Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
The Indian Constitution guarantees certain rights and privileges to its legislators to ensure freedom of speech and expression within the legislative chambers without fear of undue interference. Article 105 deals with Parliament and its members, while Article 194 mirrors it for State Legislatures. The question highlights a crucial aspect: both are “exact reproductions” of each other, implying a shared underlying rationale. This signifies that principles governing parliamentary privilege at the Union level apply analogously to state legislatures. Understanding their complementary nature is vital for comprehending the framework of legislative immunity within India’s federal structure.
Understanding Article 105 and Article 194
Article 105 of the Constitution deals with privileges of Parliament and its members, while Article 194 addresses similar privileges for State Legislatures. The core similarity lies in their verbatim repetition – a deliberate choice by the framers to ensure uniformity in legislative immunity across both levels of government.
Key Provisions of Article 105
- Freedom of Speech: Members of Parliament have freedom of speech in Parliament and its committees, not subject to any undue restrictions.
- Publication of Proceedings: The publication of reports, papers, votes, and proceedings of Parliament is deemed as privileged. This protects the process of legislative deliberation from external interference.
- Contempt of Houses: Any act that obstructs or interferes with the functioning of Parliament can be considered contempt.
Key Provisions of Article 194
- Freedom of Speech (State Legislature): Similar to Article 105, members of State Legislatures enjoy freedom of speech within the state legislature and its committees.
- Publication of Proceedings (State Legislature): Publication of reports, papers, votes, and proceedings of the State Legislature are also considered privileged.
- Contempt of Houses (State Legislature): Any action that obstructs or interferes with the functioning of a State Legislature is subject to contempt proceedings.
Why Read Articles 105 & 194 Together?
While seemingly identical, reading both articles together provides a broader perspective on legislative privilege in India.
Ensuring Consistency and Federal Balance
- Uniformity of Principle: The repetition highlights the constitutional intent to treat both Union and State legislatures with equal respect regarding their internal workings.
- Federal Structure: It underscores the principle of federalism, where legislative autonomy is essential for effective governance at both levels.
Illustrative Examples & Case Studies
Consider instances where debates in state assemblies have been challenged on grounds of defamation or breach of privilege. Reading Article 194 alongside Article 105 strengthens the argument for legislative immunity, drawing parallels from established precedents concerning Parliament.
The Role of Committees
Both articles explicitly extend privileges to committees formed by the respective legislatures. This is crucial as much legislative work happens within these committees. The privilege extends to reporting and deliberation processes.
Potential Challenges & Interpretations
Despite their similarity, interpretations can differ based on specific contexts. Courts often consider the spirit of the Constitution while adjudicating matters related to parliamentary/legislative privilege.
| Feature | Article 105 (Parliament) | Article 194 (State Legislature) |
|---|---|---|
| Subject Matter | Privileges of Parliament and its members | Privileges of State Legislatures and their members |
| Freedom of Speech | Guaranteed for Members in Parliament & Committees | Guaranteed for Members in State Legislature & Committees |
| Publication of Proceedings | Considered Privileged | Considered Privileged |
| Contempt | Acts obstructing Parliamentary functioning are contempt | Acts obstructing State Legislative functioning are contempt |
Limitations and Judicial Scrutiny
While legislative privileges are significant, they aren’t absolute. The Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized that these privileges must be exercised reasonably and not violate fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution (Article 19, Article 21).
Conclusion
In conclusion, Articles 105 and 194 are intrinsically linked; their identical language underscores the constitutional commitment to safeguarding legislative independence at both Union and State levels. Reading them together offers a holistic understanding of parliamentary privilege in India's federal framework. While these privileges are vital for robust debate and scrutiny, they must be exercised responsibly, respecting fundamental rights and adhering to judicial interpretations that prevent abuse and maintain a balance between legislative autonomy and constitutional values.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.