This article has been written by Ms. Sejal Birani, a student studying B.COM LLB (Hons.) from Institute of Law, Nirma University, Ahmedabad. The author is a second year law student.
INTRODUCTION-
This article highlights various instances of unethical conduct by the members of Parliament inside the house and discusses its negative impact with respect to the functioning of the entire nation. The article elaborately explains the Code of Conduct that has been formulated by the House, specifically the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Ethics, which has been entrusted with the task of maintaining ethical behaviour in the House. The committees have been formulated both at the central and state levels to discourage unethical conduct by members of parliament and the legislature. Furthermore, now that there are advancements in new technologies in the communication sector, remarks on the floor of the House spread fast, even if they are expunged from the records. In light of recent incidents, it has become necessary that the MPs follow certain decorum when speaking inside the House as well as outside. The article also explains how members of the house are violating parliamentary privileges through unethical behaviour, which leads to contempt of Parliament (House).
CONTEMPT OF PARLIAMENT-
The privileges and immunity accorded to members of Parliament and the Parliament itself are known as parliamentary privileges. The purpose of giving these rights is to give members of Parliament the freedom to carry out their duties without interference from outside forces. Contempt of Parliament results from violating the privileges granted to the parliament by Article 105 (Powers, Privileges, and Other Matters of the Houses of Parliament and of the Members and Committees Thereof) and to the state legislatures by Article 194 ( Powers, Privileges, and Other Matters of the House of Legislatures and of the Members and Committees Thereof). This includes actions like obstructing the house’s business or proceedings, releasing news articles or speeches without the house’s approval, etc. Let us understand in detail what “contempt of Parliament” means.
A proceeding for contempt of the Parliament House may be brought against someone who obstructs the conduct of a proceeding or interferes with an officer’s or member’s ability to perform their duties. This obstruction can be both direct and indirect in nature. Parliament is a body that takes all the relevant decisions with respect to the functioning of the country. A person committing contempt deliberately obstructs the parliament and thus negatively impacts the functioning of the nation.
In addition to the aforementioned crimes, we frequently witness assault, the use of unlawful force, vandalism, intimidation, and kidnapping on the House floor or in connection with House proceedings. If done in ordinary circumstances and outside the house, the person committing it would be prosecuted as a criminal offender. The majority of the time, members of parliament use their powers to seek immunity from prosecution, which doesn’t seem to be a legitimate legal justification for protecting guilty behaviour. For instance, the provisions of the IPC have extra-territorial operation. A declaration made pursuant to Section 3 of the IPC provides that all culpable acts performed outside of India shall be subject to the same legal sanctions as if they had been committed domestically. Additionally, Section 4 states that any crime committed by an Indian citizen outside of India, aboard an Indian-registered ship, or in an aircraft, regardless of location, is punishable by law. Parliamentary privileges should not be used as a legal justification for seeking immunity, considering the legal proposals that have been made to exempt the culpable activities that are punishable under the IPC if they are undertaken on the floor of the House. The Constitution should be amended appropriately in this regard. If necessary, separate adjudicatory mechanisms should be established to handle offences committed on the House floor or in connection with the House’s proceedings. The elected official who was found guilty of the crime should be made to renounce his or her position in addition to serving his or her term for his unethical behaviour. Additionally, it appears necessary to define the elected representative’s privileges in a way that excludes immoral, dishonest, and unlawful behaviour.
CODE OF CONDUCT-EVOLUTION –
In 1964, a code for Union ministers was established, and state governments were urged to follow it as well. The establishment of “Parliamentary Standing Committees on Ethics” in both Houses was the first step to regulate the behaviour of the Members of Parliament (MPs). For Rajya Sabha, the Committee was established in 1997 to regulate the moral and ethical behaviour of the Members and to investigate issues that were reported to it involving ethical and other wrongdoing on the part of Members. In the year 2000, the Lok Sabha established its first “Ethics Committee.”
CODE OF CONDUCT IN RAJYA SABHA-
Since 2005, there has been a 14-point Code of Conduct for House members, which states that: a) Private interests are subordinate to the responsibilities of holding public office.
b) The public interest is not jeopardised.
c) Members shall never expect or accept any payment or advantage in exchange for casting a vote in favour of a bill, voting against one, etc. on the floor of the House.
d) Members are forbidden from taking any actions that harm the reputation of the Parliament or their own credibility.
e) Members are required to use their influence in the legislature to enhance the general welfare of the populace.
f) Members ought to support the advancement of secular ideals and refrain from showing disrespect to any faith or religion.
g) Members shall keep the fundamental obligations outlined in Part IVA of the Constitution at the forefront of their minds.
h) In public life, members are expected to uphold high standards of morality, dignity, decency, and ideals.
Rule 256 of the Rajya Sabha’s Rules of Procedure:
It specifies the acts of misconduct. An MP may be suspended in accordance with this if they disobey the Chair’s authority, wilfully break the rules, or interfere with the House’s business. However, the house, not the chairman, has the authority to suspend a member of parliament. According to Rajya Sabha Rule 255, the chairman just mentions the member whose behaviour, in his judgment, was improper or disorderly, and the Parliamentary Affairs Minister or another minister moves the resolution to suspend the member. The House may pass a motion excluding the member from House service for a time frame no longer than the remainder of the current session. The suspension may be ended by another motion made by the House, though.
