Mahua Moitra's five-year tenure as a Lok Sabha member came to an abrupt end after she was expelled from the lower house in the cash-for-query case. Amid the cacophony of Indian politics, emerges the 'Cash for Query' controversy, headlined by Trinamool Congress dynamo Mahua Moitra. After allegations and counter-allegations, Moitra's response to the Lok Sabha Ethics Committee's probe was under scrutiny, setting the stage for a critical examination of parliamentary ethics and the power dynamics at play.
As the Winter Session of Parliament commences on Monday, the corridors of power are abuzz with anticipation, focusing particularly on the unfolding drama surrounding Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra. The Ethics Committee of Lok Sabha, after a thorough investigation, has purportedly recommended her expulsion from the lower house, making it a matter of intense scrutiny and discussion.
Challenging the Powers of the Ethics Committee
-
Criminal Jurisdiction: Moitra points out that parliamentary committees are not equipped with criminal jurisdiction, and the investigation of alleged criminal activities falls under the purview of law enforcement agencies. This separation of powers, according to Moitra, is a safeguard against the potential misuse of parliamentary committees by dominant governments.
-
Cross-examination of Darshan Hiranandani: Moitra reiterates her demand to cross-examine Darshan Hiranandani, the businessman who made the allegations against her.
-
Political Partisanship: The Trinamool Congress MP has called for an impartial and non-partisan approach by the ethics committee in their inquiry. She emphasises the importance of conducting the investigation objectively, given the absence of a structured code of conduct for MPs.
-
Lack of a Code of Conduct: Moitra points out that the ethics committee has yet to formulate a code of conduct for members.
The Broader Context
This case is not isolated; it has broader implications for the functioning of parliamentary ethics committees. It's essential to note that, to date, the ethics committee has not formulated a code of conduct for members. Ms. Moitra pointed out that in the absence of such structured guidelines, it is even more critical that each case is handled objectively and fairly.
The ethics committee, in response to these allegations, is expected to provide a timely report to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla.
The Accusations Unfolds
The crux of the matter lies in the accusations made in Hiranandani's affidavit. He claims that Moitra sought his assistance to politically target Prime Minister Narendra Modi and utilise the Adani Group for a smear campaign against him. Furthermore, he claims that Moitra shared her Parliament login ID with him to frame questions concerning the Adani Group. According to Hiranandani, Moitra believed that by attacking Gautam Adani, she would find support to challenge PM Modi's leadership.
Mahua Moitra admitted to granting the CEO of the Hiranandani Group, Darshan Hiranandani, access to her Lok Sabha login credentials, allowing him to post questions on her behalf. These questions, she asserted, were of her own creation. While she firmly denies any bribery allegations, the Ethics Committee of Parliament has summoned her to provide her defense.
Moitra defends her decision to share her credentials with Hiranandani, stating that it was a necessity since she worked from a remote constituency. She contends that there was always an OTP (one-time password), and her team was the one responsible for posting her questions. She further argues that the NIC (National Informatics Centre), which operates government and parliamentary websites, had no set rules against this practice.
This revelation came in response to accusations made by BJP MP Nishikant Dubey. Dubey's complaint referenced a detailed complaint from Supreme Court advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai, which included allegations of Moitra posing questions in Parliament for gifts and cash, along with targeting the Prime Minister and Home Minister.
Earlier, Moitra took to social media to respond to Dubey without directly naming him. She welcomed any motions against her and pointed to pending investigations. In the same vein, Dubey wrote to Communications, Electronics, & Information Technology Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw, requesting an investigation into the "IP Address" of Moitra's "Lok Sabha login credentials."
BJP MP Nishikant Dubey and lawyer Jai Anant Dehadrai have already presented their statements and evidence against the Trinamool MP, painting a grim picture of misconduct.
The Bribery Allegations
The storm truly brews when allegations of bribery surface. It is claimed that Moitra received gifts from Hiranandani in exchange for posing questions in Parliament. While the Ethics Committee of the Parliament is summoning her to present her defence, she pleads for more time due to "pre-committed programs" in her constituency.
