Hello Jontst78,
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PARLIAMENT (PRIVILEGES, IMMUNITIESAND POWERS) ACT
(CHAPTER 217)
Freedom of speech and debate and proceedings
5. There shall be freedom of speech and debate and proceedings in
Parliament, and such freedom of speech and debate and proceedings
shall not be liable to be impeached or questioned in any court,
commission of inquiry, tribunal or any other place whatsoever out
of Parliament
Thanks for reproducing the section on MP's privilege to speak
with immunity in parliament.
Certainly under this section, MP's privilege to speak is well
established and should not be administratively or legally
superseded by Prof Jayakumar by merely alleging for whatever reason
that MPs are behaving like Jeyeratnam and not speaking with
facts.
It will have to take more than this judgment by prof Jayakumar to
supersede such a privilege.
Furthermore, what constitutes abuse of privilege is not for
ministers to judge.
An independent court without influence by ministers who had an
interest to protect under the query should be the proper competent
court to provide such a judgment and not Jayakumar.
MPs are definitely immune from any administrative actions like the
blockage by a commission of inquiry to stop MP's query or whatever
other actions ministers may be contemplating behind Prof
Jayakumar's threat to block Sylvia from speaking with a commission
of inquiry.
