recent illustration The June 2026 strikes on commercial tankers off Oman killed three Indian seafarers; the MEA summoned the U.S. Chargé d'Affaires and demanded the attacks cease [4]. The LoP's response — a post on X terming the Prime Minister "compromised" ahead of the G-7 Summit [5] — drew attention but was not converted into a structured House discussion on seafarer protection, UNCLOS remedies or energy-route security.

Accountability in foreign policy is thus exercised episodically through media, not institutionally through Parliament. Instituting an annual foreign-policy debate, regular confidential briefings to the LoP, and stronger reliance on the External Affairs Committee would convert contestation into scrutiny — strengthening, rather than diluting, India's external voice and the constitutional principle of responsible government.

(~315 words)

Sources: 1. The Salary and Allowances of Leaders of Opposition in Parliament Act, 1977 — statutory recognition and status of the LoP 2. Departmentally Related Standing Committees, Lok Sabha — Committee on External Affairs as the institutional oversight channel over MEA 3. PRS Legislative Research, Parliament Functioning in Budget Session 2025 — decline in sittings and Question Hour time 4. Ministry of External Affairs, Media Briefings and Transcripts — summoning of the U.S. Chargé d'Affaires and the demand that attacks cease 5. "Compromised PM cannot protect sons of India: Rahul", The Hindu, 13 June 2026 — the LoP's criticism of the executive ahead of the G-7 Summit