English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Rafale deal: SC reserves its order on petitions challenging the deal and seeking court-monitored probe

Published

on

Rafale deal controversy

The Supreme Court today (Wednesday, November 14) reserved its judgment on pleas challenging the deal for procurement of 36 Rafale fighter jets from France and seeking a court-monitored probe into the matter.

A three-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi and comprising Justices UU Lalit and KM Joseph, heard the arguments two days after the government submitted details on the decision-making process to finalise the Rafale fighter jet deal with France and the details of pricing in a sealed cover exclusively to the judges. A redacted version of decision making process was shared with petitioners.

The petitioners in the case include advocate Manohar Lal Sharma, lawyer Vineet Dhanda, AAP MP Sanjay Singh and former Union ministers Yashwant Sinha, Arun Shourie and activist lawyer Prashant Bhushan.

The petitioners wanted the Attorney-General, representing the Centre, to reply why a joint press statement was issued by Prime Minister along with French President Francois Hollande in April 2015, well over a year before the Cabinet Committee on Security finally approved the 36 jets’ deal signed in Sep 2016.

On the price of the Rafale aircraft, they said the government was hiding behind the secrecy clause of the agreement.

Arun Shourie, who was also present, said, “All that is spoken of as add on’s to the jets had figured in the original Request for Proposal,” adding, “Government is putting out all kinds of reports through ‘friendly media’.”

He argued that pricing was about public money and it must not be covered under secrecy agreement.

Attorney General KK Venugopal contended that “secrecy agreement has to be secret”. He argued that if the price is made public, adversaries would be able to relate it to the equipment. The AG said the secrecy is not about the price but the weaponry and avionics and if price is made public, adversaries would be able to relate it to the equipment.

The AG further asked if the court was competent to judicially review the Rafale deal, adding that the “matter is for experts to decide on, not the court”.

The bench then asked for the assistance of an Air Force officer on the issue. Deputy Chief of Air staff, Air Marshal VR Chaudhari and two other officers from Indian Air Force appeared in the Supreme Court to assist it on the issue of the procurement of 36 Rafale fighter jets from France.

They told the court that Sukhoi 30s were the latest to be inducted which is a third generation aircraft and added that the Indian Air Force does not have fourth or fifth generation aircraft in its fleet. The top court asked if there has been no induction of aircraft since 1985, the officers said “no”.

The government’s contention that procedure was followed was challenged, arguing that the Rafale deal qualified none of the three conditions laid down by the Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP).

It was contrary to the procedure laid down as the choice was not disclosed to the Cabinet, Defence Acquisition Council nor the Defence Minister. They argued that the government “short-circuited” the acquisition process, as it took the Inter-Government Agreement route to avoid giving tender.

Alleging gross violation of procedure in decision making process in the deal, Bhushan asked: “Who took the decision for 36 jets? On what basis did the PM announce the deal for 36 jets? He had no authority. How was 126 jets reduced to 36 jets?”

Asserting that not a single aircraft was delivered till now even after three-and-a-half years, he told the Supreme Court bench that if the 126 aircraft deal was still on, “at least 18 jets would have been delivered by April 2019”.

The government note in the Supreme Court on the Rafale deal said the prolonged impasse over the 126-aircraft deal had caused an “urgent need” to acquire 36 Rafale jets or two squadrons in a fly-away condition.

The documents provided by the government Monday claimed that the delay in concluding the Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) deal, during the UPA rule, gave India’s adversaries time to upgrade and equip their fighter fleets with advanced weaponry.

“During this long period of inconclusive 126 MMRCA process, our adversaries inducted modern aircraft and upgraded their older versions. They acquired better capability air-to-air missiles and inducted their indigenous fighters in large numbers. Further, they modernised and inducted aircraft with an advanced weapon and radar capabilities,” the government had said.

When asked by the CJI about the argument of the petitioner that France had not given a sovereign guarantee to the deal, the attorney general said there was “letter of comfort” from the French President.

The petitioners also questioned Reliance as the choice of offset partner, a company with no experience in manufacturing defence aircraft. Regarding the contentious offset details of the Rafale deal, Justice Joseph asked the additional defence secretary as to how the country’s interests would be protected if the offset partner did not carry out production.

“What was the need to amend offset guidelines with retrospective effect?” Joseph asked. The official said that it was for the government to accept the choice made by the Original Equipment Manufacturer of the offset partner. Venugopal said that Dassault had not yet submitted details of offset partner to government.

India News

Amit Shah counters delimitation concerns, says southern states to gain Lok Sabha seats

Amit Shah assures Parliament that southern states will gain Lok Sabha seats after delimitation, countering opposition criticism during the women’s reservation debate.

Published

on

Amit Shah

Union Home Minister Amit Shah on Thursday addressed concerns over the proposed delimitation exercise, asserting in the Lok Sabha that southern states will not lose representation but instead see an increase in their number of seats.

His remarks came during a heated debate linked to the implementation of women’s reservation, where opposition parties have raised fears that population-based delimitation could reduce the political weight of southern states.

