💥Join UPSC 2027,2028 Mentorship (August Batch) + XFactor Notes & Microthemes PDF
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

GS Paper: Parliament & State Legislatures

  • Legal challenges the Farm Acts could face

    Farm Acts passed by the Parliament could face the legal hurdle in the court when challenged on its constitutional basis. This article explains the issue.

    Background

    • Recently, Parliament passed three acts related to agriculture. These Acts are-
    • 1) The Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Act, 2020.
    • 2) The Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Act, 2020.
    • 3) The Essential Commodities (Amendment) Act, 2020.
    • This has led to the question: Does the Union government have the authority to legislate on what are rightfully the affairs of States?

    Why agriculture is considered as States’ prerogative

    • Agriculture is a State subject in the Constitution, listed as Entry 14 in the State List (List II).
    • Entry 26 in the State List refers to “trade and commerce within the State”.
    • Entry 27 in the State List refers to “production, supply and distribution of goods”.
    • Entry 28 refers to “markets and fairs”.
    • For these reasons, intra-State marketing in agriculture was always considered a legislative prerogative of States.

    What was the legal basis used by the Parliament to pass the Farm Acts

    • The central government invoked Entry 33 in the Concurrent List (List III).
    • Entry 26 and 27 in List II are listed as “subject to the provisions of Entry 33 of List III”.

    Entry 33 in List III: Trade and commerce in, and the production, supply and distribution of, — (a) the products of any industry where the control of such industry by the Union is declared by Parliament by law to be expedient in the public interest, and imported goods of the same kind as such products; (b) foodstuffs, including edible oilseeds and oils; (c) cattle fodder, including oilcakes and other concentrates; (d) raw cotton, whether ginned or unginned, and cotton seed; and (e) raw jute.

    Historical background of  “Entry 33” of Concurrent List

    • Entry 33, in its present form, was inserted in List III through the Constitution (Third Amendment) Act, 1954 after heated constitutional debates.
    • The contention of the dissent was the following:
    • As per Article 369 in the original version of the Constitution, the responsibility of agricultural trade and commerce within a State was temporarily entrusted to the Union government for a period of five years beginning from 1950.
    • The 1954 Amendment attempted to change this into a permanent feature in the Constitution.
    • According to dissident “if matters enumerated in Article 369 in were placed in List III, State autonomy would be rendered illusory and State powers and rights would be progressively pulverised…”.
    • While another dissident argued that “passage of the Bill would transform the Indian Constitution into a “unitary Constitution” instead of a “federal Constitution” and reduce “all the States’ powers into municipal powers”.
    • Notwithstanding the strong dissenting voices, the Bill was passed.

    Let’s look into the related Supreme Court Judgments

    • In many of its judgments after 1954, the Supreme Court of India has upheld the legislative powers of States in intra-State agricultural marketing.
    • Most notable was the ruling of the five-judge Constitution Bench in I.T.C. Limited vs. Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC) and Others, 2002.
    • The Tobacco Board Act, 1975 had brought the development of the tobacco industry under the Centre.
    • However, Bihar’s APMC Act continued to list tobacco as an agricultural produce.
    • In this case, the question was if the APMC in Monghyr could charge a levy on ITC for the purchase of unprocessed tobacco leaves from growers.
    • An earlier judgment had held that the State APMC Act will be repugnant to the Central Act, and hence was ultra vires.
    • But the Constitution Bench upheld the validity of the State APMC Act, and ruled that market fees can be charged from ITC under the State APMC Act.

    Consider the question “Examine the validity of legal basis used by the Parliament to pass the Farm Acts. Why it could face the legal challenge?”

    Conclusion

    It was unwise on the part of the Centre to use Entry 33 in List III to push the Farm Bills. Such adventurism weakens the spirit of federal cooperation that India needs in this hour of crisis. Second, agriculture is exclusively a State subject.

