Why in News?

  • A seven-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, headed by the Chief Justice of India, closed the two-decade-old reference in N. Ravi and others v. Speaker, Legislative Assembly, Chennai as infructuous.
  • The Bench deliberately kept the substantive questions of law open for future adjudication.
  • The case involved the conflict between legislative privileges and the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression.

What are Legislative Privileges?

  • Special rights, immunities and exemptions enjoyed by Parliament, State Legislatures, their committees and members.
  • Aim: secure independence, dignity and effective functioning of legislative bodies.
  • Types:
  • Collective Privileges: Belong to the House as a whole. Examples: right to regulate internal proceedings, publish reports/debates, exclude strangers, punish for contempt/breach.
  • Individual Privileges: Belong to members individually. Examples: absolute freedom of speech in Parliament, freedom from arrest in civil cases during sessions.

Constitutional Provisions

  • Article 105: Powers, privileges, immunities of Parliament, its members and committees.
  • Article 194: Corresponding provisions for State Legislatures.
  • Articles 122 and 212: Bar courts from questioning legislative proceedings merely for procedural irregularity; limited judicial review for substantive illegality or constitutional violation remains.
  • Article 105(3): Parliament may define its privileges by law. Similar for states under Article 194(3).
  • Uncodified: Until codified, privileges continue as those existing before the 44th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1978.

Privilege Notice and Committee of Privileges

  • Privilege Notice: Formal notice by an MP alleging breach of privilege, rights, immunities or dignity of the House.
  • Committee of Privileges: Standing Committee, quasi-judicial body.
  • Lok Sabha: 15 members nominated by Speaker.
  • Rajya Sabha: 10 members nominated by Chairman.
  • Functions: investigates facts, determines breach, recommends action (reprimand, apology, suspension/expulsion) to the House.

Limitations

  • Parliamentary freedom of speech subject to Constitution, rules and procedures under Article 118.
  • Article 121: Prohibits discussion of conduct of SC/HC judges in Parliament, except when a removal motion is under consideration.

Key Supreme Court Precedents

  • Pandit M.S.M. Sharma v. Sri Krishna Sinha (1959): Legislative privileges under Article 194(3) prevail over citizen's Article 19(1)(a) right.
  • Special Reference No. 1 of 1964 (Keshav Singh Case): Fundamental Rights do not automatically yield to legislative privileges; constitutional courts have judicial review over penal actions.
  • Raja Ram Pal v. Hon’ble Speaker, Lok Sabha (2007): Exercise of parliamentary privilege, including expulsion, is not absolute; subject to judicial review.
  • Amarinder Singh v. Special Committee, Punjab Vidhan Sabha (2010): Privileges cannot be weaponized to punish past executive actions unrelated to House functioning.
  • Alagaapuram R. Mohanraj v. Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly (2016): Privilege protects independent functioning of House, not personal reputation of CM or ruling party.
  • Sita Soren v. Union of India (2024): Overruled P.V. Narasimha Rao (1998); lawmakers do not enjoy constitutional immunity from criminal prosecution for accepting bribes.

Concerns

  • Article 194(3) vs Article 19(1)(a): Conflict when legislatures punish citizens/journalists for criticism.
  • Threat to Article 21: Arrest/imprisonment for breach of privilege affects personal liberty; actions must satisfy fairness, due process.
  • Sword instead of Shield: Privileges meant to protect lawmakers, but increasingly used to stifle criticism and punish opponents.
  • Chilling effect on press: Undermines watchdog role of media in a parliamentary democracy.
  • Clash with Constitutional Supremacy: India follows constitutional supremacy, not parliamentary sovereignty; no privilege should bypass Part III.

Way Forward

  • Codification of Privileges: Parliament and State Legislatures should codify privileges under Articles 105 and 194 to set clear boundaries.
  • Harmonious Construction: Balance dignity of House with free speech and investigative journalism.
  • Judicial Review: Penal actions affecting fundamental rights must remain subject to strict judicial review.

UPSC Relevance

  • Prelims: Articles 105, 194, 121, 122, 212; Committee of Privileges; key judgments.
  • Mains: Codification debate, parliamentary privileges vs fundamental rights, constitutional supremacy, freedom of press.

Related PYQs

  • Prelims 2017: Parliament control over Council of Ministers through adjournment motion, question hour, supplementary questions.
  • Mains 2014: Assess reasons for absence of legal codification of parliamentary privileges and how to address it.

Drishti Mains Question: The uncodified nature of legislative privileges creates a potential space for arbitrary exercise of power. Examine the need for codification of parliamentary privileges in India.