The turn of events in the Goa Legislative Assembly on Monday, where the entire State Budget for 2026-27 was passed hurriedly without any discussions, has put a question mark over democratic processes and the integrity of the government’s actions. Amid protests and vociferous opposition, the government went ahead with its decision, overriding an option of going for a Vote on Account till the Monsoon session, citing the imposition of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) ahead of the Ponda bye-election.
Interestingly, Chief Minister Pramod Sawant argued that extraordinary circumstances necessitated such a course, citing similar actions in other States. Upon closer examination, it became apparent that the government was in no mood to explore available options and chose to close the session, as it had served its purpose of avoiding scrutiny.
Instead of passing a full budget, the government could have opted for a vote on account — a short-term financial bridge, a route which allows the government the time to pass the full budget. This is a commonly followed democratic process during the MCC period, one that respects democracy and legislative rights of the Opposition. If we recall, Sawant has sought a vote on account in the past three years — 2023-24, 2024-25, 2025-26 -and passed a full budget during the monsoon session. Also, instead of rushing through the process, the government could have engaged with opposition leaders for a consensus so that at least it would be ensured that key issues were addressed.
The government faced no emergency or compulsion to arrive at such a decision this time. It may be noted that senior leader and PWD Minister Digambar Kamat made it amply clear that the “House is supreme”, a view also upheld by the Speaker. In clear terms, the Code cannot override Constitutional institutions like the State Assembly, but only regulates the conduct of the government or the political dispensation during the period of elections. The Supreme Court in Mohinder Singh Gill vs Chief Election Commissioner (1978) held that the power vested in the ECI does not extend to suspending or controlling legislative proceedings.
Budget sessions clashing with the MCC are not a new phenomenon; such scenarios have been encountered by other States as well. As of now, West Bengal, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Assam and Puducherry are going to the polls between April 9 and April 29. West Bengal and Assam had already passed a vote on account, citing elections, and Kerala is expected to do the same.
Lastly, the decision to cut short the Assembly session is baffling, especially since there are no compelling reasons for the same. A Model Code of Conduct has no direct implications on the Assembly session other than enforcing strictures against major sops or populist decisions that can influence voters. In a worse-case scenario, the State can seek the permission of the Election Commission. By all means, the State legislative assembly can conduct its business, hold debates and address urgent matters, including key issues like Section 39A of the TCP Act, Agriculture Bills, etc.
The decision to pass the Budget in such a hurried manner and subsequent curtailment of the session under the pretext of the Model Code of Conduct raises serious concerns about the erosion of democratic norms. While the government may argue that extraordinary circumstances demand extraordinary measures, it must also uphold the spirit of the legislative process. Debate and scrutiny are two crucial aspects of a healthy democracy, and when these are sidelined, it sets a worrying precedent and rings in a sense of frustration. Compromises on accountability erode the very foundation of democratic governance.
