Introduction
Parliamentary ethics committees are expected to uphold moral standards, integrity, and accountability within legislative institutions. However, in 2023–2024, the Lok Sabha Ethics Committee came under scrutiny for handling the cash-for-query allegations against Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra. The proceedings sparked controversy over ethics, confidentiality, and political bias, raising questions about the robustness of parliamentary oversight.
### Background: The Cash‑for‑Query Row
What Cheated the Case?
-
Accusations: BJP MP Nishikant Dubey alleged that Moitra shared her Lok Sabha login credentials with businessman Darshan Hiranandani, who authored 50 out of her 60 parliamentary questions favouring his interests (turn1search4turn1search8).
-
Credentials Leakage: IP logs showed Moitra’s portal accessed from Dubai 47 times, indicating misuse of her official access (turn1search2turn1search8).
### Key Controversies and Committee Behavior
Opposition Walkout Over 'Undignified Questions'
-
Moitra and opposition members walked out of a committee session, calling the questions “filthy,” “personal,” and invasive—such as inquiries into her personal life and nighttime conversations (turn1search0turn1search5).
-
They accused the committee chairperson Vinod Sonkar of overstepping ethical bounds by probing beyond professional conduct ([turn1search5]turn1search7).
Allegations of Bias and Selectivity
-
Opposition MPs pointed to the committee’s past inaction on other serious cases, such as the Narada sting involving MPs from the same party now in power, calling the panel a “kangaroo court” (turn1search3turn1search10).
-
Critics questioned the committee’s neutrality and pointed to what seemed like political motivation in its tenure of action (turn1search10turn1search10).
### What Did the Ethics Committee Find?
-
The Committee reported that Moitra engaged in unethical conduct, breach of privilege, and surrendered official credentials, which could impact national security (turn1search8turn1search8).
-
It recommended her expulsion from the Lok Sabha, marking the first such case since the ethics panel's inception in 2000.
### Outcome: Expulsion and Aftermath
-
In December 2023, the Lok Sabha endorsed the Committee’s recommendation, expelling Moitra via a voice vote despite her demand to speak (turn1search8turn1search8).
-
Moitra termed the process a “kangaroo court”, alleging political victimization over her criticisms of the government and the Adani group (turn1search10turn1search10).
### Broader Implications of the Controversy
| Area | Implication |
|---|---|
| Ethics Oversight | Calls into question the procedural fairness and impartiality of the Ethics Committee. |
| MP Accountability | Highlights blurred lines between ethical vs criminal misconduct and parliamentary privilege boundaries. |
| Political Bias | Undermines trust when committees appear reactive towards opposition while ignoring alleged ruling-party violations. |
| Public Perception | The clash between institutional ethics and political theatre may erode faith in parliamentary watchdog institutions. |
### Conclusion
The Parliamentary Ethics Committee’s handling of the Mahua Moitra case exposes deep procedural, ethical, and political fissures. When parliamentary panels enforce morality, they must themselves embody integrity, independence, and fairness—free from factional bias or procedural shortcuts. This episode underscores the urgent need for transparent guidelines, independent secretariats, and public accountability in legislative ethics forums.
Until then, the Ethics Committee will remain both a tool for accountability—and, when mishandled, a subject of criticism itself.