Manas Dasgupta
NEW DELHI, Oct 28: The Lok Sabha Ethics Committee on Saturday agreed with Trinamool Congress member Mahua Moitra’s request for a fresh date but refused to accommodate her convenience and asked her to appear before the committee on November 2 to answer questions related to “cash for query” charges against her.
The committee also asserted that no further extension would be granted to her. Ms Moitra had on Friday wrote to the Ethics Committee, which is probing the allegations against her, expressing her inability to appear before it on October 31 and citing her prior engagements had requested for a date after November 5.
In its response, the Lok Sabha Ethics Committee extended the date of appearance by three days, asking her to depose before it on November 2 and made it clear that it would not entertain any request for further extension.
The committee is probing allegations against Ms Moitra levelled by the BJP MP Nishikant Dubey and supported by Supreme Court advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai that she took bribes and favour from businessman Darshan Hiranandani for asking questions in Parliament targeting the Adani group and through him the Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Mr Dubey and Mr Dehadrai had given “oral evidence” before the panel on Thursday.
Ms Moitra has said she should be given “a fair hearing and an adequate opportunity to defend myself against the false, malicious and defamatory accusations levelled against me by Shri Dubey and Shri Dehadrai.” She had also demanded the panel opportunity to cross examine Hiranandani who has filed a “suo motu” affidavit “confirming” the allegations against Ms Moitra.
Talking to media persons, Ms Moitra has reiterated her earlier stand that she had not taken any bribe or special favours from the businessman Hiranandani. She said the only things she had received from Darshan Hiranandani, the CEO of the Hiranandani Group, as gifts were “one scarf, some lipsticks, and other makeup items including eye shadow” but she admitted to letting him use her Lok Sabha login credentials to post questions that she claimed were hers.
Her remarks came amid allegations that she received gifts from Mr Hiranandani in exchange for asking questions in Parliament. Most members of the Ethics committee belonging to the BJP have said the charges against Ms Moitra are serious in nature and amount to a breach of parliamentary privilege.
Ms Moitra on Friday also lashed out against Mr Dehadrai, citing that he did not deserve the national importance he was getting. She also said his complaint against her was motivated by the acrimonious custody battle that both were fighting over their pet dog Henry.
Ms Moitra defended sharing login credentials with Mr Hiranandani saying she has done that with others too “as she worked from a remote constituency.” “But there is always an OTP and the team would always post my questions,” she said, claiming that the NIC that operates government and parliamentary websites had no rules against this.
This was countered by Mr Dubey in a tweet in which he posted the rules specified by the NIC and a form that every parliamentarian was obligated to fill out. These include instructions to keep the credentials private and confidential and inform the NIC of any alternate user as any breach could have security implications.
Mr Dubey also demanded a probe into the attempts that he claimed were being made to influence Mr Hiranandani and if Ms Moitra was in touch with him. Mr Hiranandani is an approver in this case with his signed affidavit corroborating the charges raised against Ms Moitra by both Mr Dubey and Mr Dehadrai.
Ms Moitra said the things she had received from the businessman, who she called a close personal friend, were a scarf for her birthday present, lipsticks, and makeup items from Bobbi Brown. She said the makeup products were brought for her from Dubai’s duty-free store. She also said she had consulted him for changing the interiors of her house, and he had presented her with new architectural plans and drawings, but the expenses were undertaken by the CPWD which comes under the government.
“When I was allotted my personal bungalow, it was in a dilapidated state. I asked Darshan if he could get one of his architects how the doors can be re-designed so light can come in,” said Ms Moitra, showing pictures of designs sent to her by Mr Hiranandani’s architects for the bungalow’s rooms, layout, and kitchen. She said the designs were submitted to the Central Public Works Department (CPWD) and claimed that her bungalow’s renovation was done by the government body. She also said whenever she was in Mumbai, she would use Mr Hiranandani’s car as he was a friend.
“I would urge Darshan Hiranandani to come immediately and put on record if he has given anything else to me. Anyone can make an allegation, but the onus is always on the complainant to prove those allegations. There’s no mention of ₹ 2 crore cash given to me in the affidavit. If cash is being given, please tell the date and provide all the documentary evidence,” she said.
Refuting the charges, she said the issue was cash for questions. “It’s a serious issue. One side of the issue is that there was a quid pro quo, and the other side is the cash. I have asked a total of 61 questions in the Lok Sabha whereas the national average for questions by 17th Lok Sabha’s MPs is 191. I am not even at one-third. The average of West Bengal MPs is 129.”
Pointing out that Darshan Hiranandani was not in the main business competing with Adani group as had been claimed in the complaint, Ms Moitra said “Adani, in collaboration with this government, is the biggest fraud on the people of India. It is in my interest to get information from any source possible to expose Adani. Darshan Hiranandani does not need to pay me to ask questions; I should be paying Darshan to get information on Adani.”
She claimed that she had been targeted because she asked uncomfortable questions against the BJP government, as was the case with any other members who dared to criticise the Narendra Modi government and maintained that she would remain a loyal soldier of the TMC and the West Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee’s silence over the “cash for query” allegations meant any rift between them. “I am a loyal soldier of the Trinamool and I will remain one till I die. Short of being my birth mother, Mamata Banerjee is my mother,” she maintained.