Legislative privilege versus free speech: What was the Supreme Court reference about? | Explained

The story so far: The Supreme Court has disposed of a long-pending reference concerning the scope of legislative privileges and their interplay with free speech arising out of a 2003 Tamil Nadu Assembly resolution to arrest editors of The Hindu for an editorial criticising then Chief Minister Jayalalithaa.

However, the Court clarified that all substantial questions of law regarding the precedence between parliamentary privileges and free speech are kept open for determination in appropriate future proceedings.

What was the case about?

The case began with a series of events in 2003. The Hindu published articles reporting on speeches made in the Tamil Nadu State Assembly. The reports led the Speaker to move a resolution accusing the newspaper of “distorted the proceedings of the Assembly, commented contrary to the events in the Assembly”.ma

The resolution said the editorial’s comments “amounts to breach of privilege of the entire House” under Article 194 of the Constitution, which gives State legislators certain privileges and immunities.

The Assembly passed a resolution seeking the arrest of senior editorial staff of The Hindu. Soon after, police raided the newspaper’s Chennai office while attempting to arrest its senior editors. In November 2003, N. Ravi, then Editor of The Hindu, approached the Supreme Court.

Senior advocate Harish Salve, appearing for the newspaper, argued that Article 194(3) could not be used to restrict the freedom of the press protected under Article 19(1)(a). The larger question before the court was whether critical reporting or publication about legislative proceedings could amount to a breach of legislative privilege.