Does Parliamentarians Enjoy Legal Cover For Their Assembly Statements?

WEB DESK: Even though the government’s spokesperson hinted at initiating legal action against the former speaker of the national assembly Ayaz Sadiq over his unsubstantiated statements on the assembly floor, the law of the country grants freedom of expression.

The parliamentarians in the country enjoy legal immunity under the constitution and not liable to a criminal or civil action for the things they utter in the assembly.

The government seemed to have lock horns against the Former Speaker, who had given statements that, to some extent, inflicted damage to the state as a whole. Minister for Information and Broadcasting Shibli Faraz termed Sadiq’s statements as ‘beyond pardon’. He hinted at initiating legal action against the ex-speaker.

The statements made by Sadiq were highlighted in the Indian media too and they were distorted and used in building narrative against Pakistan. They labeled the release of Indian captured pilot Abhinandan Varthaman as an act of cowardice instead of a goodwill gesture by Pakistan.

Such statements did not only come from an opposition member on the assembly floor. The Federal Science and Technology Minister Fawad Chaudhry had declared the Pulwama incident a ‘triumph’ of his government, which gave a sense of involvement of Pakistan in the incident and India claims to be a terrorist attack.

Later, both lawmakers either extended apology or clarification on their statements made during the assembly session.

However, isn’t it the responsibility of a lawmaker to show some responsibility while making assertions on sensitive issues?

In this regard, News360 took comments of a legal expert Shahab Usto. He said that the constitution granted legal cover to the parliamentarians to discuss everything in the lower or upper house of the parliament.

He cited Article 66 of the Constitution of Pakistan that defines the powers, immunities, and privileges of the parliamentarians according to which the lawmakers were not liable to civil or criminal action.

Usto commented what would become of the country if those who legislate laws were put under suspicion.

Back Ground

Former speaker Ayaz Sadiq implied in his speech that the PTI government had buckled under fear of an Indian attack and released an Indian pilot captured during last year’s military standoff between the two hostile neighbours.

He claimed that the government had begged the parliamentary leaders to let Indian Air Force Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman go.

Later, sensing the gravity of the situation, Sadiq issued a video statement on Thursday to clarify that the Indian social media posts and TV channel reports about his speech were “totally contrary” to what he had actually said in parliament.