Jagdeep Dhankar, Rajya Sabha Chairman has raised complaints against Derek O’Brien from TMC and Raghav Chadha from Aam Aadmi Party relating to privileges of the House to the privilege committee on August 3.
There have been differences between the ruling and the opposition party that have impacted the Monsoon Session of the sittings. The complaints by the opposition were demanding Prime Minister Narendra Modi appear in the Parliament and address the violence issue in the state of Manipur.
The Hon’ble Chairman, Rajya Sabha, after considering the facts, has referred the matter to lie under Rule 203 of Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the Council of States (Rajya Sabha) to the Committee of Privileges for the purposes of examination, report, and investigation. This has been stated through a bulletin the Rajya Sabha secretariat issued on Thursday. As per the rule, any question of privilege can be issued by the Chairman to the Committee of Privileges for investigation and examination.
What moved the complaints?
As expressed by the Rajya Sabha secretariat, it was BJP members Surendra Singh Chadha and Laxmikant Bajpayee who filed the complaint against O’Brien, and in the case of Raghav Chadhha, the complaints were filed by Deepak Prakash and Sushil Kumar Modi.
The basis of complaints against O’Brien was the repeated publishing of the clips of the man’s statement that were made on July 20 in the House via his verified personal Twitter account, despite that those statements were removed by the chairman.
In the case of Raghav Chadha, the complaints alleged “an international and deliberate act of presenting and misleading facts to the media” relating to the suspension of Sanjay Singh from the service of the Council for the rest of the period of the 260th session of Rajya Sabha for his indecorous behavior and repeated violation of directions of the Chair.”
The complaint also said that a few members also alleged that Raghav Chaddha stated that Sanjay Singh would remain to sit inside the Chamber in spite of getting suspended from the Council service. However, this would have violated Rule 256 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the Council of States (Rajya Sabha), as per the notice.
ALSO READ: What are the newly imposed restrictions on personal laptop/ computer imports? Why is the move taken?
Understanding privilege motion
The present case talks about something called bas parliamentary privilege. these are some rights bestowed to the Members of the Parliament for the purpose of conducting the Parliament’s business. While these privileges are not codified anywhere, some of these rights empower the individual to free expression in Parliamentary debates. Additionally, in such a case, Members of the Parliament are not going to be liable for court proceedings in this case.
Basically, all the Members of the Parliament (MPs) are entitled to a few rights and immunities, both collectively and individually. The purpose is to make them able to discharge their functions and duties effectively. In case any of these immunities and rights get disregarded by any of the members of the Rajya Sabha or the Lok Sabha, it will become an offense, known as the “breach of privilege”. Just like every other offence, this one too would be punishable as per the Laws of Parliament.
The member from any house can move such a notice in the form of a motion against a person who s/he feels is guilty of breach of privilege.
ALSO READ: The government issues a warning opposing Akira. What is the Akira ransomware? Understand it today
Categories: Trends
Source: HIS Education