Cash-for-query row: INDIA parties rally behind Mahua Moitra as she is expelled from Lok Sabha

“This ethics committee report has been laid on the table after 12 pm. And at 2 pm, debate on it has been started. There are 106 pages and along with annexures there are 495 pages. I want to ask is it humanly possible to read it within two hours. I request you to grant us three-four days so that we can go through the reports carefully, discuss it within the parties and then come and debate over it properly,” Congress leader of the House Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury said.

Arguing for Moitra to be given an opportunity to defend herself, he said, “Even in a court of law a man on death row is asked if he has to say anything. If Mahua Moitra has been accused, she should have the right to speak. I hope the House does not begin a tainted chapter.”

Parliamentary Affairs Minister Pralhad Joshi objected to this remark and demanded that the same be expunged. He also argued that in 2005 when 10 MPs were expelled in the cash-for-query case, they were not allowed to defend themselves in the House.

Congress MP Manish Tewari also said that in his 31-year career as a lawyer he had not argued a case without taking cognizance of its documents. “Heavens would not have fallen if three-four days were given to us. This is a very sensitive matter,” he stated.

Tewari raised a few points regarding the procedure of the committee even as he argued that when the House was deciding the fate of one of its members, a whip could not be issued.

“Can the procedure of the Ethics Committee override the fundamental principle of natural justice? Through media reports we have learnt that the accused were not even given an opportunity to defend themselves properly. It is a fundamental principle of natural justice that not only the accused must get an opportunity to defend herself but also to cross-examine the accuser. No such opportunity was provided,” he said.

Tewari also pointed out that Rule 316 D of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business says that the Ethics Committee can only recommend that a certain person is guilty, but it cannot recommend a sentence. “That power lies with this House. The recommendation of the Ethics Committee is fundamentally flawed,” he said regarding the panel’s recommendation that Moitra be expelled from the House.

“All parties have issued a three-line whip. In matters of Ethics Committee can a party ask its members to vote in a particular way? Can a whip even be issued? This is like directing a judge to decide a case in a particular manner. This is complete travesty of justice. This House should be adjourned and all whips should be withdrawn. We are not sitting as ordinary members, rather we are sitting here as judges,” Tewari said.

Speaker Om Birla took exception to this and said, “This is Parliament, not court. I am not a judge, I am Speaker. The decision will be taken by the House. Do not make wrong arguments.”

Joshi intervened to say the party had only given a whip for everyone to be present, not vote in a particular manner.

TMC MP Kalyan Banerji sought to argue that a fair trial had not been conducted.

“The main person here is Darshan Hiranandani who has relied upon the statement of Jay Anant Dehadri. Who has brought it? … Honourable MP Nishikant Dubey… On what basis is it going on? It is going on on the basis of the statement of Hirandani. He has not testified… There is only his affidavit. No affidavit can be relied upon unless the person concerned comes and says this is my affidavit. Right of cross examination is part of fair trial. Principle of natural justice is implicit in the Article 14 of the Constitution. Moitra’s rights have been violated by the Ethics Committee. Constitutional violations have been made,” he said.

Banerji also argued that in the 2005 cash-for-query case, when 10 MPs were expelled from the House, the inquiry committee had examined the journalists who had conducted the sting operation that led to the scandal. He also argued that the House had no power to remove Moitra.

Throughout the proceedings, TMC MP Sudip Bandopadhyay kept proposing that Mahua Moitra be allowed to speak on behalf of the TMC. Moitra rose from her seat multiple times hoping she will be allowed to speak. Birla, however, did not allow it.

Joshi said the entire matter had been discussed in the Ethics Committee according to procedure. “When 10 MPs were expelled in the cash for query case, a request was made to allow the 10 MPs put forth their side. Speaker Somnath Chatterji had then said that they have deposed before the inquiry committee and have given their side. ‘After detailed deliberations, a decision has been made and they have no right to speak in this House.’ This is what Somnath Chatterji said,” Joshi stated.

When more members made the demand for Moitra to be allowed to speak, Birla said, “Documents related to parliamentary traditions in such matters are there before me. Somnath Chatterji gave a ruling. Pranab Mukherji was there…when matters were discussed…If I was not following the traditions, you would have the right to complain. We are only discussing the recommendations of the committee. We are not sitting here as judges.”

JD(U)’s Giridhari Yadav, who is a member of the Ethics Committee, while making the argument of violation of natural justice and the committee not calling Hiranandani for examination, stumped the Speaker by claiming that many MPs get their questions framed by others.

“Even I do not remember my password, my PA knows it. I have not asked any questions since thinking God knows what will happen. I never frame my own questions. Many MPs do not frame their questions. I do not know how to run a computer. Ye manusmriti mein likha gaya hai ki sabke liye alag kanoon hoga. Wahi Manusmriti BJP wale laagu karna chahate hain. Do not strangle democracy,” he said.

Birla immediately interjected to say, “I request all MPs to frame their questions themselves and put it up. No one else is allowed to do that. Serious action can be taken against you in such a scenario. You are saying this on record. I will not let the dignity of this House be tarnished.”

BJP MPs Heena Gavit and Aparajita Sarangi defended the action against Moitra. Sarangi, who is a member of the committee, said, “There were three meetings and in all she was given an opportunity to speak. But she misbehaved and used unparliamentary language. She walked out. She did not put forth her side, we wanted to hear.”

Gavit said, “In 1951, MP Shri Mudgal had been expelled for alleged bribery. Before today, 13 MPs have been expelled similarly. There is a huge difference between Mahua Moitra’s case and the past cases. In this there is a company, there is a businessman, Mr Hiranandani, who has interest in telecom, shipping, real estate, petroleum and pipeline. Moitra has asked 61 questions as MP and 50 of these questions are from these sectors. As many as 47 times, her account has been logged in from Dubai. And six times log in has happened from the US, UK and Nepal. She has accepted that she had given her login and password to Hiranandani. Moitra got ample opportunity to defend herself before the Ethics Committee. Hiranandani has given a sworn affidavit.”

She argued that it was written in the rules that no MP would give their ID and password to anyone. “Her account is being logged in from four different cities in the world. So what is this question of natural justice? There is a question of the dignity of the House. This case has tarnished the reputation of all MPs across the world,” she said.