In recent days, the behavior of opposition Members of Parliament (MPs) in India has come under scrutiny following reports of vaping and smoking within the parliamentary premises during the ongoing winter session of 2025. This incident has raised questions about decorum and adherence to parliamentary rules, prompting discussions among lawmakers and the public regarding acceptable conduct within the legislative assembly.
The controversy began when several opposition MPs were observed using vape devices and smoking cigarettes in the vicinity of the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha chambers. Notably, prominent figures such as Renuka Chowdhury of the Indian National Congress, Kirti Azad of the Janata Dal (United), and Saugata Roy of the Trinamool Congress were seen engaging in these activities. The incident was captured on camera and subsequently circulated on social media, drawing widespread attention and criticism.
According to parliamentary rules, smoking is prohibited in all indoor areas of the Parliament complex, as stipulated by the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act (COTPA) of 2003. This legislation aims to protect public health by regulating the use of tobacco products in public spaces. While vaping is not explicitly mentioned in the act, it is generally considered to fall under similar health regulations due to its association with nicotine consumption.
The implications of this behavior extend beyond mere rule violations. Critics argue that such actions undermine the dignity of the Parliament and set a poor example for the public. The Parliament is viewed as a symbol of democracy and governance, and the conduct of its members is expected to reflect the values and standards of the institution. The incident has sparked a debate about the need for stricter enforcement of rules regarding conduct within the Parliament, as well as the potential introduction of new regulations to address emerging trends such as vaping.
In response to the incident, several ruling party members have called for disciplinary action against the opposition MPs involved. They argue that the behavior displayed is unbecoming of elected representatives and detracts from the serious nature of parliamentary proceedings. Some have suggested that the Speaker of the Lok Sabha and the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha should take a firm stance on the issue to maintain the integrity of the institution.
The opposition, on the other hand, has defended its members, arguing that the focus should be on substantive legislative issues rather than the personal conduct of MPs. They contend that the ruling party is attempting to divert attention from pressing matters such as economic challenges, social issues, and governance failures. The opposition has also pointed out that the use of vaping devices is becoming increasingly common among younger generations, and that discussions around regulation should focus on public health rather than punitive measures against individual MPs.
This incident is not the first time the behavior of parliamentarians has come under scrutiny. In recent years, there have been several instances of MPs engaging in disruptive behavior, including shouting slogans, displaying placards, and walking out of sessions in protest. Such actions have often led to calls for reforms in parliamentary procedures and a reevaluation of the rules governing conduct during sessions.
The winter session of Parliament, which commenced on December 11, 2025, is a crucial period for legislative business, with several key bills and issues on the agenda. The ongoing controversy surrounding the behavior of opposition MPs could potentially overshadow important discussions and decisions that need to be made during this time. As the session progresses, it remains to be seen how parliamentary leadership will address the issue and whether any formal actions will be taken against those involved.
The scrutiny of opposition MPs’ behavior in Parliament highlights broader societal issues related to public health, governance, and the expectations placed on elected officials. As the debate continues, it serves as a reminder of the importance of maintaining decorum and respect within the legislative process, as well as the need for ongoing dialogue about the evolving landscape of public health and personal conduct in public spaces.
