CASH FOR QUERY SCAM

MAHUA MOITRA: EXPELLED MP

HER FUTURE COURSE OF ACTION

SARASIJ MAJUMDER

 

Trinamool Congress (TMC) leader Mahua Moitra was expelled as a Lok Sabha MP after she was found guilty by the ethics panel in the 'cash-for-query' case.

The case of Moitra has generated a LEGAL ISSUE:- whether the act of soliciting favours in return for parliamentary actions constitutes illegal gratification. Legal experts have emphasised the severity of this breach, suggesting that if an MP indeed performed parliamentary actions in exchange of remuneration, it warranted investigation by the Privileges Committee for contempt and a breach of privilege, which can harm the country.

The only significant aspect complicating the  matter, as well as in favour of Mrs. Moitra-  is the absence of explicit rule (s)  barring MPs from sharing their Parliament login credentials, as the practice of online question submission is relatively recent. And many MPs are not conversant with the PROCEDURE . BUT, the absence of specific rules does not diminish the gravity of  breaches of parliamentary conduct, and security aspects of the Country.

The Ethics Committee's call for a thorough investigation to establish any financial impropriety further demonstrates the gravity of the case. In a major development in the cash-for-query controversy involving Mrs. Mahua Moitra, the Central Bureau of Investigation has begun a preliminary probe against the EXPELLED  MP on the directions of the Lokpal, sources have told NDTV. A preliminary enquiry has been initiated and the agency will decide whether to file a criminal case against the EXPELLED MP based on the outcome of this enquiry.

JUDGEMENT DELIVERED BY SUPREME COURT IN PREVIOUS CASES:

The Supreme Court has tabled divergent views on similar cases in the past, reflecting the complexity of parliamentary expulsions. The Raja Ram Pal case of 2007 highlighted that Parliament possesses the power to expel its members, subject to justifiability. However, the interpretation of Article 101, which deals with the vacation of seats in Parliament, led to disagreements among the judges.

While the majority argued that expulsion was within Parliament's powers, the minority raised concerns over the exhaustive nature of Article 101 and its silence on expulsion as a ground for vacancy.

I will not site the details of previous cases. Those JUDGEMENTS are in PUBLIC DOMAIN, can be accessed, and read.

LEGAL OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO Mrs. MAHUA MOITRA:

1.0 Mrs.  Moitra can file an appeal against the Ethics Committee's ruling. This could be done by approaching the Supreme Court or the High Court, pleading to overturn or provide an order against the decision. The plea would be based on the grounds of natural justice and principles of fair hearing .But, court may keep the order in abeyance conditionally.

2.0 She could also challenge the jurisdiction and conduct of the Ethics Committee. She can argue that the committee overstepped its mandate, that the proceedings were irregular, or they were conducted with malice, and/ or prejudice. In this case, Court may review whether Article 101 is properly applied, and followed.

3.0 Moitra can seek intervention. Through her party or independent avenues, she can approach senior Parliament or government officials, alleging bias, prejudice or any sort of malfeasance in the Ethics Committee's proceedings. She has by-passed this route, or so it seems.

4.0 She can seek relief through the defamation suit already filed by her before the Delhi High Court. If Mrs. Moitra can prove that the accusations against her were slanderous, fabricated, or damaging to her reputation, in her defamation case against involved individuals, she may hope for a reversal of the Ethics Committee's decision. Action already taken, but the appointed Lawyer has declined to continue with the case.

PRESENT STATUS:

Mrs. Mahua Moitra seemed to have moved to Supreme Court, days after she was expelled as a Lok Sabha MP in connection with the 'cash-for-query' case . Moitra, in her plea, said the decision to expel her was "illegal”, as per information available".

 SOURCE:-

IT, TOI, HT, NDTV

IMAGE:-- INTERNET

Disclaimer:-- All information is from published sources. This can’t be construed as trial by BLOGGER. This post  is a  mere REPORTING.