The Ethics Committee of the Lok Sabha recently adopted a report concerning allegations of ‘cash-for-query’ against Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra. The report received support from six members of the ethics panel while four members opposed it.
The draft report recommended the disqualification of Mahua Moitra, a Member of Parliament from the Trinamool Congress (TMC), from the Lok Sabha due to an ongoing investigation into an alleged bribe-for-query case.
A complaint was filed by Nishikant Dubey, a senior MP from the Bhartiya Janata Party, alleging that Ms. Moitra had received money from a businessman in exchange for raising questions in Parliament to promote the person’s business interests. The Speaker subsequently referred the complaint to the Ethics Committee for examination and a report.
The Lok Sabha Ethics Committee’s proceedings have sparked widespread public debate. If a Member of Parliament accepts money in exchange for raising questions in Parliament, they would be deemed to have committed a breach of privilege and shown contempt towards the House.
Such complaints are consistently referred to the Committee of Privileges for thorough investigation. Following a meticulous inquiry, this committee presents its findings and recommendations regarding the appropriate action to be taken against the implicated MP.
History Of MPs Expulsion For Illegal Gratification
- MPs may face expulsion from the Parliamentary House if proven guilty of illegal gratification for doing parliamentary work.
- Examples of such instances have been recorded in Lok Sabha.
The H.G. Mudgal Case (1951)
- H.G. Mudgal, a member of the Provisional Parliament, was found guilty of promoting business interests in return for financial benefits.
- Actions included placing questions and moving amendments to a Bill favouring a business association.
- A special committee deemed his conduct derogatory to the House’s dignity and not meeting parliamentary standards.
- Mudgal, however, resigned before the recommended expulsion could take place.
The 2005 Sting Operation
- A 2005 sting operation by a private channel revealed 10 Lok Sabha members accepting money for placing questions in Parliament.
- A special committee found them guilty of unbecoming conduct.
- The recommended expulsion was accepted by the House, and all ten MPs were expelled.
The Ethics Committee Of The Lok Sabha
Established in 2000, the Ethics Committee of the Lok Sabha holds the responsibility of scrutinizing complaints pertaining to the unethical conduct of Members of Parliament and making recommendations for appropriate action. Additionally, it is entrusted with the formulation of a code of conduct for MPs.
Defining Unethical Conduct
- The term ‘unethical conduct’ is not defined by the Constitution anywhere.
- The responsibility to decide if an act is unethical is solely upon the ethics committee.
- Previously decided cases give insight into what may be deemed as ‘unethical’.
Case Of Ms. Moitra
- Complaints about MPs accepting money for parliamentary work are usually referred to the privileges committee or a special committee.
- However, the case of Ms. Moitra, involving allegations of illegal gratification for parliamentary work, has been referred to the Ethics committee.
- If Ms. Moitra’s complaint involves alleged acceptance of illegal gratification, it becomes a breach of privileges.
- Breach of privileges is beyond the purview of the ethics committee.
How Do Parliamentary Committees Different From Investigative Agencies
Acceptance of a bribe by a public servant is a criminal offense, typically investigated by governmental criminal agencies. However, Parliament committees do not engage in criminal investigations.
Decisions And Punishment
- These committees make decisions based on evidence, determining if an MP’s conduct breaches privilege or shows contempt of the House.
- The punishment pertains to the MP’s functions within the House.
- For any criminal offenses, the MP can be liable for punishment under the law.
- Example of Expelled MPs: 10 MPs expelled from the Lok Sabha are still undergoing trial under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
How Parliament Investigates Matters
- Parliament investigates matters differently than the judiciary.
- This investigation is done through a committee, following the House’s rules.
- The committee’s methods include:
- Reviewing documents provided by the complainant and witnesses.
- If necessary, consulting experts.
- Analyzing all available evidence to arrive at findings.
- If a house member is under scrutiny, they can:
- Have an advocate represent them before the committee.
- Cross-examine the complainant and other witnesses, with the chair’s permission.
- The committee bases its findings on the overall evidence and common sense.
- Unlike a judicial investigation, the committee’s findings are based on likelihoods rather than absolute proof.
- Rules under the Evidence Act don’t apply to a parliamentary committee’s probe.
- The Speaker alone decides the relevance of a person’s evidence or a document, not the Evidence Act.
Online Submission Of Questions
- The topic at hand is the practice of Members of Parliament (MPs) sharing their login details and passwords with others, a method resulting from time constraints.
- MPs often delegate the task of writing questions to personal assistants, as they lack the time to do it themselves.
- The Lok Sabha currently doesn’t have specific rules regarding the online submission of questions by MPs.
- MPs are not restricted in whom they can employ for their parliamentary duties.
- There is also no requirement for MPs to disclose where they source their information for parliamentary work.
- According to Article 105 of the Constitution, MPs have broad freedom to express themselves in the House.
- This freedom could potentially cover using any information source for parliamentary questions, bills, or resolutions.
- Legally, investigating the origins of an MP’s information might not be allowed.
- Parliament, however, does have the ability to discipline its members if necessary.