The Karnataka assembly believes that its honour has been besmirched not by members watching porn even as proceedings were on but by the news channel that ran the exposé. Our sanctimonious representatives think they are above public scrutiny, much less reproach; that the very grounds that they conduct their business on is hallowed.

The questions posed by the inquiry committee to the channel are telling of how respectable and inviolable the lawmakers woould like us to think they are. Sadly, much before news channels beamed images of the porn-watching ministers on to our tellies, we had known our lawmakers did not deserve the halo they so frequently like to wear. The house debates in most assemblies and parliament have sometimes (read frequently) been labelled "pandemonium". So, given all that goes on in the hallowed grounds, there is little room for sanctity of the house, or even a notion of it.

It would have augured well if the Karnataka assembly had euestioned the ministers and commeded the channel for exposing the unparliamentary act. It wold have bolstered its claim to sanctity. Instead, it has chosen to shoot the messenger.

In this day and age, it only increases the brand image of politicians and lawmakers to maintain maximu transparency in public dealings. Anachronistically, there are still many assemblies in India that do not allow their proceedings to be  telecast. Some let only the state television cameras document the events of the house.

Allowing a private news channel in the galleries was a commendable  step on the part of the Karnataka assembly. But, attacking it for showing the true pastime of the gents in white kurtas is atavisitic.