After expulsion from Parliament, what are the next options for TMC's Mahua Moitra?

The Ethics Committee report recommended an 'intense, legal, institutional inquiry' by the government against TMC MP Mahua Moitra.

Trinamool Congress leader Mahua Moitra was expelled from the Lok Sabha on Friday after the Ethics Committee's report on her was adopted by the House. The committee found her guilty of accepting gifts and favours from businessman Darshan Hiranandani to further his interests.

Moitra was found guilty of "unethical conduct", "serious misdemeanours", and contempt of the Parliament by sharing her Lok Sabha credentials - which can impact national security.

In an interview with The Indian Express, Moitra had accepted providing businessman Darshan Hiranandani with her Parliament login credentials, although she denied accepting cash from him.

“The serious misdemeanours on the part of Smt Mahua Moitra calls for severe punishment. The Committee, therefore, recommend that Smt Mahua Moitra, MP may be expelled from the membership of the 17th Lok Sabha. In view of highly objectionable, unethical, heinous and criminal conduct of Smt. Mahua Moitra, the Committee recommend for an intense, legal, institutional inquiry by the Government of India in a time-bound manner,” the panel report said.

"Moitra has the option of challenging the expulsion in the Supreme Court. Normally, House proceedings cannot be challenged on the ground of procedural irregularity. Article 122 of the Constitution is clear. It gives immunity to the proceedings from a challenge from court,” former Lok Sabha secretary general PDT Achary told The Indian Express.

According to Article 122, “the validity of any proceedings in Parliament shall not be called (into) question on the ground of any alleged irregularity of procedure”. It states that “no officer or Member of Parliament in whom powers are vested by or under this Constitution for regulating procedure or the conduct of business, or for maintaining order, in Parliament shall be subject to the jurisdiction of any court in respect of the exercise by him of those powers”.

However, Achary clarified that the Supreme Court said in 2007 in the Raja Ram Pal case that “those restrictions are only for procedural irregularities. There may be other cases where judicial review may be necessary.”

“Moitra asked for the cross-examination of the people, which has not been done. Her allegations that 'filthy questions' were being asked by the Ethics panel and the walkout staged by the Opposition MPs… In the meantime though, the report was ready. Therefore, she can cite these examples to say there was a denial of natural justice and so on,” said Achary.

Mohua Moitra could also bring up Article 20 and provide an argument based on the disproportionality of punishment. Article 20 states that the punishment should be proportionate to the offence.

Achary also added that there has been no rule framed by the Lok Sabha or provisions under the Information Technology (IT) Act, which prohibits the sharing of one’s password. He also added that many MPs do not add questions on their own.

Achary pointed out that there is an aspect of corruption in this case, and if it is true, then under the Prevention of Corruption Act, the CBI will act on it.

Meanwhile, Moitra can also put forward an argument that the panel overstepped its mandate and that the proceedings were irregular.