Shah rejected these claims, calling them misleading, and said the proposed framework ensures fairness while expanding the overall strength of the Lok Sabha.

Seat count to rise with expansion of Lok Sabha

The government has indicated that the total number of Lok Sabha seats could increase significantly as part of the delimitation process. In this expanded House, the combined representation of southern states is expected to rise from 129 seats at present to around 195 seats.

Shah emphasised that no state will lose seats in absolute terms, and the exercise is designed to reflect population changes while maintaining balance across regions.

State-wise projections shared in Parliament

During his address, Shah also provided indicative figures for individual southern states, suggesting notable increases in representation. According to the projections:

  • Tamil Nadu could see its seats rise substantially
  • Kerala, Telangana, and Andhra Pradesh are also expected to gain additional seats
  • Karnataka’s representation may increase as well

These figures were presented to counter the argument that delimitation would disproportionately favour northern states.

Political debate intensifies over linkage with women’s quota

The delimitation exercise has been closely linked to the rollout of women’s reservation, which proposes one-third seats for women in Parliament and state assemblies.

Opposition leaders have questioned this linkage, arguing that tying reservation to delimitation could delay its implementation and raise federal concerns. Some leaders have also warned that the move could impact national unity if apprehensions among states are not addressed.

The government, however, maintains that the reforms are necessary to ensure equitable representation and to align the electoral system with demographic realities.

Centre dismisses ‘false narrative’ on southern states

Shah reiterated that concerns about southern states losing influence are unfounded. He said the delimitation process will increase representation across regions and described the criticism as a “false narrative” aimed at creating confusion.

The issue is expected to remain a key flashpoint as Parliament continues discussions on the women’s reservation framework and related legislative changes.

Continue Reading

India News

PM Modi assures no discrimination in women’s quota, delimitation debate intensifies in Parliament

PM Narendra Modi has assured that women’s reservation will be implemented without discrimination, amid a heated debate over delimitation in Parliament.

Published

on

PM modi

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has assured that there will be no discrimination in the implementation of women’s reservation, as Parliament witnessed a sharp debate over the proposed linkage between the quota and delimitation exercise.

During the ongoing special session, the government reiterated its commitment to ensuring fair representation while addressing concerns raised by opposition parties regarding the timing and structure of the legislation.

The proposed framework aims to reserve 33 percent of seats for women in the Lok Sabha and state assemblies. However, its implementation is tied to a fresh delimitation exercise, which is expected after the next census.

Opposition questions timing and intent

Opposition leaders have raised concerns that linking the women’s quota to delimitation could delay its implementation. They argue that the process of redrawing constituencies may push the actual rollout further into the future.

The issue has triggered a broader political confrontation, with multiple parties questioning whether the move could alter representation across states.

Some critics have also alleged that the delimitation exercise could disproportionately benefit certain regions based on population, a charge the government has rejected.

Government reiterates commitment to fair implementation

Responding to these concerns, the Centre has maintained that the reforms are necessary to ensure accurate and updated representation based on population data.

Leaders from the ruling side have repeatedly emphasized that the process will be carried out transparently and without bias. The assurance that there will be “no discrimination” is aimed at addressing fears among states and opposition parties.

The debate marks a key moment in Parliament, with both sides engaging in intense exchanges over one of the most significant electoral reforms in recent years.

Continue Reading

India News

Give all tickets to Muslim women, Amit Shah says, attacking Akhilesh Yadav on sub-quota demand

A sharp exchange between Amit Shah and Akhilesh Yadav in Parliament over sub-quota for Muslim women highlights key divisions on women’s reservation implementation.

Published

on

A heated exchange broke out in Parliament during discussions on the women’s reservation framework, with Union Home Minister Amit Shah and Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav locking horns over the demand for a sub-quota for Muslim women.

The debate unfolded as the government pushed forward key legislative measures to implement 33% reservation for women in the Lok Sabha and state assemblies.

Akhilesh Yadav argued that the proposed reservation must ensure representation for women from marginalised communities, including Other Backward Classes (OBCs) and Muslim women. He said that without such provisions, large sections could remain excluded from political participation.

He also questioned the timing of the bill, alleging that the Centre was avoiding a caste census. According to him, a census would lead to renewed demands for caste-based reservations, which the government is reluctant to address.

Government rejects religion-based quota

Responding to the demand, Amit Shah made it clear that reservation based on religion is not permitted under the Constitution.

He stated that any proposal to provide quota to Muslims on religious grounds would be unconstitutional, firmly rejecting the idea of a separate sub-quota for Muslim women within the broader reservation framework.

The government has maintained that the existing framework already includes provisions for Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) women within the overall reservation structure.

Wider political divide over implementation

The issue of sub-categorisation within the women’s quota has emerged as a major flashpoint, even as most opposition parties broadly support the idea of women’s reservation.

Samajwadi Party leaders reiterated that their support for the bill depends on inclusion of OBC and minority women, while the government continues to defend its constitutional position.

The debate is part of a broader discussion during the special Parliament session, where multiple bills linked to delimitation and implementation of the women’s quota are being taken up.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com