By indulging in bribery, MPs or MLAs destroy integrity in public life. They cannot escape in the name of privilege. If we think that they are exempted, then it would be tantamount to keeping aside the basic ideals, basic goals and basic discussion of the Constitution.
In a democratic structure, under the parliamentary system, the basic ideal, the basic goal and the basic discussion of the Constitution are at the center of the citizen only. According to the Constitution, there are no truly respectable or honorable MPs or MLAs, rather this right has been given to the citizens. MPs or MLAs have not got the privilege to be respectable or to fulfill their political interests, but to work for the welfare of the citizens. The discussion of privileges under the Constitution is also citizen-centric.
Claim of privilege and judicial review
The supreme court, in concluding its order, said that unlike the house of Commons of the United Kingdom, india does not have 'ancient and undoubted' privileges which were vested after a conflict between parliament and the King. Before independence, privileges in india were governed by law before the reluctant colonial government. After the implementation of the Constitution, statutory privilege was transformed into constitutional privilege. The supreme court also made it clear that being a constitutional privilege, it can be judicially reviewed whether the claim of privilege in a particular case is in accordance with the parameters of the Constitution or not.
An mp or mla cannot claim privilege under Articles 105 and 194 from prosecution on charges of bribery in connection with a vote or speech in the House. If such a claim is made, it raises questions about the collective functioning of the house as well as the discharge of that person's duties as a member of the legislature.
click and follow Indiaherald WhatsApp channel