English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest Politics News

Rafale deal: Modi govt waived anti-corruption clauses; and curious case of MoD financial advisor

Published

on

Rafale deal: Modi govt waived anti-corruption clauses; and curious case of MoD financial advisor

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]The Rafale deal affair got muddier with reports raising further questions about Narendra Modi government’s actions.

A report by The Hindu said the Indian government made major and unprecedented concessions, waiving critical provisions for anti-corruption penalties and making payments through an escrow account dropped days before the signing of the inter-governmental agreement (IGA).

Modi has been claiming to be waging a relentless war against corruption and justifying cases against political rivals on this basis.

Also significant is the fact that this and other important information on the “parallel negotiations” conducted by the Prime Minister’s Office and the National Security Adviser seems to have found been withheld from the material submitted by the government to the Supreme Court of India, The Hindu reported.

Another report in India Legal mentioned the curious case of Modi government appointing an officer from the Indian Audit and Account Services (IA&AS) as financial advisor to the Ministry of Defence (MoD). The post is traditionally reserved for Indian Defence Accounts Service (IDAS) cadres.

The IA&AS officer in question, 1984 batch’s Gargi Kaul, is sister-in-law of Supreme Court judge, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul who was part of the three judge bench of the apex court, also comprising Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice KM Joseph, which had, on December 14, dismissed a bunch of petitions demanding a court-monitored investigation into alleged irregularities committed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government in finalising the Rafale deal.

A day after the Supreme Court verdict, on December 15, Gargi Kaul was empanelled by the Centre at the rank of Secretary, Government of India. Ten days later, on December 24, she was transferred to MoD. Prior to her transfer, Kaul was serving as Additional Secretary and Financial Advisor to the Ministry of Civil Aviation.

While this report has not yet drawn much attention or ruffled any feathers outside IDAS, The Hindu’s report had the Congress launch a fresh attack on Modi government.

Congress chief Rahul Gandhi Monday launched a fresh salvo at Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Quoting The Hindu report, the Congress chief said, “Every defence deal has an anti-corruption clause. Reports suggest that the PM removed the anti-corruption clause. It is clear that the PM facilitated loot.” Taking to Twitter, he wrote, “NoMo anti-corruption clause. The Chowkidar himself opened the door to allow Anil Ambani to steal 30,000 Cr. from the IAF.”

The Congress said the Rafale deal is “unravelling” faster than the government thought, with issues such as “parallel negotiations” by the PMO and changes in the standard defence procurement procedure coming to the fore.

Senior Congress leader and former finance minister P Chidambaram said in a series of tweets, “First, it was the loading of the India Specific Enhancement costs on 36 aircraft instead of 126 aircraft giving a bonanza to Dassault. Then it was the revelation that ‘parallel negotiations’ were being carried on by PMO undermining the efforts of the Indian Negotiating Team.”

Now it is revealed that crucial changes were made to the clauses in the standard Defence Procurement Procedure, he said. “No sovereign guarantee, no bank guarantee, no escrow account, yet a huge amount was paid as advance,” Chidambaram alleged.

Lashing out at the Modi government, he said, “No penalty clause for undue influence, no clause against agency commission, no clause for access to suppliers’ accounts, and Dassault goes laughing all the way to the bank.”

Citing the media report, Congress’ chief spokesperson Randeep Surjewala said, “Modiji, after waiving off sovereign guarantee in Rafale deal, you also waived off the ‘anti-corruption measure’ of a ‘safeguard Escrow A/c’! What is the corruption you wanted to hide?”

The whole country is abuzz that “chowkidar chor hai”, he said.

The Congress on its official Twitter handle, asked: “Throwing all good sense to the wind, the PMO also discarded the advice to create an escrow account under the control of the French Govt to release payments from India. Instead it chose to pay Dassault upfront in advance. Who was the PMO trying to benefit?”

“After the PMO forced the waiver of a sovereign guarantee, it now turns out the PMO asked for the WAIVER of standard ANTI-CORRUPTION clauses. Who was the PMO trying to shield? There is no doubt that #ChowkidarChorHai”

The Hindu report states that the government gave “major and unprecedented concessions” to the French side when the Rafale deal was signed between the two countries. This included dropping of “critical provisions for anti-corruption penalties and making payments through an escrow account”.

According to the media report, the high-level political intervention meant that standard Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP) clauses on “Penalty for use of Undue Influence, Agents/Agency Commission, and Access to Company accounts” of Dassault Aviation and MBDA France were dropped by the Modi government.

