No Immunity For Legislators For Criminal Acts In House
Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator. Author of Cyber Scams in India, Digital Arrest, The Money Trap and The Human Hack
View all posts by this Author
By Sunil Garodia
First publised on 2021-07-29 06:45:24
About the Author
Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator. Author of Cyber Scams in India, Digital Arrest, The Money Trap and The Human Hack
View all posts by this Author
In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that it would be wrong to focus just on the rights of the elected representatives and ignore the corresponding duties cast upon them and hence, the privileges and immunity granted to them could not act as a shield against criminal acts carried out in the House. The court said that "it was not the intention of the drafters of the Constitution to extend the interpretation of 'freedom of speech' to include criminal acts by placing them under a veil of protest".
The case before the apex court was a plea by Kerala that sought to quash a case against several MLAs of the LDF who had vandalized property in the state assembly while protesting against the budget presented by the UDF government in 2015. The cost of the damaged property was ascertained to be Rs 2,20,093. The court said that the withdrawal of prosecution against the MLAs "would amount to an interference with the normal course of justice for illegitimate reasons. Such an action is clearly extraneous to the vindication of the law to which all organs of the executive are bound".
Making a clear distinction between the privileges and immunity granted to legislators under the Constitution and the criminal acts of vandalism inside assemblies or Parliament, the court was of the opinion that the privileges granted to legislators were only "to enable them to perform their functions without interference, fear or favour". But that does not mean that they are privileged to vandalize public property under the garb of protest. The court also categorically stated that "privileges and immunities are not gateways (for MPs/MLAs) to claim exemption from the general law of the land".
MLAs and MPs sometimes behave inappropriately inside assemblies and Parliament. Apart from abusing each other and indulging in scuffles, they also damage public property by breaking mikes, throwing chairs, upturning tables and destroying other property on the premises. Apart from setting a wrong example (which the apex court said was to "betray the trust which is impressed on the character of elected representatives as makers and enactors of the law"), such damage also involves a monetary cost that needs to be made good by them. The Supreme Court is right in holding them accountable, just like any ordinary citizens, for criminal acts inside the House.