    Back2Basics: Read more about 3 Agricultural Acts passed by the Parliament here-

    [Burning Issue] Agricultural Reform Bills, 2020

     

  • Moving away from parliamentary scrutiny

    The article discusses the important role played by the various committees and their significance.

    Committee system for legislative scrutiny

    • Over the years, the Indian Parliament has increasingly adopted the committee system as did the other democracies in the world.
    • This helped in housekeeping, to enhance the efficacy of the House to cope with the technical issues confronting it and to feel the public pulse.
    • But the committee approach also helped to guard its turf and keep it abreast to exercise accountability on the government.

    Important role played by the committees

    • Committees are the guardians of the autonomy of the House: consider the role of committees of scrutiny and oversight.
    • In the discharge of their mandate, the committee can solicit expert advice and elicit public opinion.
    • Besides the standing committees, the Houses of Parliament set up, from time to time, ad hoc committees to enquire and report on specific subjects which include Select Committees of a House or Joint Select Committees of both the Houses.
    • Departmentally-related Standing Committees (DRSCs)  were envisaged to be the face of Parliament in a set of inter-related departments and ministries.

    Issues

    • Committees of scrutiny and advice, both standing and ad hoc, have been confined to the margins or left in the lurch in the last few years.
    • While 60% of the Bills in the 14th Lok Sabha and 71% in the 15th Lok Sabha were wetted by the DRSCs concerned, this proportion came down to 27% in the 16th Lok Sabha.
    • The government has shown extreme reluctance to refer Bills to Select Committees of the Houses or Joint Parliamentary Committees.

    Conclusion

    The government must not forget that the primary role of Parliament is deliberation, discussion and reconsideration, the hallmarks of democratic institutions, and not a platform that endorses decisions already arrived at.

    Back2Bascis: Parliamentary Committees

    Broadly, they are classified into two categories — standing committees and ad hoc committees.

    1) Standing Committees

    • As the name suggests, these committees cover all the ministries and departments of the Government of India.
    • Standing committees are more permanent in nature, and are constituted from time to time in pursuance of the provisions of an Act of Parliament or Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha.
    • The standing committees are further divided into financial committees and departmentally-related standing committees (DRSCs).
    • There are 24 DRSCs in total — 16 from Lok Sabha and 8 from the Rajya Sabha.
    • Financial committees are of three kinds — the estimates committee, the public accounts committee and the committee on public undertakings.

    2) Ad hoc committees

    • Ad hoc committees are appointed for a specific purpose and they cease to exist after they finish the task assigned to them and submit a report.
    • These include advisory committees and inquiry committees.
    • Advisory committees include select and joint committees on bills.
    • Inquiry committees are constituted to inquire into a specific issue and report on it.

  • Parliament is not just about technicalities, deference to process builds trust

    The article deals with the issue of importance of parliamentary procedures and how it has been neglected in the passage of several Bills recently.

    2 contexts that explain the crisis Parliament faces

    1) Neglecting the procedure

    • Three simple procedural matters are the cornerstone of parliamentary practice.
    • The first is Question Hour, which was suspended.
    • Even in taking that decision, the Speaker did not accede to the demand for a division.
    • The second is referring bills to committees.
    • It is increasingly the case with important pieces of legislation that they are not being either referred to committees, nor are they being fully debated in Parliament.
    • The third and most important is “division.”
    • If a member of a House asks for a division of votes, the Speaker needs to grant it.
    • The Speaker can refuse under some circumstances, but even then he has to take something like an informal headcount vote before refusing division.

    2) Substantive context

    • There are three bills relating to agriculture that have occasioned serious protests.
    • There are three far-reaching pieces of legislation pertaining to labour reform.
    • Each of these bills can be improved and crafted in ways that make them more the object of consensus.
    • The bills pertaining to agriculture were debated, ffter the debate,  deputy chairperson refusesed a division.
    • By allowing a division we would at least record where each member of Parliament stood on a question of monumental importance.