The newspaper further cites official documents that reveal that the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) chaired by the then Defence Minister, Manohar Parrikar, met in September 2016, and “ratified and approved” eight changes in the IGA, supply protocols, offset contracts and offset schedules. The agreement and the documents had been approved by the Cabinet Committee on Security chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi before that on August 24, the report adds.

The most significant among these eight changes, recorded in a note signed by Vice Admiral Ajit Kumar, DCIDS (PP&FD) who was the member-secretary of the DAC, is at sub-para (c). This states: “Non-inclusion of the Standard DPP Clauses related to ‘Penalty for Undue Influence,’ ‘Agents/Agency Commission’ and ‘Access to Company Accounts’ in the Supply Protocols.”

The Hindu further quotes a dissent note by signed by three members of the Indian Negotiating Team that said: “…it is not advisable to sacrifice the basic requirement of financial prudence.”

The Rafale deal was signed between India and France under the terms of DPP-2013. Despite the procedure stating explicitly that the Standard Contract Document “would be the guideline for all acquisitions”, the Indian government chose to remove these clauses from the supply protocols with the two private defence suppliers, the report says.

The Hindu in its report says this was significant because the government also chose to do away with a sovereign or bank guarantee from France and settled for a letter of comfort, which is not legally binding, from the French Prime Minister.

After the introduction of a letter of comfort, another proposal that was turned down was one proposed by former defence bureaucrat Sudhanshu Mohanty

This came on the back of another turned-down proposal to have an escrow account operated by the French government. The Indian government would then release money to the account and France would make further payments to the firm as per terms agreed to by both governments as per the IGA.

“This would make French Govt. morally and materially responsible for the procurement so proposed,” Mohanty is quoted as saying in a separate note reported by The Hindu.

The newspaper had earlier reported on the defence ministry’s reservations to “parallel negotiations” conducted by the PMO in the deal.

You might also be interested in:

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

India News

INDIA bloc likely to meet on September 30 over Gyanesh Kumar row

INDIA bloc parties are likely to meet in New Delhi on September 30 amid growing opposition to Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls.

Published

on

Rahul-Gandhi

Opposition parties belonging to the INDIA bloc are set to meet in New Delhi on September 30 to discuss concerns surrounding the Election Commission, the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls and a proposed removal motion against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.

The proposed meeting comes amid growing coordination among opposition parties over the functioning of the poll panel and demands for action against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. The parties are also discussing a possible joint response to the developments.

Why is the INDIA bloc meeting being planned?

The INDIA bloc meeting on September 30 comes amid reports of objections within the Election Commission over certain decisions and orders related to the SIR exercise. 

According to the report, Opposition leaders have been discussing a coordinated response to their concerns over the Election Commission and the electoral-roll revision process. 

The issue is also expected to be discussed at the Congress Working Committee meeting scheduled for September 29, a day before the proposed INDIA bloc meeting.

Gyanesh Kumar removal demand in focus

The demand for the removal of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar has become a major point of contention between the Opposition and the Election Commission.

The CPI(M), CPI and CPI(ML)-Liberation have demanded Kumar’s removal and an immediate halt to the SIR exercise. Congress has also intensified its criticism of the CEC.

Opposition parties are also working on a fresh removal motion against Gyanesh Kumar. The September 30 meeting is expected to finalise the strategy for the motion, including the collection of signatures. According to the report, this would be the Opposition’s third such attempt. 

What is the SIR controversy?

The political dispute is linked to the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, or SIR.

The controversy intensified following a report that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had recorded objections on several occasions concerning decisions and orders related to the SIR process.

The Election Commission has said that differing views and observations are part of normal deliberations in a multi-member constitutional body. The poll panel has also maintained that its orders have legal sanction and follow statutory procedures, while stating that the final decisions on the SIR were taken unanimously. 

TMC and Left parties coordinate over the issue

The developments have also brought the Trinamool Congress and the CPI(M) together on the Election Commission issue, despite their political differences in West Bengal.

CPI(M) general secretary M A Baby proposed an immediate meeting to discuss a joint strategy. According to the report, Mamata Banerjee spoke with M A Baby and Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi, after which the leaders settled on September 30 for the meeting. 

What could be discussed at the September 30 meeting?

The proposed meeting is expected to focus on:

  • Concerns surrounding the Election Commission
  • The Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls
  • Opposition demands concerning CEC Gyanesh Kumar
  • A possible fresh removal notice against the CEC
  • A coordinated response by INDIA bloc parties

The exact agenda and participation will depend on the discussions among the opposition parties before the proposed meeting.