CODE OF CONDUCT IN LOK SABHA –
Since the 13th Lok Sabha, the Ethics Committee has been established for each newly elected Lok Sabha. The task of creating a code of conduct for Lok Sabha members and periodically proposing changes to the code was given to the Ethics Committee in August 2015. Every allegation of unethical behaviour by a Lok Sabha member that the Speaker refers to the Committee for investigation is investigated, and the Committee makes any recommendations it sees fit. The house has created comprehensive rules of procedure known as “Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha” and “Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the Council of States” as part of the exercise of its authority under Article 118 (Rules of Procedure) of the Constitution of India.
Rule 374 and 374A (Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha)
The Speaker has the right to designate a member who consistently and wilfully obstructs the House’s business in violation of the Chair’s authority or House regulations. And the member so named will be suspended from the House for a period not exceeding the remainder of the session. Additionally, in accordance with Rule 374A, notwithstanding anything contained in rules 373 and 374, in the event of serious disorder brought about by a Member entering the House or violating the Rules of the House by repeatedly and purposefully obstructing its business by shouting slogans or in any other way, such Member shall, upon being named by the Speaker, stand automatically suspended from the service of the House for five consecutive sittings or the remainder of the session, whichever is less. With the condition that, whenever a motion is made, the House may decide to end the suspension.
INSTANCES OF UNETHICAL CONDUCT IN PARLIAMENT–
MPs from the Seemandhra region rushed to the House well while yelling insults. L Rajagopal, an industrialist and suspended Congressman from Vijayawada, discharged pepper spray into the House, giving some members searing sensations and forcing many of them to cough and sneeze. The protest against the controversial Telangana Bill turned ugly the moment Home Minister Sushil Kumar Shinde tabled the bill in the Lok Sabha session.
The Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly had a riot on October 21, 1997, with MLAs grabbing microphones, chairs, and other objects to throw at one another. Security pulled off the tops of desks as a shield for the Speaker.
On November 10, 2009, at the Maharashtra state assembly, an assault took place on a member of the Maharashtra Legislature. Abu Azmi, one of the participants, who could not speak Marathi, took the oath in Urdu. Right-wing group Maharashtra Navnirman Sena objected to this because they wanted Marathi to be the state’s official language. Four members of MNS were suspended for four years for disrupting the proceedings of the legislature.
On 25 March 1989, a riot broke out in the state legislative assembly in Tamil Nadu between members of the ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam party and the now-unified opposition ADMK over the reading of the state budget. In the melee, Durai Murugan tried to disrobe J. Jayalalithaa, Muthuvel Karunanidhi had his sunglasses broken, and the budget was torn up by angry rioter.
According to Delhi High Court ,the petitioner’s actions in Om Prakash Sharma vs. Legislative Assembly of National Terittory of Delhi,2018 met the criteria established by the Supreme Court in the Amarinder Singh case. The offensive comments were uttered on the House floor during a discussion of a public matter. It was closely related to and directly related to the petitioner’s responsibilities, roles, and tasks as a legislator. Hence the judgement stated that his actions caused the House’s proceedings to be interrupted for two days, which interfered with the House’s ability to pass legislation and thus it was termed as an unethical conduct.
CONCLUSION –
The Members frequently engage in behaviour that is inconsistent with the norms that the House is entitled to expect of its members, in addition to committing serious offences and not upholding the dignity of the House and other Members through their unethical behavior. When such unethical behaviour is made public, it undermines the credibility of Parliament as an organisation and a supporter of national democracy. Any democracy cannot succeed without the legitimacy of a democratic institution like Parliament and the integrity of its members. Members of Parliament are required to uphold a specific standard of behaviour both inside and outside the House in order to uphold the best traditions in parliamentary life. As a result, members’ behaviour shouldn’t be against the rules, offensive to the House’s honour, or in any other manner inconsistent with the standards that Parliament is allowed to demand of its members.
REFERENCES –
https://www.drishtiias.com/daily-updates/daily-news-analysis/rules-regarding-suspension-of-mps
https://iasbaba.com/2022/07/suspension-of-member-of-parliament/
https://cms.rajyasabha.nic.in/UploadedFiles/Procedure/RajyaSabhaAtWork/English/311-345/CHAPTER9.pdf
“Indian Government Ousts State Leaders”. 22 October 1997
https://caravanmagazine.in/vantage/titans-tn-assembly
1989 ugly episode haunts the House”. The Hindu. 26 March 2003.
Aishwarya Says:
Law students often face problems, which they cannot share with their friends and families. We have started a column on our website Student’s Corner. In this column we are talking to several law students about the challenges that they face. Students who are interested in participating in the same, can fill this Google Form.
IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING IN THE SAME, DO LET ME KNOW.
The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.
If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems to aishwarya@aishwaryasandeep.com
Join our Whatsapp Group for latest Job Opening