    Concerns

    • We seem to not want to give flexibility to states when it comes to farmers.
    • Flexibility is given to states, in the most unrestrained manner possible, when it comes to the interest of capital against labour.
    • It seems that the hurried interests of corporate India take precedence over farmers and labour, rather than a well negotiated social contract between all three.

    Why the farmers are concerned

    • A lot of the farmers’ legitimate fear is that in a fiscal crunch, MSP will be rolled back or procurement curtailed.
    • There is genuine uncertainty over what private procurement will mean.

    Way forward

    • It is also possible that in the case of the APMC, a more creative solution could have been found for concerns of the states, like an opt-out clause for them.
    • In case of amendments to labour laws, there is need to examine whether it fulfils the twin objectives of both protecting workers and being compliance-friendly at the same time.

    Conclusion

    Some deference to process can build trust because it is a sign of a government that listens. At least on the APMC this was a possibility. Let us hope on labour bills there is more reasoned deliberation. Parliamentary practice will not be able to knit an enduring social contract between labour, capital and farmers if it does not inspire confidence.

  • Explained: Suspension of Members of Parliament

    Recently eight Rajya Sabha MPs were suspended for unruly behaviour in the House.

    Try this PYQ:

    Q.Consider the following statements:

    1. Speaker of the legislative assembly shall vacate his/her office of he/she ceases to be a member of the assembly
    2. Whenever the legislative assembly is dissolved the speaker shall vacate his/her office immediately

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct? (CSP 2018)

    a) 1 only

    b) 2 only

    c) Both 1 and 2

    d) Neither 1 not 2

    What is the reason for suspending an MP?

    • The general principle is that it is the role and duty of the Presiding Officer — Speaker of Lok Sabha and Chairman of Rajya Sabha — to maintain order so that the House can function smoothly.
    • In order to ensure that proceedings are conducted in the proper manner, the Speaker/Chairman is empowered to force a Member to withdraw from the House.

    What are the rules under which the Presiding Officer acts?

    • Rule Number 373 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business provides for the suspension of MPs by the Speaker of the House.
    • To deal with more recalcitrant Members, the Speaker make take recourse to Rules 374 and 374A.
    • Rule 374 says: The Speaker may, if deems it necessary, name a Member who disregards the authority of the Chair or abuses the rules of the House by persistently and wilfully obstructing the business thereof.
    • Rule 374A was incorporated in the Rule Book on December 5, 2001. The intention was to skirt around the necessity of moving and adopting a motion for suspension.

    Procedure in Rajya Sabha

    It’s largely similar, with one important difference.

    • Like the Speaker in Lok Sabha, the Chairman of Rajya Sabha is empowered under Rule Number 255 of its Rule Book to “direct any Member whose conduct is in his opinion grossly disorderly to withdraw immediately” from the House.
    • Unlike the Speaker, however, the Rajya Sabha Chairman does not have the power to suspend a Member. The House may, by another motion, terminate the suspension.
    • The Chairman may “name a Member who disregards the authority of the Chair or abuses the rules of the Council by persistently and wilfully obstructing” business.
    • In such a situation, the House may adopt a motion suspending the Member from the service of the House for a period not exceeding the remainder of the session.

    Is suspending an MP a decent practice?

    • It is a strong action, but it is not uncommon. In general, a balance has to be struck.
    • There can be no question that the enforcement of the supreme authority of the Presiding Officer is essential for smooth conduct of proceedings.
    • However, it must be remembered that the job of the Presiding Officer is to run the House, not to lord over it.

    Alternatives to suspension

    • The solution to unruly behaviour has to be long-term and consistent with democratic values.
    • A previous Speaker had ordered that television cameras be focussed on the demonstrating members so that people could see for themselves how their representatives were behaving in the House.