Continue Reading

India News

Gandhi Parivar vs Sangh Parivar, Revanth Reddy’s remark sparks BJP attack

Telangana Chief Minister Revanth Reddy’s remarks contrasting the Gandhi Parivar with the Sangh Parivar triggered a BJP response accusing Congress of prioritising the Gandhi family.

Published

on

Telangana Chief Minister Revanth Reddy’s remarks comparing the Gandhi Parivar and Sangh Parivar have triggered a political exchange, with the BJP hitting back at the Congress leader.

Speaking in Kerala on Friday, Mr Reddy described the contest over India’s future as a fight between the two “parivars”. He said the Gandhi family had made sacrifices for the country while accusing the Sangh Parivar of attempting to divide India on the basis of religion, caste, region and language.

What Revanth Reddy said

Mr Reddy cited Mahatma Gandhi, Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi while speaking about what he described as sacrifices made by the Gandhi family.

He also referred to Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi and Priyanka Gandhi, saying they had given up positions, power and high office.

The Telangana Chief Minister said he had no remaining personal political ambitions and described his objective as working towards a Congress-led government at the Centre with Rahul Gandhi as Prime Minister.

Mr Reddy also appealed to people to stand with the Gandhi Parivar and oppose the Sangh Parivar. He described the latter as a threat to India’s democracy.

BJP hits back

The BJP responded to Mr Reddy’s remarks on Saturday.

BJP spokesperson Pradeep Bhandari said the Telangana Chief Minister’s comments amounted to an admission that Congress’s objective was to bring the Gandhi family back to power.

He also linked Mr Reddy’s remarks to the ongoing political debate around “vote chori”, the Election Commission, the Constitution and democracy, arguing that the Congress’s focus was instead on the Gandhi family.

The exchange adds to the political confrontation between the BJP and Congress, with Mr Reddy presenting the Gandhi Parivar and Sangh Parivar as opposing forces in India’s political future, while the BJP has interpreted his remarks as evidence of Congress’s focus on the Gandhi family.

Continue Reading

India News

Veeramani POCSO case: Vijay questions Stalin over earlier probe

Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Vijay has questioned MK Stalin over the handling of the Veeramani POCSO case, while Stalin has rejected allegations that the previous DMK government protected anyone.

Published

on

Actor Vijay

Tamil Nadu Chief Minister and Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) president C Joseph Vijay has questioned DMK president MK Stalin over the handling of the POCSO case involving Gem Granites founder R Veeramani. The political exchange follows renewed investigation into allegations involving minor girls.

Vijay’s remarks came as the ruling TVK stepped up its questions about how the case was handled during the previous DMK government. The party’s IT wing has alleged that the earlier investigation was weakened and questioned why a final report was filed.

The allegations have been rejected by the DMK. Stalin has said that no order was issued by the DMK government to protect anyone in the case and has called the allegations false and defamatory.

What did Vijay say about the Veeramani case?

Vijay questioned Stalin over the handling of the case and demanded an explanation from the former chief minister.

The TVK has specifically questioned why action was not taken against Veeramani during the previous administration and why the earlier investigation resulted in a closure report.

The party has also raised questions about the role of officials involved in the earlier investigation. These are political allegations made by the TVK and have not been established as facts.

What is the Veeramani POCSO case?

The case concerns allegations of sexual abuse of minors involving R Veeramani, the founder of Gem Granites.

The case came under renewed scrutiny after a special POCSO court rejected an earlier closure report and ordered further investigation. The expanded probe has subsequently identified additional alleged survivors who were minors at the time of the alleged offences, according to current reporting.

The investigation is also examining the circumstances surrounding the earlier probe and whether there were any lapses in how the case was handled.

What has MK Stalin said?

Stalin has rejected allegations that the previous DMK government protected Veeramani.

He has said that no order was issued by the DMK government to shield anyone in the case. Stalin has also said that everyone responsible for the alleged offences, including anyone who aided or attempted to protect the accused, should face the law.

The DMK president has further said that the focus should remain on securing justice for the affected girls rather than making political allegations.

Why has the case become a political issue?

The Veeramani case has become the subject of a political dispute between the ruling TVK and the DMK over the handling of the earlier investigation.

The TVK is questioning the previous government’s handling of the case, while the DMK has denied that it intervened to protect the accused.

At this stage, claims about political interference or deliberate weakening of the earlier investigation should be treated as allegations unless established by the ongoing investigation or judicial proceedings.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com