Are there exceptions to the sub-judice rule?

Yes, the sub-judice rule does not apply to Bills, which Parliament can debate regardless of pending court cases. Other exceptions include Calling Attention notices (which only seek information rather than discussion), linked matters where parts are not sub-judice, and discussions focused on potential solutions rather than merits of cases before courts.

Understanding the balance: These exceptions reflect a sophisticated balancing of competing constitutional principles. Parliament's primary function is legislation, and restricting its ability to make laws due to court cases would effectively subordinate the legislative to the judicial branch, undermining constitutional separation of powers. The Calling Attention exception acknowledges the distinction between seeking factual information (permissible) and debating legal merits (restricted). The linked matters exception recognizes that legal cases often touch only specific aspects of broader issues, leaving other elements available for parliamentary discussion. And the solution-focused exception distinguishes between discussing facts under judicial consideration (restricted) and exploring potential policy remedies (permissible). Collectively, these exceptions preserve parliamentary sovereignty while respecting judicial independence.

Key citations:

• Chairman's ruling (8 May 1986) established the fundamental Bills exception: "This is a sovereign body and it has the power to legislate on any matter – whether it is pending in a court or not" - affirming Parliament's primary constitutional function of lawmaking.
• Chairman's ruling (31 July 1970) created the Calling Attention exception: "A calling attention is not a motion. It does not involve discussion... only questions are put for clarification" - distinguishing information-seeking from substantive debate.
• Committee of Presiding Officers report (1967) identified the partial matter exception: "In case of linked matters, part of which is sub judice and part not sub judice, debate can be allowed on the matters which are not sub judice" - enabling discussion of broader issues while respecting specific judicial proceedings.
• Deputy Chairman's ruling (12 December 1994) outlined the solution-focused exception: "To talk about a settlement of any problem is permitted but let us not go into the details" - allowing forward-looking policy discussions while avoiding interference with judicial fact-finding.
• Committee of Presiding Officers report (1967, Section 3.6) provided the crucial clarification that the rule "applies only in regard to the specific issues before a court. The entire gamut of the matter is not precluded" - preventing overly broad application of the restriction.