IN DEFENCE OF FREE SPEECH IN PARLIAMENT

Article 105 gives MPs broad immunity to speak freely in the House, while Article 118 allows the House to set boundaries. It's time this tension is resolved through a law

- MANISH TEWARI

DURING the recently-concluded budget session of parliament, a lighthearted repartee about who, how and in what order of precedence members get the right to address the House brought up a substantive issue.

For when MPs speak in parliament, they articulate the views of millions of their constituents, often on critical issues. To speak is to breathe.

So, what are the privileges of an MP provided for in the Constitution? Where does the power to frame the rules and procedures for conducting business in both Houses of parliament flow from? How did the office of the chairperson of the Council of States and the speaker of the House get created? What are the powers, privileges and immunities that the Constitution bestows on these august offices?

Article 93 creates the offices of the speaker and deputy speaker by election, while Article 64 provides that the vice president would be the ex-officio chairperson of the Council of States. Articles 89 to 97 about the officers of parliament and the procedure to appoint and remove them.

However, the Constitution only partially defines, that too spread over different Articles, the scope of the presiding officers' powers. The roles of these constitutional functionaries are delineated more by convention, tradition, precedent, rules of procedure, directions for functioning, rather than by the Constitution itself. Conversely, Article 105, which deals with the powers and privileges of the Houses, its members and committees, is far more precise and expansive.