Former Lok Sabha secretary-general PDT Achary said the ethics committee was only an advisory authority and could not behave like a probe agency.
Published Nov 03, 2023 | 3:04 PM ⚊ Updated Nov 03, 2023 | 3:18 PM
Mahua Moitra.
The allegations by TMC MP Mahua Moitra of the “sordid, unethical, demeaning, and prejudiced” conduct of the chairman of Parliament’s Ethics Committee during her questioning has received all-round condemnation from constitutional experts and rights activists.
Former secretary-general of the Lok Sabha PDT Achary told South First on Friday, 3 November, that if news reports were to be believed, “the Ethics Committee overstepped its bounds”.
He explained: “What is the ethics of questioning a parliamentarian about where she slept or who she called late at night? They are an infringement on personal liberty. The ethics committee is solely an advisory authority. It has no authority to pose questions as if it were an investigating agency.”
Women’s rights activist Tara Krishnaswamy also condemned the treatment meted out to Moitra, which she described as a “witch-hunt” rather than any reasonable investigation on behalf of the people.
Moitra attended the committee hearing on Thursday, concerning the cash-for-questions allegations levelled against her by BJP MP Nishikant Dubey and later endorsed by Mumbai-based businessman Darshan Hiranandani.
She walked out of the meeting midway, in the company of a few other agitated Opposition MPs, and claimed that the committee’s Chairman Vinod Sonkar, of the BJP, “stooped to a sordid line of questioning while reading from a script”.
In a letter she later wrote to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla, Moitra alleged he asked her “detailed and extremely personal questions about her private life”.
She alleged that he continued in the same manner despite other committee members cautioning him “to refrain from this filthy line of questioning”.
Sonkar denied the charges and said, “Instead of cooperating with the committee, she became angry and used unparliamentary words against the panel and the chairman”.
My letter emailed to the Honourable @loksabhaspeaker pic.twitter.com/2wGlWTTej6
— Mahua Moitra (@MahuaMoitra) November 2, 2023
Achary said the only question they had to ask Moitra was if she owned up to all 49 questions posted on her behalf by someone else.
If she responded that she accepted responsibility, there was no need for any additional action, because “who drafted it or uploaded it is irrelevant”, he pointed out.
He said though Moitra’s questions were clearly aimed at a corporate group, “they all reflected a broader public interest”.
Raising questions in Parliament “against a business that is tied to the ruling party is nothing new”, noted Achary.
Similar questions were raised against Ambani and other major business conglomerates when the Congress was in power.
Achary also commented on the evolving nature of parliamentary committees in the present context: “There was a time when legislative committees were completely independent. Now, the committee has a predetermined agenda, and its recommendations would be implemented using Parliament’s majority position.”
He added: “Even if someone uploads 500 questions on an MP’s behalf to the Lok Sabha website, I believe there is nothing improper with it as long as the MP endorses them.”
Tara Krishnaswamy, a prominent women’s activist from Bengaluru, said the questioning of Moitra was “motivated” and part of a “witch-hunt”.
Describing Moitra as one of the “strongest voices in questioning on behalf of the people” against the abuse of power and misuse of money, Krishnaswamy said the MP had repeatedly put the Union government and its friendly capitalists on the mat.
“It is just horrendous the way she has been treated,” she said.
She told South First: “When an MP is asked questions like who she speaks to at night and how many times, where she visits, where she stays, with whom, and so forth, it is clearly motivated. It is not just a violation of privacy and decency but also adds to the notion that it is a witch-hunt rather than any kind of reasonable investigation on behalf of the people.”
The activist said the aim of the ruling party at the Centre seemed to be to target the Opposition parties. She pointed to the example of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) as an independent unit.
“That is apparent from the fact that every time there are elections, elected representatives from various Opposition parties and states are targeted, and no one else gets targeted. No independent body can target only the Opposition when the majority of the sitting MPs are actually from the BJP,” she said.
Krishnaswamy called for the Union government and other agencies to function with a “far greater degree of decency and transparency”.
