The Lok Sabha witnessed unprecedented chaos and fiery debates today as the ‘Cash for Query’ scandal involving Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra took centre stage. Speaker Om Birla found himself in the eye of the storm as opposition members vehemently protested the decision to expel Moitra, citing concerns over procedural fairness and violations of constitutional principles.
In a charged session, Speaker Om Birla sought to address the escalating tensions by emphasizing the continuity of traditions set by previous Speakers, notably Somnath Chatterjee and Pranab Mukherjee. However, this attempt to invoke precedent failed to quell the mounting unrest among opposition MPs.
Kalyan Banerjee, a Trinamool Congress MP, passionately argued for Mahua Moitra’s right to a fair trial, asserting that a fair hearing should include the opportunity for the accused to present their side. He raised concerns over the reliance on an affidavit without the affiant being called as a witness, contending that the principles of natural justice and constitutional rights were being violated.
Banerjee stressed the significance of Mahua Moitra’s right to cross-examine those making accusations against her, describing it as a fundamental element of a fair hearing. He accused the Ethics Committee of violating Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law, and claimed that Moitra’s constitutional rights were being compromised.
The Ethics Committee’s report recommending Moitra’s expulsion faced strong opposition, with accusations of a hurried and biased inquiry. Opposition members demanded more time to study the extensive report, arguing that a decision of such gravity required careful consideration.
As the uproar continued, the Lok Sabha appeared to be a battleground for conflicting interpretations of parliamentary ethics and constitutional safeguards. The unfolding events cast a shadow over the institution’s ability to uphold fairness, transparency, and the principles of natural justice in dealing with allegations of unethical conduct by its members. The political firestorm surrounding the ‘Cash for Query’ controversy is likely to reverberate in the corridors of power, prompting broader debates about parliamentary accountability and due process.