    Present situation

    • In the present case, however, the Opposition has accused the Chairman of stopping the telecast of the proceedings in Rajya Sabha.
    • What cannot be denied is that Speaker’s/Chairman’s actions are often dictated more by expediency and the stand of the party that they belong to, rather than by the Rules and principles.
    • So, the ruling party of the day invariably insists on the maintenance of discipline, just as the Opposition insists on its right to protest. And their positions change when their roles flip.

  • Roles, functions and limitations of Parliamentary Committees

    The government pushed through two crucial agriculture Bills in Rajya Sabha, rejecting Opposition demands to refer them to a Select Committee of Rajya Sabha.

    Try this PYQ:

    With reference to the Parliament of India which of the following Parliamentary Committees scrutinizes and reports to the House whether the powers to make regulations, rules, sub-rules, bylaws, etc. conferred by the Constitution or delegated by the Parliament are being properly exercised by the Executive within the scope of such delegation?(CSP 2018)

    (a) Committee on Government Assurances

    (b) Committee on Subordinate Legislation

    (c) Rules Committee

    (d) Business Advisory Committee

    What is a Parliamentary Committee?

    • It means a Committee which is appointed or elected by the House or nominated by the Speaker and which works under the direction of the Speaker and presents its report to the House or to the Speaker and the Secretariat for which is provided by the Lok Sabha Secretariat.

    By their nature, Parliamentary Committees are of two kinds: Standing Committees and Ad hoc Committees.

    1. Standing Committees are permanent and regular committees which are constituted from time to time in pursuance of the provisions of an Act of Parliament or Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha. The work of these Committees is of continuous nature. The Financial Committees, DRSCs and some other Committees come under the category of Standing Committees.
    2. Ad hoc Committees are appointed for a specific purpose and they cease to exist when they finish the task assigned to them and submit a report. The principal Ad hoc Committees are the Select and Joint Committees on Bills. Railway Convention Committee, Joint Committee on Food Management in Parliament House Complex etc also come under the category of ad hoc Committees.

    Why need Parliamentary Committee?

    • Parliament scrutinizes legislative proposals (Bills) in two ways. The first is by discussing it on the floor of the two Houses.
    • This is a legislative requirement; all Bills have to be taken up for debate.
    • The time spent debating the bills can vary. They can be passed in a matter of minutes, or debate and voting on them can run late into the night.
    • Since Parliament meets for 70 to 80 days in a year, there is not enough time to discuss every Bill in detail on the floor of the House.

    Its role in the passage of a Bill

    • The debate in the house is mostly political and does not go into the technical details of a legislative proposal.
    • The second mechanism is by referring a Bill to a parliamentary committee. It takes care of the legislative infirmity of debate on the floor of the House.
    • However, referring to Bills to parliamentary committees is not mandatory.

    And what is a Select Committee?

    • India’s Parliament has multiple types of committees.
    • They can be differentiated on the basis of their work, their membership and the length of their tenure. First are committees that examine bills, budgets and policies of ministries.
    • These are called departmentally related Standing Committees. There are 24 such committees and between them, they focus on the working of different ministries.
    • Each committee has 31 MPs, 21 from Lok Sabha and 10 from Rajya Sabha.
    • The main purpose is to ensure the accountability of Government to Parliament through a more detailed consideration of measures in these committees.
    • The purpose is not to weaken or criticize the administration but to strengthen by investing in with more meaningful parliamentary support.

    When does a committee examine a Bill?

    • Bills are not automatically sent to committees for examination. There are three broad paths by which a Bill can reach a committee.
    • The first is when the minister piloting the Bill recommends to the House that his Bill be examined by a Select Committee of the House or a joint committee of both Houses.
    • Last year Electronics and IT Minister moved a motion in Lok Sabha referring the Personal Data Protection Bill to a Joint Committee.
    • If the minister makes no such motion, it is up to the presiding officer of the House to decide whether to send a Bill to a departmentally related Standing Committee.

    What happens when a bill goes to a Committee?

