News: The Supreme Court on Friday took suo motu cognisance and issued a contempt notice against the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly Secretary for browbeating Republic TV editor-in-chief Arnab Goswami for approaching the court in connection with an alleged breach of privilege motion.
About Legislative Privileges:
Article 105 and Article 194 grant privileges or advantages to the members of the parliament so that they can perform their duties or can function properly without any hindrances. Such privileges are granted as they are needed for democratic functioning.
These powers, privileges and immunities should be defined by the law from time-to-time. These privileges are considered as special provisions and have an overriding effect in conflict.
This is defined under Article 105(1) and clause (2). It gives the members of parliament freedom of speech under clause (1) and provides under Article 105(2) that no member of parliament will be liable in any proceedings before any Court for anything said or any vote given by him in the Parliament or any committee thereof.
Also, no person will be held liable for any publication of any report, paper, votes or proceedings if the publication is made by the parliament or any authority under it.
The same provisions are stated under Article 194, in that members of the legislature of a state is referred instead of members of parliament.
Both the Articles, Article 19(1)(a) and Article 105 of the Constitution talks about freedom of speech. Article 105 applies to the members of parliament not subjected to any reasonable restriction. Article19(1)(a) applies to citizens but are subject to reasonable restrictions.
Article 105 is an absolute privilege given to the members of the parliament but this privilege can be used in the premises of the parliament and not outside the parliament.
If any statement or anything is published outside the parliament by any member and if that is reasonably restricted under freedom of speech then that published article or statement will be considered as defamatory.
The Parliament has the power, which is given by the Constitution of India, to make its own rules but this power is subjected to the provisions of the Constitution. Though it can make its own rules, the rules should not be made for its own benefit. If they make any rule which infringes any provision of the Constitution then it would be held as void.
For the effective working of both the houses of parliament and their members, internal independence should exist without the interference of any outside party or person. The houses can deal with their respective issues internally without any interference of the statutory authority.
The Indian Judiciary might not interfere with the proceedings or issues dealt in the parliament or by the members in the course of their business. Nevertheless, it may interfere in the proceedings if it is found to be illegal or unconstitutional.
The member of parliament cannot be arrested 40 days before and 40 days after the session of the house. If in any case a member of Parliament is arrested within this period, the concerned person should be released in order to attend the session freely.
Right to exclude strangers from its proceedings and hold secret sessions: The object of including this right was to exclude any chances of daunting or threatening any of the members. The strangers may attempt to interrupt the sessions.
Right to prohibit the publication of its reporters and proceedings: The right has been granted to remove or delete any part of the proceedings took place in the house.
Right to punish members or outsiders for contempt: This right has been given to every house of the Parliament. If any of its members or maybe non-members commit contempt or breach any of the privileges given to him/her, the houses may punish the person.
The houses have the right to punish any person for any contempt made against the houses in the present or in the past.
2. LINE OF ACTUAL CONTROL
News: The Allahabad High Court has asked the Uttar Pradesh government if it is “fair and reasonable” to allow the District Magistrate (DM) of Hathras to continue in his post during the pendency of the investigation into the case of alleged rape, and ‘hurried’ cremation of the victim, as he was in “the thick of things.”
The Line of Actual Control (LAC) is a notional demarcation line that separates Indian-controlled territory from Chinese-controlled territory in the Sino-Indian border dispute.
The term is said to have been used by Zhou Enlai in a 1959 letter to Jawaharlal Nehru.
It subsequently referred to the line formed after the 1962 Sino-Indian War, and is part of the Sino-Indian border dispute.
The entire Sino-Indian border (including the western LAC, the small undisputed section in the centre, and the McMahon Line in the east) is 4,056 km (2,520 mi) long and traverses five Indian states/territories: Ladakh, Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh, Sikkim, and Arunachal Pradesh.