House privileges yet to be codified

The founding fathers had left the job to the law-makers. As a temporary measure, they had passed Articles 105 and 194 of the Constitution dealing with the powers, privileges and immunities of the legislatures.

They state that till the law is codified, the powers, privileges and immunities of the Houses "shall be such as may from time to time be defined by the legislature by law, and until so defined, shall be those of the House of Commons of the Parliament of the UK".

More than half a century has passed, but few attempts have been made to codify the privileges. Some half-hearted attempts were made in the 1970s and an amendment was passed but it was not enforced.

The reason why the law-makers are not keen on passing such a law is obvious. They would be bound by such a law unlike now when they are virtually a law unto themselves.

Moreover, if a law is passed, it would be subject to the Fundamental Rights of the citizens, which includes freedom of the media and the right to life and liberty. Therefore, the law-makers stand to gain by not making a law curtailing their so-called privileges.

These privileges flow from the colonial days, and even in the land of its origin, they have been modified drastically and many abandoned. But our legislators defy even the courts to protect these archaic privileges.

The concept is increasingly becoming anachronistic in a democratic society. Whatever privileges are now recognised in the civilised world are meant to protect the citizens and not to be used against them.

The Tamil Nadu House has a history of using legislative privilege to harass editors, cartoonists and other critics leading to recurrent confrontation with the judiciary. The privileges panel had defied the notice of the Supreme Court in a case involving the editor of Dinakaran in the Eighties.

KP Sunil, a journalist of a reputed English weekly, had to seek the protection of the Supreme Court again from the breach of privilege action by the Assembly. The editor of Ananda Vikatan was sentenced to three months rigorous imprisonment for publishing a cartoon depicting an MLA as a pickpocket and a minister as a dacoit.

The world outside Tamil Nadu is rather liberal in this field of law. C Rajago-palachari once told a public meeting that "the representatives of a political party in the legislatures were people whom any first class magistrate would round up."

Action against him flopped. Dharma Vira, erstwhile governor of Mysore, once stated that "the legislatures were being used as a stage for wrestling." Again, attempts to move privilege action failed.

In the land of origin of the concept of privilege itself, The Times of London wrote in 1887 that certain members of Parliament drew their living "from the steady perpetration of crimes for which civilisation demands the gallows".

This was not held to be contempt of the house. Centuries later, the dead concept of privilege is invoked by more corrupt persons to harass those who protect society.