Legal experts term Deputy Speaker’s privilege notices against editors “invalid”

Privilege notices issued by Tripura Assembly Deputy Speaker Ram Prasad Paul against newspaper editors have been described by legal experts as legally untenable and likely to become “meaningless,” citing violations of Assembly rules.

According to Assembly records, in some instances the Deputy Speaker issued multiple privilege notices during the same Assembly session. After reviewing the relevant Assembly laws, legal experts stated that issuing more than one privilege notice in a single session is not permissible. “If a member issues multiple privilege notices within the same session, all such notices lose their legal validity and will not stand scrutiny,” experts said.

In recent weeks, the term “Privilege Notice” has frequently appeared in the state’s morning newspapers. In parliamentary and legal contexts, the term refers to a “notice of breach of privilege.” Assembly sources indicate that during the current year, Deputy Speaker Ram Prasad Paul issued privilege notices at different times against three editors of leading state newspapers including Editor of ‘Aajker Fariad’ and Editor of ‘Tripura Bhabhishyat’, alleging that reports published in their papers violated his rights or privileges. Though, the reports published in these news papers not related to Assembly and reports only cited over ground reports of Suryamaninagar assembly constituency, which has represented by MLA Ram Prasad Paul.

However, legal analysts argue that since some of these notices were issued within the same Assembly session, they are contrary to Assembly procedure. As a result, the notices against the three editors are expected to meet the same fate—becoming legally ineffective. This, experts suggest, may explain why the Assembly Secretariat has reportedly not responded to letters submitted by the editors in response to the notices.

The issue has sparked wider debate in political and media circles. Questions are being raised as to why, under what is often described as “good governance,” repeated privilege notices are being issued against representatives of the press—the so-called fourth pillar of democracy.

Senior BJP leaders, including Chief Minister Dr Manik Saha and former Chief Minister Biplab Kumar Deb, have often projected the government as “media-friendly.” Critics now question whether the repeated issuance of privilege notices contradicts that claim. Some have also questioned whether the Deputy Speaker is intolerant of criticism, drawing comparisons with similar actions during the previous Left Front regime.

Observers have recalled a precedent from the Left era, when former minister Shahid Chowdhury had filed a privilege complaint against an editor of a leading newspaper. That complaint did not stand legal scrutiny. Chowdhury later lost his ministerial post for four years in connection with the Mamun Miah international terrorism case. Political analysts note that history can be unforgiving.

Media commentators argue that while leaders may speak loudly about democracy, the state’s media is under growing pressure. They warn that suppressing the press could have serious consequences. Instead of attempting to curb media freedom, they suggest that the government should carefully analyze reports published about its leaders and actions; as such scrutiny could ultimately benefit the ruling party and help correct its mistakes.

Seasoned observers of state politics maintain that constructive engagement with the media, rather than confrontation, would be in the long-term interest of the government and democratic institutions alike.