On Wednesday (January 3), the Supreme Court turned down Mahua Moitra, the leader of the Trinamool Congress, who was expelled from the Lok Sabha on December 8. The court didn’t allow her the immediate interim relief of participating in the House sessions. Nonetheless, the court asked the Secretary General of the Lok Sabha to respond to Moitra’s appeal.
The bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta said that the case will be heard again in the week starting on March 11.
Senior Attorney A M Singhvi appeared on Moitra’s behalf and asked the court to grant her permission to take part in Parliamentary proceedings in the interim which the court cosented to though she would not be eligible to vote or receive compensation as an MP. However, the court denied her request.
Why was Mahua Moitra expelled from the Lok Sabha?
Moitra was expelled last month after an Ethics Committee led by BJP MP Vinod Kumar Sonkar found that she had shared her user ID and password for the Lok Sabha Member’s portal with unauthorized individuals, thereby engaging in “unethical conduct” and contempt of the House.
She was accused of taking bribes, including expensive gifts, from Dubai-based businessman Darshan Hiranandani in return for asking questions in parliament.
Moitra had said that she shared her parliamentary login credentials with the businessman to have his staff type out her questions on the official platform. “Sharing of login details does not mean giving control of the portal. Only the relevant MP was required to receive the One Time Password via the site.
Mahua vowed to restore her membership following expulsion
After her expulsion, addressing the press on the steps of parliament, she said,”there is no evidence of any cash, any gifts. This Lok Sabha has also seen the weaponization of a parliamentary committee, ironically the ethics committee which was set up to serve as a moral compass for members instead it has been abused today to do what it was never meant to do which is to bulldoze the opposition and become another weapon to “Thok Do” us into submission”.
She further said, “This committee and this report have broken every rule in the book. The committee is punishing me for engaging in a practice that is routine accepted and encouraged in the house. The findings are based solely on the written testimonies of two private citizens, whose versions contradict each other in material terms, I wasn’t allowed to cross-examine.”
Her argument in court against expulsion
Mr. Singhvi who represented Mahua in court argued that the portal is not run by an MP personally. Any MP who needs to exchange log-in information with her secretaries, delegates, or candidates can do so. There was no authorized or controlled access policy or code of behavior for the portal. Without any guidelines for providing the access code, she was kicked off.
According to the senior attorney, providing restricted access to login credentials is not equivalent to “hacking.” Since there was no quid pro quo, there was no ethical transgression. Mr. Singhvi stated, “There was no money trail.”
Thus, it is to be seen whether court’s next hearing would bring any respite for Mahua or not.
Comments 3