Parliament and free speech: The right to know

This article is very interesting, because talks about a situation similar to our own situation, free speech is based on “The bills of rigths” and it says that "Freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in parliament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of parliament".
I think that, in those cases when the parliament is elected by the citizens, it clearly a citizen right to be impeached or questioned when is not the representative opinion, when is not what most of the people wants. The case of Chile is like that, “supposedly”.
But, what we can do when the law forbid questioned whom represents us, even when their decisions go against what people need?
Maybe, the situation that this article describes, is more similar than our reality , more than we thought.
What happened about “The day after” pill?? Is the authority who decides even the most of the people is disagree.
All decision is able to be questioned, is the base of a State of Right, is the Free Speech consolidation.
The article mentions that British lawyers seem to have forgotten what people can do for defend their rights, and of course, the press too, because it exist the Press liberty, and the right to be well informed.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/14/parliament-free-speech-trafigura