The ‘Powers, Privileges and Immunities of Parliament and its Members’ as envisaged in Article 105 of the Constitution leave room for a large number of uncodified and unenumerated privileges to continue. Assess the reasons for the absence of legal codification of the ‘parliamentary privileges’. How can this problem be addressed?
The ‘Powers, Privileges and Immunities of Parliament and its Members’ as envisaged in Article 105 of the Constitution leave room for a large number of uncodified and unenumerated privileges to continue. Assess the reasons for the absence of legal codification of the ‘parliamentary privileges’. How can this problem be addressed?
Parliamentary privileges remain largely uncodified under Article 105, creating ambiguity about their scope and application in contemporary democracy.
Reasons for Absence of Legal Codification
Historical and Constitutional Factors
- British Legacy: Inherited Westminster system where privileges evolved through conventions and precedents rather than statutory law
- Constitutional Design: Article 105 deliberately mirrors House of Commons privileges as they existed in 1950, maintaining flexibility
- Framers' Intent: Constitutional drafters preferred adaptable framework over rigid codification
- Judicial Recognition: Supreme Court acknowledged Parliament's inherent authority in determining privilege matters
- Democratic Precedence: Historical emphasis on parliamentary supremacy in Westminster democracies
Political and Practical Considerations
- Legislative Resistance: MPs' reluctance to limit their own powers through formal restrictions
- Political Consensus Gap: Lack of agreement across party lines on privilege boundaries
- Contextual Application: Need for Speaker's discretion in addressing varied situations
- Evolutionary Nature: Privileges continue adapting to modern democratic challenges
- Federal Dynamics: Complex interplay between Parliament and state legislatures regarding privilege scope
| Codified Approach | Uncodified Approach |
|---|---|
| Clear legal boundaries | Flexible interpretation |
| Judicial review possible | Parliamentary self-regulation |
| Limited adaptability | Evolutionary development |
| Reduced ambiguity | Contextual application |
Addressing the Problem
Legal and Institutional Framework
- Comprehensive Legislation: Draft Parliamentary Privileges Act defining clear scope and limitations
- Constitutional Amendment: Consider Article 105 modification for better clarity
- Judicial Safeguards: Establish clear court-Parliament jurisdiction boundaries
- Independent Oversight: Create autonomous body for privilege violation investigations
- Regular Review Mechanism: Periodic assessment of privilege relevance and application
Modern Reforms and Balance
- Accountability Integration: Balance legislative independence with fundamental rights protection
- Technology Adaptation: Address digital age challenges in privilege application
- International Best Practices: Study codified systems in Australia, Canada for lessons
- Transparency Measures: Public disclosure of privilege invocation and outcomes
- Training Programs: Regular sensitization for MPs on ethical privilege use
The Supreme Court's 2024 judgment excluding bribery from parliamentary privileges signals evolving jurisprudence. A balanced codification framework ensuring legislative autonomy while preventing privilege misuse represents the optimal path forward for strengthening parliamentary democracy.
Answer Length
Model answers may exceed the word limit for better clarity and depth. Use them as a guide, but always frame your final answer within the exam’s prescribed limit.
In just 60 sec
Evaluate your handwritten answer
- Get detailed feedback
- Model Answer after evaluation
Model Answers by Subject
Crack UPSC with your
Personal AI Mentor
An AI-powered ecosystem to learn, practice, and evaluate with discipline
