All posts by admin
Posted on 05 January, 2014, No Comments Comments admin
The Congress Party and Shri Vir Bhadra Singh have decided to brazen out the allegations of corruption. Mrs. Sonia Gandhi and Shri Rahul Gandhi will hide behind silence. Shri VB Singh has dared anyone to either lodge an FIR against him or to prove the allegations of corruption.
The initial allegation against him is already being investigated by the CBI. The allegation relates to the initials ‘VBS’ which were found in the diary of a steel manufacturing company. The second allegation relates to the deposit of Rs 5.5 crores in a Shimla Bank account and the transfer of that money by one Shri Anand Chauhan for the benefit of Shri VB Singh and his family members’ LIC policies. This allegation I understand is also being investigated by the CBI.
The third allegation relating to his dealings with a power company is the one which now requires to be investigated and proved. Shri VB Singh, his family members and their company have received interest free loan from the promoter of a power company. That power company had transactions with Government of Himachal Pradesh which at a given point of time had passed orders favouring the company. The facts prima facie establish that the loaned monies are used for buying shareholding in other group companies of the lender. Certain facts showing round tripping of money have also surfaced.
Section 11 of the Prevention of Corruption Act punishes a public servant who accepts and obtains for himself or any other person any valuable thing from a party which is likely to be concerned in any proceeding or business transaction with which he is connected in his official capacity. This offence is punishable upto 5 years. Knowing fully well that the power company is doing business with the State of Himachal Pradesh, the Chief Minister and his wife accept interest free loan. This transaction also violates the provisions of section 13(1)(b) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The offence under this section is punishable for obtaining a valuable thing by a public servant for himself or for any other person without a consideration. Admittedly, an interest free loan is a valuable thing received without a consideration.
Section 20 of the Prevention of Corruption Act is the most effective provision of the Act. If an acceptance of a valuable thing other than a legal remuneration takes place by a public servant it is presumed to be for the purposes of bribery. The onus then shifts on the public servant to establish why this is still not a bribery. It is for this reason that I have called it an open and shut case. This case obviously cannot be investigated by the Himachal Pradesh police against its’ own Chief Minister. My letter to the CBI Director on 29th December,2013 constitutes an FIR. In order to investigate the same, the consent of the State Government under section 6 of the Delhi Special Police (Establishment) Act is required. I dare the State Government of Himachal Pradesh to give it’s consent so that an investigation into these allegations can also take place.
Posted on 04 January, 2014, No Comments Comments admin
The Prime Minister’s interaction with the media on 3rd January, 2014 gave rise to several controversies. His announcement that he was unavailable for leadership after the General Elections, his endorsement of Rahul Gandhi, his criticism of Narendra Modi, his admission of failure in tackling corruption and inflation were amongst the issues which caught popular attention. We on behalf of the BJP reacted on some of the issues.
The Kashmir comment in the Press Conference got missed out amidst these controversies. A media person asked the Prime Minister a question on his Pakistan initiatives. The Prime Minister revealed for the first time that secret envoys from India and Pakistan had almost arrived at a meeting to resolve the conflict on Kashmir. When a break through appeared ‘in sight ‘, General Pervez Musharraf had to make way for other leaders and the agreement got blocked. A few years ago when President Musharraf was living in exile in London he had given a similar indication .
What was this possible resolution on Kashmir ? The people of India are entitled to know an answer to this question.
The stated position of India has been very clear. Jammu & Kashmir is an integral part of India. In 1994 the Indian Parliament had passed a unanimous resolution asserting that POK was an integral part of India’s territory. India firmly believes that no third party intervention in Kashmir is permissible. Pakistan has an unfinished agenda on Kashmir. It has not reconciled to Kashmir being integral to India’s sovereignty. It has used warfare and terrorism to achieve this end. India firmly believes that the age and era of re-drawing boundaries is over. India’s negotiating space on territory in the context of Kashmir resolution is negligible.
I have always believed that the Nehruvian vision of giving a separate status to Jammu & Kashmir was a flawed one. The journey of the past 67 years has been from separate status towards separatism. The Congress stands for separate status, the National Conference advocates pre-1953 status, the PDP talks of self-rule, the separatists talk of ‘Azadi’. Each one of these is intended to dilute India’s sovereignty. Their intention is to weaken the constitutional and political link between Jammu & Kashmir and the rest of the country. It is in this context that one needs to know the details of what this ‘almost arrived at’ agreed resolution between Dr. Manmohan Singh’s government and Pakistan was. Pakistan had been advocating an interim resolution on Kashmir which comprised of several unacceptable measures. These included maintenance of territorial status quo, demilitarization in Kashmir, dilution of the Line of Control for allowing free movement of people and goods, a tripartite joint mechanism to take decisions about Jammu & Kashmir for a specified period pending which a final solution would be found. Some Pakistani observers and Kashmiri groups also spoke about the currency of the two countries to be a valid tender in Jammu & Kashmir. I do not know if any or all of these were a subject matter of the ‘almost arrived at’ resolution to the Kashmir problem. I hope the truth is otherwise. I further hope that I do not have to wait for the memoirs of the Prime Minister to know the truth.
