Context

• Recently, some Members of Parliament (MPs) of both houses of Parliament (Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha) have been suspended for disrupting the parliament functions and violating the directives of the chair.
• Lately, the fundamental idea about the disciplinary powers of the Houses seems to be changing and, therefore, it is necessary to assess the problems associated with the suspension of MPs.

The Process/Rules of Suspension of MPs

• General Principle
  • It is the role and duty of the Presiding Officer; Speaker of Lok Sabha and Chairman of Rajya Sabha, to maintain order so that the House can function smoothly.
  • To ensure that proceedings are conducted in the proper manner, the Speaker/ Chairman is empowered to force a member to withdraw from the House.
• Suspension Rules in the Lower House (Lok Sabha)
  • According to Rule 373 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business,if the speaker finds the conduct of any Member is grossly disorderly, s/he may direct such Member to withdraw immediately from the Houseand to remain absentduring the rest of the day’s sitting.
  • As per Rule 374, the Speaker may name a member if deems it necessary, who disregards the authority of the Chair or abuses the rules of the House by persistently and wilfully obstructing the business thereof.
    • If a Member is named by the Speaker, theSpeaker shall put the question whether such Memberbe suspended from the service of the House.
    • When the House adopts the motion, the member stands suspended.
  • Rule 374A was incorporated in theRule Book in December 2001.
    • In case of gross violation or severe charges, on being named by the Speaker, the member stands automatically suspendedfrom the service of the House for five consecutive sittings or the remainder of the session, whichever is less.
• Suspension Rules in the Upper House (Rajya Sabha)
  • Under Rule 255, the Chairman of Rajya Sabhais empowered to direct any Member whose conduct is in his opinion grossly disorderly to withdraw immediately from the House.
    • Unlike the Speaker of Lok Sabha, the Rajya Sabha Chairman does not have the power to suspenda member. Therefore, the House may by another motion, terminate the suspension.
    • The Chairman mayname a member who disregards the authority of the Chair or abuses the rules of the Council by persistently and wilfully obstructing business.
    • In this type of situation, the House may adopt a motion suspending the Member from the service of the House for a period not exceeding the remainder of the session.
  • Rule 256 provides forsuspension of members.The Chairman can suspend a member from the service of the Council for a period not exceeding the remainder of the Session.

The Purpose of Suspension Rules

• To Clear Logjam in the House: The rules are meant to clear obstruction in the House so that business can be conducted without obstruction. 
• To Punish Unparliamentary Behaviours of MPs
  • There is also an element of punishment in it. The member is temporarily disqualified in as much as he is not allowed to attend the meetings of the House or any meeting of the committees of which he may be a member, during his suspension.
  • Similarly, they will not be allowed to give any notice of questions, motions, or resolutions.
  • In effect, they are compelled to remain a non-member during this period.

The Problem with the Recent Suspensions of MPs

• Against the Idea of Fundamental Principle of Using Suspension as a Last Resort
  • Suspension is resorted to as a last step. Disregarding the authority of the Chair does not mean that the Chair can name a member if he refuses to sit down when asked to do so.
  • Also, suspension is a temporary punishment that can be revoked even the next day. 
  • This fundamental idea about the disciplinary powers of the Houses seems to be changing of late.
  • The recent suspension of members, including the leader of the Congress party in the Lok Sabha, points to such a change.
  • For example, in one case in the Rajya Sabha, the suspension of a memberhas been extended beyond the end of the recent session.
• Suspension on Unprecedented Grounds
  • In another case, a member has been suspendedpending investigation by the privileges committee of the House.
  • In the Lok Sabha too, the leader of the Congress party has been suspended pending investigation by the privileges committee.
  • This kind of suspension is unheard of in the history of parliament.
  • Suspension pending investigation is done only in the case of government employees because the rules permit it.But in the case of members of parliament, there is no such rule.
  • The members have been suspended because there are cases of breach of privilege pending against them.
  • So, the Houses have suspended those members not for disobeying the Chair or obstructing the business of the House, but for allegedly committing a breach of privilege of the members of the House.
• Suspensions Are Not in Accordance with EstablishedRules
  • Rules of the Houses of Parliament are framed under Article 118 of the Constitution (Rules of procedure) and these can operate only subject to the provisions of the Constitution.
  • The Houses are required to regulate their activities only in accordance with these rules.Suspension of a member can, therefore, be done only in accordance with the rules (374 and 256).
  • Further, residuary powers under Rule 266 of the Rajya Sabha can be invoked only when the House has to deal with matters that are not explicitly provided for in the rules.
  • Suspension is expressly provided for in rule 256, and therefore residuary powers of the Chairman cannot be invoked.

Judicial Intervention on Suspension Matters

• Article 122of the Constitution says parliamentary proceedings cannot be questioned before a court.
• Although courts have intervened in the procedural functioning of the legislature.
• In Ashish Shelar vs Maharashtra Legislative Assembly (2022), the SC held that any suspension beyond the period prescribed in the rules is unconstitutional.
  • If the resolution passed by the House was to provide for suspension beyond the period prescribed under the said rule, it would be substantially illegal, irrational, and unconstitutional. 

Way Forward

• Suspension Should be Considered as a Last Resort
  • Wilful and persistent obstruction of the business alone qualifies for the naming and suspension of a member.
  • This means that a very aggravated form of defiance and obstruction can leave the Chair with no option other than suspension of the member.
  • The basic principle is that the House needs the uninterrupted services of all its members and so suspension is to be a last resort.
• Suspension Should be a Temporary Provision
  • There are numerous instances in both Houses when suspension has been revoked within a day or two, even though the members were initially suspended for the remainder of the session.
  • It is because the House does not want to be deprived of the services of its members for a long time. 

Conclusion

• Exercising the disciplinary powers of the House cannot be the only effective way to run the supreme legislative body of the country.
• The political class has the task of finding ways to end the turmoil and bring harmony to our legislatures. 
• The resolution lies in finding and applying the right method and the nation is still waiting for that.