English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest Politics News

Rafale deal: Modi govt threatens action against media for ‘stolen files’, gets slammed

Published

on

Rafale deal

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]A day after Attorney General told the Supreme Court that crucial files relating to price negotiations in the Rafale deal had been stolen and the government was contemplating to take criminal action against the media houses that carried reports based on the files, the Narendra Modi government came in for scathing attack from the opposition and the media for trying to stifle the press on flimsy grounds.

Copies of files had appeared in media reports alleging that Narendra Modi government had misled the court about pricing of the Rafale fighter aircraft and the Prime Minister’s Office had sidelined the designated negotiating team in finalising the price of the Rafale fighter aircraft, causing loss to the exchequer.

Yesterday, these details were mentioned in the Supreme Court when it was hearing the petition, filed on behalf of former Union Minister Yashwant Sinha, seeking review of its December 14, 2018, judgment which dismissed all PILs seeking a probe into alleged irregularities in the Rafale deal.

Apparently left with no argument to counter petitioners demanding a review of the earlier Supreme Court verdict on grounds that the government had concealed this details from the court, the AG changed tack to claim the media reports had violated the Official Secrets Act, that the files were secret and could not be used in court proceedings and hence the plea be rejected.

He also said that the files had been ‘stolen’ and the government would initiate “criminal action” against the two publications that had reported the documents – The Hindu and news agency ANI – since the matter was of sensitive nature and is covered by the Official Secrets Act.

The AG’s contention was questioned by the judges, including Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi. When Venugopal told the court that the matter was one involving national security and stolen material could not be relied upon unless the source was established, the bench raised several questions and asked him “suppose a crime like corruption has been committed, can you seek shelter under national security to suppress it?”

By afternoon today (Thursday, March 7), #FileChorChowkidar was trending at the top on Twitter.

N Ram, chairman of The Hindu Group, said “We are fully committed, absolutely committed to protect the confidentiality of our sources…. No force on Earth is going to change our mind on that,” Ram said. “… the documents speak for themselves and the stories speak for themselves,” he said.

He said the newspaper’s stand is, “what we published is perfectly justified (and) in public interest”.

“We have not stolen the documents,” Ram told The Indian Express. Ram did not want to comment on the proceeding in the Supreme Court since he is “not privy to all that was said”.

On “allegations that these are stolen documents, and we have published stolen documents”, Ram said the documents came from “confidential sources”.

Maintaining that it may be called “stolen documents under law,” or that access to them was unauthorised, Ram said, “That is how information comes out – it is very much a part of investigative journalism.”

This information, which “should have been in the public realm has been withheld, has been suppressed”, he said. “There has been a cover-up,” he maintained. “It is information that should have been given, (but) it was not given to Parliament. And I believe much of the information we have published has not been submitted to the Supreme Court either…”

When documents related to the Bofors deal had come out, and were published, Ram said, “nobody talked of using the Official Secrets Act”.

“We are fully protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, and also under the Right to Information Act —- specifically 8(1)(i) and 8(2) overrides the Official Secrets Act,” the veteran journalist maintained.

Calling Official Secrets Act (OSA) an “obnoxious piece of legislation and legacy of the British Raj”, Ram said there have been several demands from “all democratic forces, and the press” to remove it. He said the OSA was enacted “purely in the interests of the British Raj, during imperialism” and since Independence, “it has been very rarely used against publications”. He said the OSA may have some application in cases of espionage, but that is a different matter.

Ram cited examples of Pentagon Papers, Watergate and leaks by WikiLeaks, internationally, where secret government documents were published by media and the government had claimed they were stolen. “We have heard this (charge that documents were stolen) before,” he said.

The Editors Guild of India weighed in today to back the media and condemned the government’s proposition that documents published by the media related to India’s Rafale fighter jet deal with France were “stolen” from the Defence Ministry.

The Guild said it was “perturbed” by the government’s threats that criminal action would be initiated against journalists or lawyers who used these documents.

It said any attempt to use the Official Secrets Act against the media would be “as reprehensible as asking the journalists to disclose their sources”, and urged the government against initiating action that might “undermine the media’s freedom and independence”.

In a statement, the Editors Guild said: “Although the Attorney General later clarified that the investigation and contemplated action would not be initiated against journalists or lawyers who used these documents, the Guild is perturbed over such threats. These will intimidate the media in general and curb its freedom to report and commend on the Rafale deal in particular.