    • Sending a Bill to any committee results in two things.
    • First, the committee undertakes a detailed examination of the Bill. It invites comments and suggestions from experts, stakeholders and citizens.
    • The government also appears before the committee to present its viewpoint.
    • All this results in a report that makes suggestions for strengthening the Bill. While the committee is deliberating on a Bill, there is a pause in its legislative journey.
    • It can only progress in Parliament after the committee has submitted its report. Usually, parliamentary committees are supposed to submit their reports in three months, but sometimes it can take longer.

    What happens after the report?

    • The report of the committee is of a recommendatory nature. The government can choose to accept or reject its recommendations.
    • Very often the government incorporates suggestions made by committees. Select Committees and JPCs have an added advantage.
    • In their report, they can also include their version of the Bill. If they do so, the minister in charge of that particular Bill can move for the committee’s version of the Bill to be discussed and passed in the House.

  • What are Supplementary Grants?

    Finance Minister has tabled the first batch of Supplementary Demands for Grants for this financial year in the Lok Sabha.

    Supplementary Demand for Grants

    • Article 115 of the constitution provides for Supplementary, additional or excess grants. (Note: Article 116 provides for Votes on account, votes of credit and exceptional grants.)
    • They are additional grants which are required to meet the expenditure of the government
    • Their demand is presented when the authorized amounts are insufficient and need for additional expenditure has arisen.

    Why need supplementary grants?

    • When actual expenditure incurred exceeds the approved grants of the Parliament, the Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Railways presents a Demand for Excess Grant.
    • It is needed for government expenditure over and above the amount for which Parliamentary approval was already obtained during the Budget session.
    • When grants, authorised by the Parliament, fall short of the required expenditure, an estimate is presented before the Parliament for Supplementary or Additional grants.
    • These grants are presented and passed by the Parliament before the end of the financial year.

    Who notices such grants?

    • The Comptroller and Auditor General of India bring such excesses to the notice of the Parliament.
    • The Public Accounts Committee examines these excesses and gives recommendations to the Parliament.

    What are other grants?

    • Excess Grant: It is the grant in excess of the approved grants for meeting the requisite expenses of the government.
    • Additional Grant: It is granted when a need has arisen during the current financial year for supplementary or additional expenditure upon some new service not contemplated in the Budget for that year.
    • Token Grant: When funds to meet proposed expenditure on a new service can be made available by re-appropriation, demand for the grant of a token sum may be submitted to the vote of the House and, if the House assents to the demand, funds may be so made available.

  • Departmental Standing committees

    The article analyses the issue of tenure of the members of the Department related committees and suggest the changes to the rules about the tenure.

    Context

    • There was speculation in the media that the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha, M. Venkaiah Naidu, is keen on amending the rules to give them a fixed tenure of two years.

    Why 2-year tenure?

    • According to the Rajya Sabha Rules, the term of office of the “members” of the committees shall not exceed one year.
    • Thus, it is the term of office of the members and not that of the committees per se that is one year.
    • The tenurial issue has to be looked at against the backdrop of the fact that the Rajya Sabha itself undergoes partial biennial renewal.
    • While Lok Sabha has a fixed tenure of five years, unless sooner dissolved.
    • Given these facts,2-year tenure suggestion is in consonance with the biennial partial reconstitution of the Rajya Sabha.

    Need to rethink the tenurial prescription

    • In case of Lok Sabha, the major reconstitution takes place when a new Lok Sabha is elected, that is normally after five years.
    • Since Rajya Sabha elects new member every two years and the Lok Sabha after every five years, it is only once in 10 years that the requirement of major reshuffle of the Standing Committees in both the Houses is expected to coincide.
    • Given the different election schedules of the two Houses, there is perhaps no need to mandate the same term for the members of both the Houses.