The 'Friendship' Gifts
According to Moitra, the gifts she received from Hiranandani were nothing more than birthday presents—a scarf and makeup items from Bobbi Brown, purchased at Dubai's duty-free store. She also admits consulting him for her house's interior design and claims he provided architectural plans and drawings. However, she insists that the expenses for the renovation were managed by the Central Public Works Department (CPWD), which falls under the government's purview.
The Domino Effect
Hiranandani's affidavit doesn't stop with Moitra. He asserts that she had support from various quarters in her endeavour, including journalists, opposition leaders, and former Adani Group employees, who supplied her with unverified information. Notably, journalist Sucheta Dalal was mentioned, but she denied any involvement in these allegations. This revelation has cast a wider net of intrigue, dragging more individuals and organizations into the controversy.
The Political Fallout
The fallout from these allegations has been swift and intense. Nishikant Dubey has accused Moitra of breaching parliamentary privilege, committing contempt of the House, and calling for her immediate suspension from Parliament. The Speaker of the Lok Sabha has referred Dubey's complaint to Parliament's Ethics Committee, initiating an inquiry into the matter.
Nishikant Dubey, on the other hand, wasn't having any of it. In a well-timed tweet, he presented the rules specified by the NIC and a form that every parliamentarian was expected to complete. These instructions make it abundantly clear that credentials should remain private and confidential, with a requirement to inform the NIC of any alternate user due to potential security implications.
The Hiranandani Group lost an energy and infrastructure contract to the Adani Group, and Moitra's parliamentary inquiries targeted the Adani Group, according to Dubey. Moitra has vehemently denied the allegations and stated her willingness to cooperate with any inquiry.
The Imminent Verdict & Legislative Agendas on Day One
Amid the inauguration of the Winter Session, all eyes are on the Lok Sabha Ethics Panel, set to submit its comprehensive probe report to the Lok Sabha Speaker. The stakes are high, and the possibility of Mahua Moitra facing expulsion looms large. The gravity of this situation intensifies as the probe report becomes a linchpin in shaping the trajectory of Moitra's parliamentary journey.
The bills slated for introduction on the opening day of the Winter Session encompass pivotal topics, notably one focused on regulating appointments for the Chief Election Commission and other election commissioners. In preparation for the session spanning from December 4 to December 22 with 15 sittings, the government conducted an all-party meeting to ensure the seamless functioning of parliamentary proceedings.
The Congress party has declared its intent to utilize the first day of the Winter Session to raise issues of national importance and vehemently demand a thorough discussion on the Ethics Committee's report concerning Mahua Moitra.
The Canine Angle
Amidst this political drama, a peculiar subplot unfolded on social media. Speculation began regarding a Rottweiler, seen in pictures of Moitra, being the same dog featured in pictures posted by Advocate Dehadrai on Twitter.
Advocate Dehadrai also wrote a letter addressed to the Delhi Police Commissioner, seeking assistance in reuniting with his beloved pet dog, Henry. He described his deep emotional connection with Henry, equating it to the bond between a parent and child. Dehadrai asserted his unwavering care for Henry, having looked after the dog since it was 40 days old. He claimed to understand Henry's every need and concern. Dehadrai accused Moitra of keeping Henry from him as an act of reprisal for his CBI complaint. He asserted that Henry was being held without authorization by Moitra. Remarkably, Dehadrai categorically declined an offer to withdraw his complaint in exchange for the release of his cherished pet.
She insinuated that his complaint against her was driven by an acrimonious custody battle over their pet dog, Henry. This peculiar subplot adds a layer of absurdity to an already surreal story.
Personal views expressed by the author are their own
/shethepeople/media/agency_attachments/iUYfaBbcMozaYLoGnoov.png)
/shethepeople/media/member_avatars/h4HZwmcBacu03I80QTAh.jpg )
Follow Us/shethepeople/media/media_files/TpobIyVjIpte1pvoY2x7.jpg)