It is a well-established and salutary parliamentary convention to make a valedictory address before adjourning the House. The valedictory address is given by the Speaker at the end of the last day of a session. The Indian Parliament meets in three sessions - Budget, Monsoon and Winter - in a year barely for 69 days. In the valedictory speech, the Speaker usually gives a brief summary of the legislations passed, Bills introduced, Bills referred to the Committees, time spent on discussions, etc. The Speaker also thanks the secretarial officers and staff for their hard work and cooperation and also the other agencies involved in servicing the House. The Valedictory at the end of the last session of every Lok Sabha is more elaborate and full of nostalgic speeches in which the Leader of the House, the Leader of Opposition and the leaders of political parties speak.

Ananthasayanam Ayyangar, the Speaker of the first Lok Sabha, after the death of Mavalankar-the first Speaker, in his valedictory address on 28th March, 1957 profusely thanked the MPs for their industry, hard-work and cooperation, and emphasized the values of Parliamentary democracy, democratic traditions, and the need for change and continuity.

The valedictory address is a parliamentary convention, and not a mandatory constitutional or statutory requirement. Of course, it’s another matter that the constitutionally binding direction to elect the Dy Speaker, has not been implemented from the 17th Lok Sabha up till yet in the 18th Lok Sabha. In absence of a constitutional provision, the Speaker may declare the House adjourned sine die without delivering a valedictory address or without making the customary remarks of farewell. However, the practice of making valedictory remarks has been in vogue right from the Constituent Assembly. Dr Rajendra Prasad in his address in the last sitting of the Constituent Assembly on 26 November 1949 gave vital information about the work of the CA and apprised the Members about the salient features of the Constitution and thanked the members for their arduous labor of love and also apprised them about the expenditure incurred (Rs.6,396,729) on running the Assembly.

It is interesting to recall that the 16th Lok Sabha, with 17 sessions, had invariably valedictory addresses. So it was during the 17th Lok Sabha which had 15 sessions. In case the Speaker is not available, the valedictory reference is made by the occupant of the Chair. For instance, since the 17th Lok Sabha did not choose the Dy Speaker and the Speaker was not a available, the valedictory address was made by a member of the panel of Chairmen. Therefore, it is apparently unusual practice for the Speaker not to make a valedictory reference or speech. However, there is an exception.

During the Budget session of Parliament, the Lok Sabha was adjourned sine die on 18 April 2026 after singing of the National Song without valedictory speech. Since there is no constitutional provision or Rule, the absence of a valedictory address does not invalidate the adjournment or the session. The Monsoon Session, 2026, ran from July 20 to August 13, 2026, with 19 sittings by each House. The session had constant disruptions though the Govt managed to pass without discussion as many as 11 Amendment Bills by voice vote in constant din and disruptions. Both the Houses faced constant sloganeering and logjams. Even the Question Hour, considered the most potent and precious parliamentary device to secure accountability of the executive, was disrupted. The Question Hour in Lok Sabha functioned barely for 1 percent though in the Rajya Sabha it was 12 percent. Taken as a whole, the Lok Sabha utilized 15 percent and the Rajya Sabha 33 percent of their time. It’s amazing that of the 11 Bills passed by the Lok Sabha, 9 were passed without full participation of the members. The Minister in charge introduced the motions for introduction of the Bills, for consideration and passing, and the Bills were passed by voice. Only the Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Amendment Bill, 2026, necessitated by the nationwide demonstrations by the GenG, witnessed participation by 48 MPs in the Lok Sabha and by 35 MOs in the Rajya Sabha. Unfortunately, the session marred by logjams, there were protests within the precincts of Parliament by the main political parties, holding placards and mocking toys. It was pure theatre bordering on the burlesque.

Not only the MPs of the principal opposition parties but even the MPs on the treasury benches held protests. The Opposition demanded statement by the Home Minister and the members of treasury benches, unheard in parliamentary practice, wanted resignation by the leader of opposition. Another memorable feature was that both the Prime Minister and the Home Minister made appearances in the Lok Sabha on 20th July when the National Anthem - Jana gana mana was sung and on 13th August when the revised National Song - Vande Mataram - was sung immediately before adjournment sine die.

The refusal by the Government to make even a suo motu statement in Parliament on the circumstances leading to police action against the GenG demonstrators is being paraded by many as yet another masterstroke. Had there been a statement or structured discussion on the demand of opposition on the violence perpetrated on peaceful protesters, it would have given an opportunity to the opposition to give vent to their pent-up angst and also to the Govt to show justification and to take the wind out of the sails of the opposition. Perhaps, fearing that the opposition may rake up the issue of explanation for police brutalities, the customary valedictory address was methodically done away with. It was lost sight of that a valedictory address helps remove the sense of discomfiture or acrimony between the treasury and the benches opposite and to remind both the sides that despite the acrimony that might have crept in during stormy debates, there is no love lost between them and to assuage the lurking feeling of any personal rancor or animosity. The omission of valedictory speech is reflective of the prevailing state of lack of trust, anguish and ostensible discomfiture. Ostensibly, in this psychological tug of war, the opposition seems to have gained upper hand. Be that as it may, the conspicuous departure from the well settled parliamentary convention does not bode well for the largest democracy, claimed to be the Mother of Democracy.