One meet, two versions
With two diametrically opposite versions emerging after the meeting of the Parliamentary Ethics Committee, which was called to hear Trinamool Congress Member of Parliament (MP) Mahua Moitra’s defence against the charges levelled against her by Bharatiya Janata Party MP Nishikant Dubey (Page 1, November 3), neutral observers are left with uncertainty over which version to believe. It seems, as of now, ‘reality is outsourced to the narrative skills’ of the MPs concerned to convince the people of ‘really what happened during the meeting’. At this juncture, one wonders why the proceedings of the Ethics Committee cannot be live-streamed, like the way in which parliamentary proceedings are done already. In a country which is portrayed as the “mother of democracy”, the expectation is that Members of Parliament, especially the “Ethics Committee” members, must have a strong sense of shared reality.
A. Venkatasubramanian,