    Way forward

    • There are 24 Department-related Standing Committees, each with a membership of 31 (10 of the Rajya Sabha and 21 of the Lok Sabha).
    • They can accommodate 240 members of the Rajya Sabha and 504 members of the Lok Sabha.
    • Therefore, once a member is nominated to a committee, he should be allowed to continue till he retires or otherwise discontinues the membership in order that the committee is able to benefit from his experience and expertise.
    • The Standing Committees are permanent. Hence, there should be no difficulty if the terms of the members of the two Houses on these committees are different, in consonance with the tenure of the Houses themselves.
    • Given these facts, it would stand to reason if the tenure of Department-related Standing Committees is prescribed differently for the two Houses.
    • The Rules could also provide that casual vacancies may be filled in by the Presiding Officers.

    Conclusion

    While making changes to the rules the Chairman and the Speaker should consider the different tenure for the members of the two Houses on the Department-related committees.

  • Why the Question Hour matters?

    The decision to go without “Question Hour” during the Monsoon Session of Parliament has evoked serious concerns about the democratic functioning of the institution.

    This newscard is very narrative in its form and scope. Try this question as well-

    Q.Discuss the various instruments of Parliamentary Control in India.

    What is Question Hour?

    • Question Hour is the liveliest hour in Parliament. It is during this one hour that MPs ask questions of ministers and hold them accountable for the functioning of their ministries.
    • Prior to Independence, the first question asked of government was in 1893. It was on the burden cast on village shopkeepers who had to provide supplies to touring government officers.
    • The questions that MPs ask are designed to elicit information and trigger suitable action by ministries.
    • Over the last 70 years, MPs have successfully used this parliamentary device to shine a light on government functioning.
    • Their questions have exposed financial irregularities and brought data and information regarding government functioning to the public domain.
    • With the broadcasting since 1991, Question Hour has become one of the most visible aspects of parliamentary functioning.

    Its evolution

    • The right to question the executive has been exercised by members of the House from the colonial period.
    • The first Legislative Council in British India under the Charter Act, 1853, showed some degree of independence by giving members the power to ask questions to the executive.
    • Later, the Indian Council Act of 1861 allowed members to elicit information by means of questions.
    • However, it was the Indian Council Act, 1892, which formulated the rules for asking questions including short notice questions.
    • The next stage of the development of procedures related to questions came up with the framing of rules under the Indian Council Act, 1909, which incorporated provisions for asking supplementary questions by members.
    • The Montague-Chelmsford reforms brought forth a significant change in 1919 by incorporating a rule that the first hour of every meeting was earmarked for questions. Parliament has continued this tradition.
    • In 1921, there was another change. The question, on which a member desired to have an oral answer, was distinguished by him with an asterisk, a star. This marked the beginning of starred questions.

    Its significance

    • Question Hour is not only an opportunity for the members to raise questions, but it is a parliamentary device primarily meant for exercising legislative control over executive actions.
    • The government’s actions erode the constitutional mandate of parliamentary oversight over executive actions as envisaged under Article 75 (3) of the Indian Constitution.

  • Parliamentary oversight and cancellation of question hour

    The article highlights the significance of question hour in democracy.

    Context

    • The decision to go without “Question Hour” during the Monsoon Session of Parliament, beginning September 14, has evoked serious concerns about the democratic functioning of the institution.

    Significance of question hour

    • Question Hour is an opportunity for the members to raise questions,
    • It is also a parliamentary device primarily meant for exercising legislative control over executive actions.
    • It is also a device to criticise government policies and programmes, ventilate public grievances, expose the government’s lapses, extract promises from ministers.
    • In short, question hour helps to ensure accountability and transparency in governance.

    Right to question the executive: Historical background

    • The right to question the executive has been exercised by members of the House from the colonial period.
    • The first Legislative Council in British India under the Charter Act, 1853, allowed members the power to ask questions to the executive.
    • The Indian Council Act of 1861 allowed members to elicit information by means of questions.
    • However, it was the Indian Council Act, 1892, which formulated the rules for asking questions including short notice questions.
    • The Indian Council Act, 1909, which incorporated provisions for asking supplementary questions by members.
    • The Montague-Chelmsford reforms brought forth a significant change in 1919 by incorporating a rule that the first hour of every meeting was earmarked for questions.
    • Parliament has continued this tradition.
    • Since 1921, the question on which a member desired to have an oral answer, was distinguished by him with an asterisk, a star.