“Any attempt to use the Official Secrets Act against the media is a reprehensible as asking the journalists to disclose their sources,” it added.

No talk of ‘stolen documents’, Defence Minister said in Lok Sabha the whole document should have been reported

The AG’s arguments appeared to be a lame and last ditch attempt at finding an escape route. A report in The Indian Express pointed out that on February 8 — the day The Hindu newspaper published a report citing official notings and news agency ANI put out the same note with more notings — Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman happily and triumphantly displayed the ANI report while countering the contents of The Hindu report. She made no mention of any “stolen” document when she spoke in Lok Sabha.

The Hindu report, citing a “Defence Ministry note” of November 2015, stated that the Ministry “raised strong objections to ‘parallel negotiations’ conducted by the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) with the French side” in the Rafale deal. Sitharaman said the note published along with the report did not include a noting by the then Defence Minister, Manohar Parrikar who had negated the concerns.

Sitharaman, in fact, wanted The Hindu should have seen or reported the whole document.

“When the newspaper itself has chosen to say or point out in detail the then Defence Secretary’s comment which was meant for the attention of the then Raksha Mantri, it should have also put the reply of the Raksha Mantri which was also given in writing. If the newspaper wanted to bring the truth out, I would have thought that it was incumbent upon that newspaper to put the reply of the then Raksha Mantri also on record,” she said.

“The Opposition leaders who want a reply should now know what the reply of the then Raksha Mantri, Shri Parrikar was… The then Raksha Mantri, Shri Parrikar, had very clearly said in response to the file noting of the then Defence Secretary to ‘remain calm, there is nothing to worry, things are going all right’. To that extent, a detailed reply was given by the then Raksha Mantri, Shri Parrikar Ji … In all fairness, it should have been the duty of the newspaper which has published this to also put it on record the comment of the Defence Secretary and that the reply given was this,” she said.

Subramanian Swamy’s warning

Modi government came under fire from politicians as well. Even BJP Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian Swamy warned the government in a tweet: “To file a Official Secrets Act case against any media, leave alone The Hindu, on election eve will be a political disaster.”

Senior advocate and constitutional expert Dushyant Dave was reported as having said on Wednesday, “The argument on behalf of the government is an absolute non-starter”.

“It is made only to deflect real debate on this most sensitive public issue. The government is on the back foot after having misled the Supreme Court as alleged in review petition by Shourie et al and is therefore trying to again lead the Supreme Court on a garden path,” he said.

He asserted that there was no violation of the Official Secrets Act as ministers, and the Prime Minister, besides Air Force top brass had repeatedly gone to the press with selective documents to justify their stand.

Former Additional Solicitor General and senior advocate Indira Jaising agreed with the oral observation made by the Bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi that even stolen evidence could be looked into, if it was found to be relevant.

During the hearing Justice Gogoi observed, “We can understand you saying that petitioners came with unclean hands. That they got the documents through doubtful sources. But it is another thing to say that the court cannot consider these documents at all. That they are untouchable”.

“Gayab ho gaya (It has disappeared” is Modi govt’s new tagline: Rahul Gandhi

Congress president Rahul Gandhi sought a probe against Prime Minister Narendra Modi for his role in the Rafale fighter jet deal.

Throwing back at PM the jibe of being the “poster boy of Pakistan”, he said, “PM got ISI to investigate Pathankot. PM’s going to Nawaz Sharif’s wedding and we are the poster boys? He is the poster boy of Pakistan.”

Gandhi said it was also Modi who called Sharif for his swearing-in ceremony in 2014.

“Modi is the poster boy of Pakistan and not us. We didn’t go and hug Nawaz Sharif and we didn’t let the ISI to Pathankot.”

Asked if proof of the Indian Air Force’s 26-February Balakot strike should be sought from the Modi government, Gandhi said the demand has come from the families as they are hurt.

“I won’t talk much about it (evidence of IAF strikes), but yes I read that families of some of the CRPF personnel who were martyred have raised this issue, they are saying we were hurt so please show us what happened,” he said.

The families of some of the “martyrs of the Pulwama attack” have sought proof of the strike’s casualties as doubts linger over what exactly happened at Balakot.

Referring to AG KK Venugopal’s submission in the Supreme Court that “secret papers on Rafale deal have been stolen”, the Congress president also coined a phrase — “gayab ho gaya” — to highlight the Modi government’s failure.

