Week 5 - Parliamentary Privileges & Society Date: Apr 6, 2009 9:04:33 AM PDT Author: Brooke Draw up a basic list of immunities and privileges given to Members of Parliament as well as benefits available to them. What does society think of these? Brooke Prater WBI Parliamentary Strengthening Program parliamentarystrengthening@gmail.com Last modified by Brooke on Apr 6 2009 9:05AM

Parliamentary Immunities & Privileges and Society Date: Apr 6, 2009 9:25:01 AM PDT Author: Moderator Many of the immunities of MPs – certainly those which nowadays one would call human rights issues - arise from the history of the development of democracy and of free parliaments. The relationship with the head of state in the United Kingdom is a case in point where the sovereign is barred from entering the House of Commons. We sometimes tend to forget that parliament also makes regulations about its own composition without interference from other places. Similarly a parliament creates its own rules of procedure, a far cry from the days when, in most colonial administrations, such rules needed the approval of the governor. MPs are also immune from arrest but the actual practice about this varies heavily from one country to another. The original intention was to prevent members being arrested and imprisoned for such matters as an unpaid debt. The immunity at one time became considerably wider than that but now usually does not extend to criminal cases. One of the most significant privileges possessed by MPs is the right to freedom of speech. Anything said in a house by an MP is free from the danger of being held against the MP in a court of law. There are of course inherent dangers in this but if MPs have overstretched themselves, it is parliament which can take action, not any court of law. MPs have certain privileges which they may also have as private citizens but which take on an added dimension because of their position. For instance, an attempt to intimidate a member or to bribe a member in connection with their duties as MPs become a matter of parliamentary privilege, that is, it can rank as an offence against the institution of parliament. While these immunities are generally accepted as necessary by the public, there are other views on certain types of benefit which MPs have granted themselves. There is, for instance, a debate currently raging in the United Kingdom about the payment of allowances to MPs for maintaining a second home usually away from their constituency.

Parliamentary Immunities & Privileges and Society Date: Apr 8, 2009 12:49:37 AM PDT Author: augu Parliamentarians in Rwanda has 2 main privileges and immunities : 1. Right to speech : any thing said in Parliamentary meeting can not have any negative impact on a Parliamentarian. 2. Right to not be taken to court in civil case : a parliamentarian can not be arrested in Rwanda when has committed an offense qualified as a civil case. But this privilege, is limited because the prosecutor general can request the right to take him before the court and Parliamentarians has to deliberate on it; If 2/3 of all parliamentarians accepted he/she can be taken to court. In Rwanda Parliamentarians can not fixe them self their advantages such allowances, salaries, etc. it is the Executive which do it without or after consultation of Parliament. One concern of the public to Parliamentarians immunities and privileges is that some times the Public think that the Parliamentarians have the big salaries but is because of lack of information. There are many public servant in public entities who have salaries big than parliamentarians.

Week 5 - Parliamentary Privileges & Society Date: Apr 8, 2009 4:33:19 AM PDT Author: DOCTOR In my country-Cameroon,parliamentarians enjoy certain immunities and previleges that are found in an ordinance of 26 august 1972 and some found in bureau orders. These include; -no member of parliament shall be liable to any measures of prosecution,search,arrest,custody awaiting trial or trial by reasons of any opinion,expressed or of any vote cast by him in the discharge of his duties; -except in case of flagrant delicto or a felony or misdemeanour committed against the internal security or external security of the state,as defined by the penal code,no member may be prosecuted for a felony or misdemeanour without the leave of the national assembly when it is sitting or of the bureau between sessions; -parliamentary allowance; -entertainment allowance; pension sheme; long service pension; mission allowance; -official residence: -micro project allowance; -car allowane;etc,etc. All these immunities and previleges are misconstrued by the public which decries them arguing that fabulous sums of money is given to people who dont really represent their interest.

