The Indian sub-continent is democratic. The legislature is too democratic, which means that the members of parliament or members of the legislative assembly are there expressing the opinions of the public for whom they are present. Impliedly, this refers to the fact that they have been granted certain rights and privileges by the law of the land- the Constitution. Parliamentary privileges may be considered and defined as immunity given to members of parliament and legislative assemblies making them exempt from certain obligations like that of free speech, for instance.
Thus, it is an exceptional right given to Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha members. Certainly, it is the legal right or immunity granted to the member so they can exercise their duty of framework without any legal proceedings against him/her or any repercussions. Parliamentary proceedings, however, help in the initiation of legal faster and without any fear to fulfill duties that are of public as well as national importance that include law-making, discussions on matters of the nation’s integrity, and many more. These privileges facilitate autonomy and quick functioning as well because the legislators will have no foundation to restrict themselves.
These immunities allow the legislators to not fall into any civil or criminal liability and ensure that there is no hindrance to the legislative work they are asked to do. These rights are quite different from what human rights are and should not coincide. Human rights are granted by birth and are universal, rather these privileges are not universal and are only given constitutionally under Article 105 to MLAs and MPs.
Parliamentary Privileges: A Deeper Understanding
As mentioned earlier, these immunities/ privileges are specifically guaranteed to members of Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha and not ordinary citizens. As per Sir Thomas Erskine defines these as a total sum of legal rights enjoyed by either house of parliament without which they could not proceed with their functions, and which exceed those possessed by different bodies and people.[1]
It allows the parliament members to get protection from any civil or criminal liability despite what they say in either house against the other members or in any case scenario. It allows the members to be free from any sort of liability, thereby allowing them to work freely without any legal proceedings or repercussions against them.
It has been elaborated in the legal precedent- Raja Rampal v. Hon’ble Speaker of Lok Sabha mentioning that parliamentary privilege is not an ordinary exemption or a right given to all rather it is to an extent an exemption given to members of Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha from the ordinary law of the land. The explanation of parliamentary privileges is simply understood and explained under Article 105 of the Constitution of India. The article says as follows that the parliamentarians will be allowed freedom of speech in parliament, which allows them to speak freely to avoid any legal proceedings against them and prevent any sort of problems in the proceedings of the parliament.
This is justified under Article 105(1). Moving to Article 105(2) which is the further explanation of Article 105(1) states that no member of the parliament will be made liable for any proceedings in the parliament or legislature regarding anything said or voted there. Also, it mentions that any committee of the parliament will not interfere with the same. Additionally, under clause 2 of article 105 the member of parliament will not be made liable for any sort of publications, let alone be it newspaper reports or votes, etc., he or she does while parliament is in its session.
Considering further, article 105 clause 3 thereby states that the power or immunities of the parliamentarians will be in respect to the parliament and the parliament with due consideration from time to time change it if needed or until the law states so. After a thorough reading of clause 4 of article 105, we can conclude that the provisions as mentioned and explained under clauses 1, 2, and 3 will now apply to persons who are parliamentarians or members of state assemblies or of any committee that thereby exists in the state or union legislatures.
Conclusion With Cases To Understand The Changing Dynamics
The concept of parliamentary privilege is now understood as a special right or immunity granted to all MPs and MLAs as per Article 105 of the Constitution. Thus, this right, when exercised, allows the parliamentarians to speak freely without any legal intervention so that the parliamentary proceedings may not be hindered due to the same. The changing nature, dynamics, and evolution of parliamentary privileges can be examined through the following landmark cases.
P V Narasimha Rao V. State 1998[2]
The case revolved around the then-prime minister who was accused of taking bribes and then changing the votes in the parliament. The case went to the Supreme Court of India where it was held that taking bribes is a part of corruption and the privileges and immunities granted in article 105 do extend up to this. Thus, it was said that bribery and casting a vote would be considered as a privilege, making it the landmark judgment in the history of the Indian judiciary.
State Of Kerala V. K Ajith 2021[3]
In this recent case, the Supreme Court held that the privileges or the immunities provided to the members of legislative assemblies or members of parliament will not provide any exemption from the general law of the land, particularly the criminal cases.
Sita Soren Case 2024[4]
This is another landmark judgment in the Indian Judiciary because this case overruled the judgment of P.V Narasimha Rao. The case held that taking bribery and casting a vote in favor because the same will not fall under privilege as per article 105.
[1] Sir Thomas Erskine May, Parliamentary Practice (16th Edn.) Chap. III, 42.
[2] P V Narasimha Rao v state, Supreme court of India, 17 April 1998, AIR 1998 SC 2120
[3] State of Kerala v K Ajith, Supreme court of India, 28 May 2024, AIR 2021 SC 3954
[4] Sita Soren v UOI, Supreme court of India, 4 March 2024, 2024, INSC 161
Author: Maanya Jain, 2nd year law student
