JPC Must Be a Platform for Real Democracy, Not Just a Tool of Power Politics

 

In India’s parliamentary system, the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) was created to ensure transparency and accountability. Ideally, it brings together members from different parties to investigate major financial scams, sensitive bills or important policy matters in a fair way. But over time, JPC has become controversial. While it looks powerful on paper, in practice, many believe it mostly serves the ruling party's interests.

 

Recently, TMC leader Derek O’Brien raised questions about the credibility of JPC. He said that if a bill includes rules like removing a Prime Minister, Chief Minister or Minister who goes to jail for 30 days, how can we trust a JPC led by the ruling party? His main concern is that when the ruling party dominates the committee, expecting fairness is unrealistic.

This isn’t just about one bill. It raises a serious question about the trustworthiness of democratic institutions in India. Citizens expect Parliament to not only make laws but also hold the government accountable. However, the history of JPC shows repeated misuse and political bias.

For example, in 1987, the Congress-led JPC on the Bofors scam faced a boycott from six opposition parties. Its final report was rejected by the opposition, and Congress lost the next election. Similar patterns followed in the Harshad Mehta case (1992), the Ketan Parekh stock scam (2002-03), and the 2G and VVIP helicopter scams (2011-13). In all these cases, the ruling party formed a JPC but still lost public trust and later lost elections.

This pattern suggests that people see JPCs as tools to hide the truth rather than reveal it. Derek O’Brien even called it a kind of curse, every government that formed a JPC ended up losing the next election.

Supporters of JPC say it is part of Parliament and includes members from all parties, so it is democratic. But critics point out that the ruling party always has a majority and dominates the findings. Also, between 2014 and now, seven out of eleven JPCs were formed on the last day of a Parliament session. This raises doubts about whether they were formed seriously or just to silence criticism. Between 2004 and 2014, no JPC was formed this way, which shows a stark contrast in approach.

Even recent JPCs on laws like the Waqf Amendment Bill have been accused of ignoring opposition voices and pushing the ruling party's agenda. Now, with the new bill that proposes removing leaders if they are jailed for 30 days, there’s fear it could be used for political revenge, especially when central agencies are already accused of being misused.

The main question is: does the JPC really promote accountability or is it just another way for the government to control the narrative? Supporters say JPCs help build future policy. But when outcomes are pre-decided and opposition is ignored, it weakens democracy. 

Derek O’Brien’s comments reflect a growing lack of trust. And looking at the past Bofors, Harshad Mehta, Ketan Parekh, 2G, it’s clear that people often reject the findings of JPCs and punish the ruling party in elections.

So, what can be done?

Some experts suggest:

• Major scams and sensitive bills should be investigated under judicial supervision.
• JPCs must have equal representation from both ruling and opposition parties.
• The process should be handled by an independent parliamentary body, free from government pressure.
• The JPC’s work should be made transparent and public, so citizens can see what’s really happening.
•  

The biggest challenge is restoring trust. Democracy depends on institutions that people can believe in. If JPCs are always seen as political tools, they lose their value. Derek O’Brien’s remarks aren’t just political, they’re a warning sign for democracy. 

India’s democracy is more than just elections. It’s about fairness, transparency, and accountability in all institutions. If committees like the JPC lose public trust, the whole system weakens.

That’s why it’s necessary to take the JPC out of the political game and make it a real platform for democratic discussion. Only then can it protect public interest and strengthen democracy. Otherwise, the term JPC will only remind people of politics not truth or justice.