“Gayab ho gaya (It has vanished) is the government’s new tagline,” Rahul Gandhi said. “Jobs have disappeared, economic growth has disappeared, Doklam (2017 crisis with China) and now even the Rafale files have disappeared,” said Gandhi. “The objective of this government is to make things disappear.”

Of the files that Modi government now says have been stolen, one document is an eight-page dissent note written by three domain experts in the Indian negotiating team. In another, a top defence ministry official complained about the PMO conducting “parallel parleys” with the French authorities in the controversial Rafale deal which Rahul Gandhi cited to accuse the PMO of influencing the deal. “PM Modi performed bypass surgery in Rafale deal,” he said.

When asked if action can be taken under the Official Secrets Act (OSA) as suggested by Venugopal in court, Gandhi said the government was free to charge anything on anybody. “But why don’t you press charges on Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Once that is done we will know where the money has really gone.”

“If you are going to press charges based on the Official Secrets Act, please do. But that means since documents are authentic, there should be charges pressed against the Prime Minister too,” said the Congress chief.

Gandhi also slammed the Modi government for lying to the Supreme Court. “The government is accepting in the SC that the files are original or true but claiming it to be stolen. So has the government lied to the SC?” he questioned.

“As per our (UPA) deal, Rafale jets would have come early. This PM has delayed it,” Gandhi said, adding that the Modi government was responsible for the jets not being available for the Balakot strikes.

The government had claimed in the Supreme Court that the IAF strike against the Jaish-e-Mohammed terror camp in Pakistan would have been easy if Rafale jets were available.

Pressing charges of corruption against PM Modi, Gandhi asked why criminal investigations were being done going only against opposition parties.

“They have refused to a Joint Parliamentary Committee probe in the Rafale deal. If the PM has not done anything why doesn’t he simply get an investigation done and prove himself?” asked Gandhi.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

India News

Rahul Gandhi attacks Centre ahead of Vladimir Putin’s India visit

Rahul Gandhi alleged that the government discourages visiting foreign dignitaries from meeting Opposition leaders, calling it a sign of “insecurity,” hours before Russian President Vladimir Putin arrives in Delhi.

Published

on

Rahul Gandhi

As Russian President Vladimir Putin arrives in Delhi today for the India-Russia Annual Summit, Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi has renewed his charge that the Centre discourages visiting foreign leaders from meeting Opposition representatives. He called it a sign of “insecurity” within the government.

Rahul Gandhi alleges break in long-followed tradition

Speaking outside Parliament, Rahul Gandhi said that it has traditionally been the norm for visiting foreign leaders to meet the Leader of the Opposition, a practice he claims continued during the tenures of Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Manmohan Singh.

He alleged that the present government advises foreign dignitaries against such meetings. “When foreign leaders come, the government suggests they should not meet the Leader of the Opposition. This is their policy,” Gandhi said. He added that a meeting with the Opposition offers visiting leaders a broader perspective, as “we too represent India.”

Gandhi further stated that this approach reflects the government’s reluctance to allow engagement between the Opposition and foreign guests.

Former Foreign Secretary counters Gandhi’s remarks

Responding to Gandhi’s allegations, former Foreign Secretary and Rajya Sabha MP Harsh Vardhan Shringla said visiting leaders operate on very tight schedules and there is no protocol mandating a meeting with the Leader of the Opposition. He stressed that such interactions depend entirely on the guest’s time and preference, noting that the required meetings are those with the President and the Prime Minister.

Putin’s schedule packed with bilateral engagements

Russian President Vladimir Putin is set to land in Delhi this evening on Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s invitation. His itinerary includes:

  • A private dinner with PM Modi
  • Visit to Mahatma Gandhi’s memorial at Raj Ghat
  • Engagements at Bharat Mandapam and Hyderabad House
  • A banquet hosted by President Droupadi Murmu

The visit forms part of the 23rd India-Russia Annual Summit.

Continue Reading

India News

TMC MLA Humayun Kabir suspended after Babri Mosque replica proposal sparks row

TMC suspended MLA Humayun Kabir after he proposed building a Babri mosque replica in Murshidabad, a move that drew criticism from the party and sparked political tension.

Published

on

Trinamool Congress on Thursday suspended MLA Humayun Kabir after he publicly announced plans to construct a replica of the Babri Masjid in West Bengal’s Murshidabad district. Party leaders said Kabir had earlier been cautioned for making such statements but continued to push ahead with the controversial proposal.

