RULE 357 OF THE RULES AND PROCEDURE AND CONDUCT OF BUSINESS | UPSC Current Affairs

Copyright infringement not intended

Context: According to the norms of parliamentary procedure, the constitutionally enshrined principles of natural justice, and Rule 357 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the Lok Sabha, a member of parliament requests permission to present his View.

Details

In his appeal to the Lok Sabha Speaker, the Member highlighted the incident in which a former Union Minister in 2015 invoked rule 357 to address remarks made about him.

Background of the Issue

In February 2023, an opposition party leader, also a Member of Parliament (MP) was invited to Cambridge University, during the conference he said that “everybody knows…that Indian democracy is under…attack”, and “the institutional framework which is required for a democracy — Parliament, a free press, the judiciary, just the idea of mobilization…, these are all getting restricted…”.
- A week or so later, he stated: "It is an Indian problem, and the solution will come from inside... But, given the size of Indian democracy, it is a worldwide public good. If Indian democracy fails, the world's democracies take a very significant, potentially deadly blow. So, it is crucial for you as well.”
The MP has been charged by the ruling party with promoting an "untenable narrative" and making "denigrating, unjustified comments" against Indian institutions abroad as part of a "calculated campaign" to damage them.
- The party also asked the Lok Sabha Speaker to "create a special committee of Lok Sabha to investigate if the MP should be suspended for allegedly insulting the country, its democracy, and Parliament".

Rule 357 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the Lok Sabha

In the part titled "Rules to be observed by the members" of the Lok Sabha Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business, there is a provision for "personal explanation" in rule 357.
According to the rule, "A member may, with the Speaker's permission, provide a personal explanation even if there is no question before the House; but, in this situation, no disputed topic may be raised, and no debate shall emerge."

View of Constitutional experts

Subhash C. Kashyap, a constitutional expert and former secretary general of the seventh, eighth, and ninth Lok Sabhas, said that the House has the authority to determine whether the member violated a privilege or was in contempt of the House. The House has full autonomy.
In general, he said, the claim that opposition legislators' microphones are turned off when they speak could be a matter for the Privileges Committee because it might be regarded as an insult to the Chair; however, the claim that India's democracy is under attack would probably not amount to a violation of the privileges of Parliament. However it is the House that decides on what it deems as contempt, said PDT Achary, another former Secretary General of Lok Sabha.

PRACTICE QUESTION

Q. Consider the following Statements;

1. The Speaker of the Lok Sabha is nominated by the President of India.

2. The Speaker while assuming their offices make and subscribes to a separate oath or affirmation.

3. The Deputy Speaker is subordinate to the Speaker.

Which of the following statement is/are incorrect?

(A) 1 and 2 only

(B) 2 and 3 only

(D) 1, 2 and 3

Answer: D

Explanation:

Statement 1 is incorrect: The Speaker is elected by the Lok Sabha itself from among its members.

Statement 2 is incorrect: The Speaker, while assuming their offices, does not make and subscribe to any separate oath or affirmation.

Statement 3 is incorrect: The Deputy Speaker is not subordinate to the Speaker. He is directly responsible to the House.

Must Read: https://www.iasgyan.in/daily-current-affairs/committee-of-privileges

https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/rarule-357-of-the-rules-and-procedure-and-conduct-of-business-in-lok-sabha-8510761/