Week 5 - Parliamentary Privileges & Society Date: Apr 9, 2009 2:57:34 AM PDT Author: Asad according to the Constitution of my Country the Article 66. (1) Subject to the Constitution and to the rules of procedure of {Majlis-e-Shoora (parliament )}, there shall be freedom of speech in {Majlis-e-Shoora (parliament)}, and no member shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him in {Majlis-e-Shoora (parliament)}, and no person shall be so liable in respect of the publication by or under the authority of {Majlis-e-Shoora) parliament) }, of any report , paper , votes or proceedings. (2) In other respects, the powers, immunities and privileges of {Majlis-e-Shoora (parliament)}, and the immunities and privileges of the members of {Majlis-e-Shoora (parliament)}, shall be such as may from time to time be defined by law and , until so defined , shall be such as were, immediately before the commencing day, enjoyed by the National Assembly of Pakistan and the committees thereof and its members (3) Provision may be made by law for the punishment, by a House, of persons who refuse to give evidence or produce documents before a committee of the house when duly required by the chairman of the Committee so to do: Provided that any such law- (a) may empower a court to punish a person who refuses to give evidence or produce documents ; and (b) shall have effect subject to such Order for safeguarding confidential matters form disclosure as may be made by the President. (4) The provisions of this Article shall apply to persons who have the right to speak in and otherwise to take part in the proceedings of {Majlis-e-Shoora (parliament)} as they apply to members. (5) In this Article {Majlis-e-Shoora (parliament)} means either House or a joint sitting, or a committee. People have highest regards for their Parliament and their representatives. Criticism is there but it is common in all the democratic set ups.

List of immunities available to MPs in Uganda, and public perception Date: Apr 9, 2009 7:29:38 AM PDT Author: Tumu MPs enjoy uncensored speech when in the house, i.e their speech in Parliament is privileged. Two, MPs cannot be served court papers on the precincts of parliament. Three, MPs can not arrested for civil wrongs on their way to Parliament. Four, MPs determine their emoluments. Five, MPs dtermine their rules of Procedure. Six, committees of parliament have powers to enforce the attendance of witnesses, production of documents and examination of witnesses abroad. Seven, they can arrest and detain a person who is in contempt of parliament. Witnesses who appear before committees of Parliament can not be forced to appear as witnesses in courts. Official records (Hansard) of parliament can not be used as evidence in courts except with the permission of parliament. MPs travel business class, and carry official passports.Other privileges are tax and interest free car loans. The public seems not appreciate and understand these immunities. Rather, the public thinks MPs have too much especially when it comes to their salaries and allowances. The public would expect MPs to be as ordinary as the voters they represent. In fact, due to the privileges and immunities available to MPs, the people tend to get alienated from Parliament. Immunities are regarded as luxuries bestowed on the political class, as a wall between the people and the legislators. The members of the public do not link the regime of immunities available to MPs with a regime of protection of the voters. The public does not seem to believe that the immunities for MPs are their shield. The public believes that immunities are just bribes given to MPs to silence them, to blind their eyes and choke them from raising public concerns.

Parliamentary Privileges and Society Date: Apr 10, 2009 1:26:47 AM PDT Author: srm Members of Parliament while attending to their legislature job needs freedom of speech and deliberation so that they put forward their view without any fear. The parliament system in India protects the rights of the Members to speak freely inside the house No court can interfere or question the parliamentary deliberations. Parliamentary privilege ensure Members are immune from the proceedings of court of law on any matter they have spoken in side the house. Courts are prohibited from inquiring into the proceedings of the House. Any person who has published the matter related to the House in its true form is also immune from any court proceedings on that matter. As per the rules mentioned in the statute no civil cases can proceed against a Member during the Session and 40 days before or after the session. When ever a Member is arrested it is the privilege of the House to be intimated within 24 hours of the arrest. House can not be compelled to disclose its proceedings or papers in any other forum including court of law. Of late public is irked by the nuisance created by certain misuse of privilege of the Members of Legislature. While the coalition government gathers vote inside the lower house the ruling party try to gather members of smaller parties and break up groups in its favour the under hand dealings can not be questioned in any court of Law. The uniqueness of Jharkhand Mukti Morcha case is that the bribe givers were punished and the Members who had taken bribe could not be punished as they were protected by their immunity for their action inside the House. Some Members take the privilege and put pressure in the local area. Some try to get rid of punishment after committing serious crime. The Privileges in India are not codified and it depends upon the Presiding Officer to take a decision and in some cases the Committee on Privileges take an unanimous decision. Privilege of Members are required for the legislative jobs they are entrusted crossing this limit often raise eyebrows of the public.