Kolkata Mayor Firhad Hakim said the MLA’s remarks were unacceptable, stressing that the party stood firmly by its secular stance. “We noticed that one of our MLAs suddenly declared he would build the Babri masjid. We had warned him before. As per the party’s decision, we are suspending him,” he said.

Kabir vows to continue project, may form new party

Kabir had planned to lay the foundation stone for the mosque replica in Beldanga on December 6. Sources indicated he is likely to resign from Trinamool on Friday and float a new party while continuing with the project.

The choice of date and nature of the project drew sharp criticism from the Trinamool leadership. Hakim alleged the move reflected a “divisional politics” strategy aligned with the BJP. “Why December 6? He could build a school or college. This is divisional politics,” he said.

Sources also said Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee was “hugely annoyed” by Kabir’s remarks and informed him that the party would not support or associate with such activities.

Governor raises concerns, administration on alert

West Bengal Governor Ananda Bose questioned why action was not being taken if the MLA’s statements risked creating a law-and-order issue. He said intelligence inputs suggested attempts to turn Murshidabad into a “hub of scandal,” adding that authorities would not remain silent if communal tensions were provoked.

Officials confirmed that while Kabir has permission to hold the December 6 event, the administration is maintaining a high-level alert in Murshidabad.

Minutes after his suspension, Kabir withdrew from Mamata Banerjee’s rally in the India–Bangladesh border district, where she was protesting against the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of voter lists.

BJP attacks Kabir over remarks

BJP spokesperson Pratul Shah Deo condemned Kabir’s comments, claiming they were intended to “create communal tensions.” He said any attempt to raise structures linked to historical rulers would trigger disputes similar to the Babri Masjid conflict.

Continue Reading

India News

Karnataka Power Shift: What Siddaramaiah–DK Shivakumar compromise formula means

A closer look at the emerging ‘compromise formula’ between Karnataka’s top leaders Siddaramaiah and DK Shivakumar, and how it may shape the state’s political future.

Published

on

A possible settlement between Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah and Deputy Chief Minister DK Shivakumar has emerged, signalling a calmer phase in the leadership tussle within the state Congress. While the final decision rests with the party leadership in Delhi, details of the so-called “compromise formula” are gradually becoming clearer.

Breakfast diplomacy calms tensions

After weeks of speculation over friction between the two top leaders, Siddaramaiah and Shivakumar met over breakfast today. The meeting, aimed at projecting unity, served as a symbolic reset after their strained ties over the chief ministership question.

Analysts believe the optics were crucial — the Congress successfully avoided a public showdown by diffusing tensions before they escalated further.

A transition of power likely, say analysts

According to political observers, the compromise indicates a strong possibility of Shivakumar taking over as Chief Minister in a smooth transition, potentially as early as March–April 2026.
For now, sources say the arrangement requires Shivakumar to continue as Deputy Chief Minister without pushing for immediate change.

In return, the formula reportedly includes more cabinet positions for leaders loyal to Shivakumar and continuation of his role as the state Congress chief. Siddaramaiah is also expected to back Shivakumar as the party’s face for the 2028 Assembly election.

Why the Congress prefers this route

Replacing Siddaramaiah abruptly would not only upset internal balance but could also weaken the party, given his stature and mass appeal. Shivakumar, despite his influence, does not have the numbers within the legislature to force a takeover, making compromise the most viable path.

Siddaramaiah has already stated that this will be his final term as Chief Minister. With his legacy secure and his position as one of Karnataka’s tallest leaders intact, he appears willing to enable a dignified transition when the time comes.

Variables that could shape the final outcome

The success of the formula depends on three key factors:

1. Trust between the two leaders

Whether Shivakumar believes Siddaramaiah will keep his word remains uncertain. Karnataka’s political history is full of last-minute shifts, giving rise to the phrase “natak in Karnataka”.

2. Decision-making by the Congress high command

Delhi’s leadership must ensure the transition happens on time and without internal resistance, especially in the run-up to the 2028 Assembly polls.

3. Caste equations and political alignment

Siddaramaiah is the strongest face of the AHINDA bloc, while Shivakumar represents the OBC Vokkaliga community. The Congress cannot afford to alienate either group, making the timing and execution of any transition extremely delicate.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com