“Legislative Privileges and Criminal Accountability of Legislators in India: A Critical Analysis”

Abstract

The paper analyses the conflict between privileges of the law making and the criminal responsibility of law makers in India and how the constitutional protection of the legislators overlaps with the rule of law. Parliamentary privileges, special rights, immunities and exemptions granted to members of Parliament and state legislatures to enable them to exercise their work freely, e.g. freedom of speech in the legislature and immunity on actions taken during the performance of legislative responsibilities under Articles 105 and 194 of the Constitution[1]. The paper utilises a doctrinal approach, which examines the provisions in the constitution, judicial statements, and scholarly writings to determine whether the said privileges afford protection to legislators against criminal liability outside the legislative functions. One of the areas of the analysis is new judicial illumination of the limits of immunity, especially the Supreme Court case that its members do not obtain protection against bribery in other areas of parliamentary work, and thus the scope of privilege is restricted. The results reveal that privileges are very vital in maintaining legislative independence and a healthy debate devoid of unreasonable and unwarranted influence, but should not be used as a way out of committing crimes that are not within the legislative mandate. The researcher introduces gaps in the constitutional text and offers the need of more understandable standards in order to create a balance between the protective immunities and democratic accountability. Lastly, the paper recommends specific changes by way of better statutory explanation and more robust ethical regulation, to ensure that legislators are not subject to the ordinary criminal law, and yet, they are afforded the protection needed to effectively fulfill their constitutional roles.