Parliamentary Immunities & Privileges and Society Date: Apr 10, 2009 2:54:18 AM PDT Author: Moderator Some colleagues have combined their comments on the topic of immunities and privileges of members with those on the topic of safeguarding parliamentary staff in their work (which also involves immunities and privileges of a different sort). I shall therefore post this same set of comments under both topics. There is broad agreement that the immunities granted to MPs should always include the right to free speech in parliament (that is, that what is said there cannot be contested elsewhere) and the safe guard against arrest in civil cases. We are also reminded that in certain countries the proceedings of parliament cannot be quoted in the courts without special agreement being obtained from parliament. We can draw attention here to the danger that a journalist may bring on himself or herself by quoting what was said in parliament that might have been slanderous if said elsewhere – as the Unit says, there is an interesting body of case law on this matter. There is broad agreement too on another aspect, namely, that MPs need certain benefits and privileges even outside of parliament in order to carry out their work satisfactorily. They have to accept however that these will always be seen by the public as matters for criticism – as one participant says, this is democracy in action. Perhaps the public would be willing to accept these without criticism but that some parliamentarians use their benefits to the extreme and this starts off a reaction against benefits of all kinds and against all parliamentarians. A perceptive point that is made is that immunities and privileges, however necessary and important, are a divisive factor as they have the effect in the long run of separating the parliamentarians from the electors they serve. This brings up the question of codes of conduct for both MPs and staff. Should both groups not be required to observe codes of conduct laid down for them? For MPs in particular should there be a requirement of a mandatory declaration of assets when they are elected to parliament and would the public see that as a reassurance? Colleagues are agreed that staff, like MPs, need protection in the course of performing their duties in parliament and must be given certain benefits in recognition of the type of work they do. Present safeguards and benefits in most parliaments are probably insufficient and need broadening. The best safeguard, it is suggested, is that staff should steer clear of party politics and here too a code of conduct could be a valuable asset.

Parliamentary Privileges and the Society Date: Apr 10, 2009 6:41:55 AM PDT Author: Big Ben The Privileges enjoyed by parliamentarians in Nigeria are exactly the same as those enjoyed in Tumu's parliament (Uganda, I guess). The only differences are that Members of the Lower House (House of Representatives) are not entitled to business class seats when they travel and all members (Upper or Lower House) are not entitled to Official or Diplomatic passports. Only Principal Officers of both Houses are allowed to carry Diplomatic or Official Passports. Furthermore, Legislators do not enjoy tax-free loans in Nigeria and though they determine their own salaries and allowances, it is subject to approval by the National Salaries and Wages Commission. It is apt to add that only recently, the government came out with a policy withdrawing police protection from Legislators and certain office holders. This was however reverted when it was condemned on the floor of the House. They now have their police orderlies returned to them. The public in Nigeria and Legislators are no the best of friends at all. They see Legislators as a bunch of lucky but extremely greedy few. They believe that Legislators earn too much and that their duties and responsibilities are not commensurate with their pay. It is even more disturbing because even parliamentary staff do not earn good salary. So while the Legislators are taking home huge sums of money, the staff who work for them can hardly feed themselves and their families from their salaries. This dichotomy has further heightened the disaffection of the public against parliamentarians. Last modified by Big Ben on Apr 10 2009 6:51AM

List of immunities available to MPs in Uganda, and public perception Date: Apr 11, 2009 6:39:51 AM PDT Author: karoli there is something Tumu could have omitted about Uganda's MPs, they are not immune to arrest in case the state deems that an assembly they are attending is illegal. Otherwise like he said the MPs express their views freely while at Parliament outside it is anothe matter