{"id":323632,"date":"2023-10-27T18:09:45","date_gmt":"2023-10-27T12:39:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/?p=323632"},"modified":"2023-10-27T18:09:57","modified_gmt":"2023-10-27T12:39:57","slug":"mahua-moitra-nishikant-dubey-parliament-questions-hiranandani-cash-for-query","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/magazine\/mahua-moitra-nishikant-dubey-parliament-questions-hiranandani-cash-for-query\/","title":{"rendered":"Rules of the Game"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p><strong>By Vivek K Agnihotri<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Nishikant Dubey, a BJP MP, wrote to the Lok Sabha Speaker recently accusing Mahua Moitra, a Trinamool Congress MP, of taking gifts and cash from the business house of Darshan Hiranandani in return for asking questions in Parliament to protect its interests. The Speaker has referred the complaint to the Ethics Committee of the House, even as Moitra denied the allegation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>If, for a moment, we put aside the issue of gifts and cash, the fact remains that an MP cannot be faulted for asking questions in respect of his constituents whom he represents. However, there are certain rules of the game.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>First and foremost, an MP, soon after he is elected, has to provide details of his professional and business interests, which are entered in a Register of Members\u2019 Interests, which is available to other members for inspection on request. It is also accessible to ordinary citizens under the Right to Information Act, 2005.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Further, whenever a member raises an issue in Parliament which has any association with his professional or business interests, he has to make a prior declaration to that effect. For example, if a member, who is a practising lawyer, wants to participate in a debate in which one of his client\u2019s interest may be involved, he is required to make a declaration to that effect first. Similarly, if a member has business interests in a company to which the question relates, he has to make a prior declaration before raising it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Moreover, there is a practice of prescribing a code of conduct for MPs. While there is no definitive code of conduct for MPs of the Lok Sabha, there are various provisions in the rules of procedure and conduct of business in the Lok Sabha for ensuring decorum and dignified conduct of members.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>On the other hand, in the Fourth Report of the Ethics Committee of the Rajya Sabha, which was adopted by the House on April 20, 2005, a 14-point Code of Conduct for members was recommended. Its major points are:&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul>\n<li>If members find that there is a conflict between their personal interests and the public trust which they hold, they should resolve it in a manner that their private interests are subordinated to the duty of their public office.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Members must not do anything that brings disrepute to the Parliament and affects their credibility.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Members holding public offices should use public resources in such a manner as may lead to public good.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Members should always see that their private financial interests and those of their immediate family do not come in conflict with the public interest. And if any such conflict ever arises, they should try to resolve it in a manner that the public interest is not jeopardized.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Members should never expect or accept any fee, remuneration or benefit for a vote given or not given by them on the floor of the House, for introducing a Bill, for moving a resolution or desisting from moving a resolution, putting a question or abstaining from asking a question or participating in the deliberations of the House or a Parliamentary Committee.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>Internationally, too, there is a convention of prescribing a code of conduct for MPs. In the UK, a code of conduct for MPs was prepared pursuant to the Resolution of the House of July 19, 1995. The Canadian House of Commons has a Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner with powers to examine violations of the Conflict of Interest Code at the request of another member or by Resolution of the House or on his own initiative. Germany has had a Code of Conduct for members of the Bundestag since 1972. The US has had a Code since 1968. Pakistan too has a Code of Conduct for members of the Senate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>This is not the first instance when an allegation has been made against an MP for acceptance of favours for raising issues or asking questions in the House to promote the interests of a private party. The conduct of members involving corruption in the execution of their office is treated by the House as a breach of privilege. It would also be a breach of privilege or misconduct by a member to enter into an agreement with another person for a sum of money to advocate the claims of such a person in the House.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>As early as 1951, an ad hoc committee of the House was appointed by the Provisional Parliament to investigate the conduct and activities of a member in connection with some of his dealings with a business association. This included canvassing support and making propaganda in Parliament on certain problems on behalf of that association in return for alleged financial and other business advantages.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In its report, the committee held that the conduct of the member was derogatory to the dignity of the House and inconsistent with the standards which Parliament was entitled to expect from its members. The committee recommended the expulsion of the member from the House. The member submitted his resignation. In a resolution, the House accepted the findings of the committee and deprecated the attempt of the member to circumvent the effects of the motion expelling him. This constituted contempt of the House and aggravated his offence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The most notorious case arose on December 12, 2005, when a private television channel carried video footage showing some MPs allegedly accepting money for tabling questions and raising other matters in the House. On the same day, the Speaker told the members concerned not to attend the session of the House until the matter was looked into and a decision taken. An inquiry committee was appointed and directed to submit its report by December 21, 2005. The report of the committee was adopted by the two Houses on December 23, 2005, expelling 10 members (nine of the Lok Sabha and one of the Rajya Sabha) from the membership of the Parliament.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>There have been several other cases involving misdemeanours by MPs, for which punishment ranging from reprimand, suspension and expulsion has been awarded.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In the present case, the ethics committee of the Lok Sabha, to which the matter was referred to, has summoned the complainants to take their evidence. In the meanwhile, Hiranandani has filed an affidavit before the committee corroborating the allegations. The committee will take the evidence, deliberate on the matter and then submit its report which will be placed before the House for consideration and decision. In the meanwhile, if the committee indicts the member, the Speaker may suspend her till the House takes a final decision.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-text-align-right\"><strong>\u2014The writer is former Secretary-General, Rajya Sabha<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Even as feisty Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra faces allegations of professional impropriety, the question is whether she has broken the Code of Conduct governing members of Parliament <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":323603,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","enabled":false}}},"categories":[2,56744],"tags":[98041,129083,81333,48238,91673,1003,1114,4717,1085,88373],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/d2r2ijn7njrktv.cloudfront.net\/IL\/uploads\/2023\/10\/27155105\/Parliament-Questions-Code-Vivek-min.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/323632"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=323632"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/323632\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/323603"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=323632"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=323632"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=323632"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}