Answer:

Parliamentary privilege refers to rights and immunities enjoyed by Parliament as an institution and MPs in their individual capacity, without which they cannot discharge their functions as entrusted upon them by the Constitution.

According to Article 105, the powers, privileges and immunities of Parliament and MPs are to be defined by the Parliament. No law has so far been enacted in this respect. In

the absence of any such law, it continues to be governed by British Parliamentary conventions.

Parliamentary privileges can be used as a tool against critics – the civil society and the media. This endangers the fundamental right to speech and expression of these institutions and the public. It can be corroborated from a recent incident in Karnataka, where journalists were sent to jail for breach of privileges.

There exists compelling reasons to clearly define and delimit parliamentary privileges to balance it with Fundamental Rights, because of the following reasons:

♤ To remove their vagueness, uncertainty and inscrutability.

♤ These Privileges may be misused to hide misdeeds like corruption and may have far-reaching implications for a clean public life. For example, in 1998, a constitutional bench of Supreme Court in P.V. Narasimha Rao vs. CBI held that bribe takers who had taken bribes and voted against the no-confidence motion were immune from prosecution; but the bribe givers have no such immunity.

♤ It raises the issue of conflict of interest as it allows parliamentarians to become judges in their own cause and thus violates the principle of fair trial.