This article is supposed clear a Layman's confusion on three questions of law which bothers him often.
1) Can a Member of Parliament stand up in house and speak against line of his political party? Can he say that I am against the law which my party is proposing to pass?
2) Which Law applies if one MP kills another MP on floor of House?
3) How far Team Anna's stand is valid on :-
(A) Janlokpal should have right to investigate conduct of members of Parliament inside the House also
(B) The Central Government should give Janlokpal power to investigate Central Government Employees working in various States also.
(I am not sure whether I have rightly understood their demands. But I will try to reflect on legality of these two aspects)
Question No.1) Can a Member of Parliament stand up in house and speak against line of his political party? Can he say that I am against the law which my party is proposing to pass?
I remember that it was Senior Advocate Ram Jethmalani who was arguing in Supreme Court, probably before Bench headed by Justice M.M. Punchhi (as he was then)
Ram Jethmalani put a question to himself. "Can we say that Rape by one person is crime, but if Rape is done by 50 to 80 persons, it is not a Crime?"
He was arguing anti-defection law.
If one MP of a Political party goes in favour of other Political party, it is illegal and he can be disqualified. But if One Third of a political party go in support of any other political party, it is legal. It can be done. It will not incur disqualification to any of the group.
Supreme Court rejected argument of Ram Jethmalani. And upheld the law.
Supreme Court avoided to answer hypothetical issues raised and left it for future Judges to answer them as when they arise.
Position of Law now is, no member can vote against party line.
But does it also prevent him to stand up in parliament and say that I disagree with the stand taken by my party?
I will try to answer this question after answering Question No. 2.
Question 2) Which Law applies if one MP kills another MP on floor of House?
I remember it was Senior Advocate P.P. Rao who was arguing in Supreme Court.
Bench headed by Justice M.K.Mukharjee, put a question to Senior Advocate P.P.Rao.
"Do you mean to say that Courts can do nothing even if one member of Parliament kills another member of Parliament on floor of House?" Judge asked angrily.
"Yes.My Lords. That is the Law." P.P. Rao pacified the Judge and pointed law from various decisions on this issue. Senior Advocate had to literary force judge read earlier decisions.
Supreme Court accepted arguments. If something happens in House, it is only the House which has power to punish or to anything about. World over this is the Law also known as Legislative Immunity.
In Rule of Law, Legislative Body has to be at the top all other things. It has to be Supreme.
Now let me answer question left earlier. Anti-defection Law may prevent a member to Vote
against party line. But it does not prevent him from Speaking Against Party line in Parliament.
Because, Legislative Body is Supreme. It is also Supreme to heads of all political parties also. He enjoys absolute freedom in House. He is Supreme. No one except the House can take any action against anything which he may have done.
Question No. 3) How far Team Anna's stand is valid on (A) Janlokpal should have right to investigate conduct members of Parliament inside the House also (B) The Central Government should give Janlokpal to investigate Central Government Employees working in States also.
(I am not sure whether I have rightly understood their demands. But I will try to reflect on legality of these two aspects)
As answered in Question No. 2, Legislative Body is recognized as Supreme Body all over the world where Rule of Law is understood. The members are not subject to even their party leaders for their in House conduct. They are not answerable to Supreme Court also. The question of making them subject to Janlokpal does not arise.
Another part is, why Central Government cannot set up Jan Lokpal for Central Government employees working in States? These employees are allocated by Central Government but they are doing work jointly with state government employee only. Supremacy of Legislative Body of Center and Supremacy of States Legislative Body, will both come under direct conflict. It is for each state to pass their own regulatory laws.
(This is my understanding of law. I am only a little-experienced advocate. If you want authentic view, please consult some Senior Advocates. They will probably charge you Rs. 5,50,000 per question, which I have answered here without charging anything from you.)
Thank you,
Please support by viewing my posts more often if you want me to say more courageous things.
Haresh Raichura
1) Can a Member of Parliament stand up in house and speak against line of his political party? Can he say that I am against the law which my party is proposing to pass?
2) Which Law applies if one MP kills another MP on floor of House?
3) How far Team Anna's stand is valid on :-
(A) Janlokpal should have right to investigate conduct of members of Parliament inside the House also
(B) The Central Government should give Janlokpal power to investigate Central Government Employees working in various States also.
(I am not sure whether I have rightly understood their demands. But I will try to reflect on legality of these two aspects)
Question No.1) Can a Member of Parliament stand up in house and speak against line of his political party? Can he say that I am against the law which my party is proposing to pass?
I remember that it was Senior Advocate Ram Jethmalani who was arguing in Supreme Court, probably before Bench headed by Justice M.M. Punchhi (as he was then)
Ram Jethmalani put a question to himself. "Can we say that Rape by one person is crime, but if Rape is done by 50 to 80 persons, it is not a Crime?"
He was arguing anti-defection law.
If one MP of a Political party goes in favour of other Political party, it is illegal and he can be disqualified. But if One Third of a political party go in support of any other political party, it is legal. It can be done. It will not incur disqualification to any of the group.
Supreme Court rejected argument of Ram Jethmalani. And upheld the law.
Supreme Court avoided to answer hypothetical issues raised and left it for future Judges to answer them as when they arise.
Position of Law now is, no member can vote against party line.
But does it also prevent him to stand up in parliament and say that I disagree with the stand taken by my party?
I will try to answer this question after answering Question No. 2.
Question 2) Which Law applies if one MP kills another MP on floor of House?
I remember it was Senior Advocate P.P. Rao who was arguing in Supreme Court.
Bench headed by Justice M.K.Mukharjee, put a question to Senior Advocate P.P.Rao.
"Do you mean to say that Courts can do nothing even if one member of Parliament kills another member of Parliament on floor of House?" Judge asked angrily.
"Yes.My Lords. That is the Law." P.P. Rao pacified the Judge and pointed law from various decisions on this issue. Senior Advocate had to literary force judge read earlier decisions.
Supreme Court accepted arguments. If something happens in House, it is only the House which has power to punish or to anything about. World over this is the Law also known as Legislative Immunity.
In Rule of Law, Legislative Body has to be at the top all other things. It has to be Supreme.
Now let me answer question left earlier. Anti-defection Law may prevent a member to Vote
against party line. But it does not prevent him from Speaking Against Party line in Parliament.
Because, Legislative Body is Supreme. It is also Supreme to heads of all political parties also. He enjoys absolute freedom in House. He is Supreme. No one except the House can take any action against anything which he may have done.
Question No. 3) How far Team Anna's stand is valid on (A) Janlokpal should have right to investigate conduct members of Parliament inside the House also (B) The Central Government should give Janlokpal to investigate Central Government Employees working in States also.
(I am not sure whether I have rightly understood their demands. But I will try to reflect on legality of these two aspects)
As answered in Question No. 2, Legislative Body is recognized as Supreme Body all over the world where Rule of Law is understood. The members are not subject to even their party leaders for their in House conduct. They are not answerable to Supreme Court also. The question of making them subject to Janlokpal does not arise.
Another part is, why Central Government cannot set up Jan Lokpal for Central Government employees working in States? These employees are allocated by Central Government but they are doing work jointly with state government employee only. Supremacy of Legislative Body of Center and Supremacy of States Legislative Body, will both come under direct conflict. It is for each state to pass their own regulatory laws.
(This is my understanding of law. I am only a little-experienced advocate. If you want authentic view, please consult some Senior Advocates. They will probably charge you Rs. 5,50,000 per question, which I have answered here without charging anything from you.)
Thank you,
Please support by viewing my posts more often if you want me to say more courageous things.
Haresh Raichura