Overview:
The Supreme Court delivered a landmark ruling on Monday, stating that Members of Parliament (MPs) and Members of Legislative Assemblies (MLAs) are not immune from prosecution for accepting bribes in exchange for making a speech or casting a vote in the legislature.
Background:
A seven-judge constitution bench, led by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, unanimously overturned the 1998 verdict delivered by a five-judge bench in the JMM bribery case. The previous ruling had granted immunity to MPs and MLAs from prosecution for accepting bribes related to their legislative duties.
Key Points of the Verdict:
Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud highlighted that bribery is not protected by parliamentary privileges. The interpretation of the 1998 verdict was deemed contrary to Articles 105 and 194 of the Constitution, which deal with the powers and privileges of MPs and MLAs in Parliament and legislative assemblies.
Implications:
The ruling signifies that MPs and MLAs can now be prosecuted for accepting bribes in connection with their legislative functions. This decision is expected to strengthen integrity in public life by holding lawmakers accountable for unethical conduct.
Conclusion:
The Supreme Court’s ruling marks a significant step towards upholding transparency and accountability in the legislative process. By removing immunity for MPs and MLAs in bribery cases, the judiciary reinforces the principle of probity in public life and promotes ethical governance.