    Recent instances in which right to ask questions was curtailed

    • The government passed important bills in the first session of the 17th Lok Sabha before the formation of department-related standing committees.
    • The Constitution Amendment Bill on J&K was introduced without circulating copies to the members.
    • Several important bills were passed as Finance Bills to avoid scrutiny of the Rajya Sabha.
    • Standing committees are an extension of Parliament.
    • Any person has the right to present his/her opinion to a Bill during the process of consideration.

    Consider the question “What is the significance of question hour in the context of democracy in India? What is the implication of its suspension due to pandemic?”

    Conclusion

    The government’s actions erode the constitutional mandate of parliamentary oversight over executive actions as envisaged under Article 75 (3) of the Indian Constitution.

  • What constitutes a breach of the legislature’s privilege?

    A motion for breach of privilege was moved in the Maharashtra Assembly against a news channel’s editor-in-chief. A similar motion was moved in the Maharashtra Legislative Council against an actor.

    Try this PYQ:

    Q.With reference to the Parliament of India, which of the following Parliamentary Committees scrutinizes and reports to the House whether the powers to make regulations, rules, sub-rules, by-laws etc. conferred by the constitution of delegated by the Parliament are being properly exercised by the Executive within the scope of such delegation?

    (a) Committee on Government Assurances

    (b) Committee on Subordinate Legislation

    (c) Rules Committee

    (d) Business Advisory Committee

    Provisions to protect the privileges of the legislature

    • The powers, privileges and immunities of either House of the Indian Parliament and of its Members and committees are laid down in Article 105 of the Constitution.
    • Article 194 deals with the powers, privileges and immunities of the State Legislatures, their Members and their committees.
    • Parliamentary privilege refers to the right and immunity enjoyed by legislatures, in which legislators are granted protection against civil or criminal liability for actions done or statements made in the course of their legislative duties.

    What constitutes a breach of this privilege?

    • While the Constitution has accorded special privileges and powers to parliamentarians and legislators to maintain the dignity and authority of the Houses, these powers and privileges are not codified.
    • Thus, there are no clear, notified rules to decide what constitutes a breach of privilege, and the punishment it attracts.
    • Any act that obstructs or impedes either House of the state legislature in performing its functions, or which obstructs or impedes any Member or Officer of such House in the discharge of his duty, or has a tendency, directly or indirectly, to produce such results is treated as a breach of privilege.
    • It is a breach of privilege and contempt to print or publish libel reflecting on the character or proceedings of the House or its Committees or on any member of the House for or relating to his character or conduct as a legislator.

    Procedure followed in cases of an alleged breach

    • The Legislative Assembly Speaker or Legislative Council Chairman constitutes a Privileges Committee consisting of 15 members in the Assembly and 11 members in the Council.
    • The members to the committee which has quasi-judicial powers are nominated based on the party strength in the Houses.
    • The Speaker or Chairman first decides on the motions.
    • If the privilege and contempt are found prima facie, then the Speaker or Chairman will forward it to the Privileges Committee by following the due procedure.
    • At present, there is no Privileges Committee in either House of the state legislature.
    • The Committee will seek an explanation from all the concerned, will conduct an inquiry and will make a recommendation based on the findings to the state legislature for its consideration.

    What is the punishment for this?

    • If the Committee finds the offender guilty of breach of privilege and contempt, it can recommend the punishment.
    • The punishment can include communicating the displeasure of the state legislature to the offender, summoning the offender before the House and giving a warning, and even sending the offender to jail.
    • In the case of the media, press facilities of the state legislature may be withdrawn, and a public apology may be sought.