Track Two diplomacy is not an unknown phenomenon. It is an accepted instrument world over. But Track Two diplomacy cannot be at complete variance with the stated national position. At best it can be marginally ahead of the national thinking. If the above stated points that the Pakistanis have been frequently mentioning i.e a dilution of the LOC and a tripartite arrangement were part of this ‘breakthrough’ , it would be a defacto acceptance of Jammu & Kashmir being a disputed territory. It is with great difficulty that Indian diplomacy has achieved a non-internationalization of the Kashmir issue and an internationalization of cross-border terrorism. By even suggesting such a resolution, we could squander all gains. De-militarisation of the valley without dismantling the terror infrastructure by Pakistan would be disastrous. I hope the Government was not working in this direction.
Since the Prime Minister for the first time informed the nation that a resolution on Kashmir was almost agreed to, it is eminently desirable that he takes the nation into confidence of what the specifics he had in mind about the failed solution. Even for history to make assessment of Prime Minister’s tenure, these details would be of immense help.
Posted on 03 January, 2014, No Comments Comments admin
Today’s Press Conference by the Prime Minister was intended to announce the fact that he is no longer a contender for office after the General Elections. While announcing his own farewell one expected the Prime Minister to be candid. There was a historic opportunity for the Prime Minister for a reality check. I regret that he completely missed the opportunity.
The Congress Party has been routed in the recent Assembly elections. Its prospects in the coming General Elections appear to be ‘disastrous’. This is entirely on account of performance of the UPA Government headed by Dr.Manmohan Singh. The Prime Minister admitted his Government’s failure in containing inflation, unemployment and corruption. A combination of these three factors makes a perfect recipe for an electoral doom. Instead of owning up to this reality, the Prime Minister would want only history to assess him. His most repeated statements in the Press Conference was “Time will tell”. The Prime Minister is entirely wrong. In a democracy it is the voters who tell by judging your performance. He is willing to rest the corruption of UPA-I on the argument that an electoral sanction was granted to corruption in 2009. However, he is not willing to accept electoral verdict in 2013 as a judgement of his performance.
The Prime Minister is bitter with the media, bitter with the Opposition and even more bitter with Narendra Modi. The Prime Minister’s office demands that a Prime Minister in his vocabulary and idioms must always maintain dignity and grace. Dr. Manmohan Singh failed that test today. No Indian politician has gone through the kind of scrutiny that Narendra Modi went through on the 2002 riots. The Supreme Court appointed SIT and finally the courts have both vindicated him. The electorate gave him a thumbs up thrice . Opinion polls indicate that he is the most popular leader in race for becoming the Prime Minister and yet Dr. Manmohan Singh used phrases like ‘disastrous’ and ‘mass murder’. A person against whom no evidence has been found by repeated inquiries deserves better. By using this phraseology the Prime Minister has demeaned his office. Is he willing to use the same phraseology for the Prime Minister as on 1st November,1984 during whose tenure the worst ever genocide in the country took place against the Sikh community and for which nobody till date has been held responsible.
It was a Press Conference of a failed leader. He has lost his willingness to rule. His concern for probity is minimal. He has not yet cared to even look at the voluminous evidence against one of his party’s Chief Ministers. His mindspace on issues of corruption has narrowed. His Press Conference found no mention on issues of national security. There was no concern for atrocities on women in the last few years. The concern for revival of investment cycle and economic activity was minimal. He played down corruption cases from Coal gate to 2G to VBS bribe gate.
The Press Conference was intended to be a formality . It ended as a farce.
Posted on 02 January, 2014, No Comments Comments admin
Is 2014 going to be substantially different in terms of India’s polity and governance ? The bar of expectation of Indian people has been raised high. It is not merely the Indian middle class which is the strong opinion maker. There is additionally a substantial aspirational class in India whose level of expectations is entirely different. They are going to judge Indian politics, persons in public life and the quality of governance harshly. They will vote in governments and vote out governments if they found them not meeting popular aspirations.
The results of the elections to the four State assemblies held recently has conclusively established the point. Shri Shivraj Singh Chauhan , Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh successfully led the BJP to electoral victory for the third time because of his performance, more particularly because of his personal credibility . At any given point of time, polls rated his acceptability as higher than the BJP. Dr. Raman Singh’s personal credibility coupled with the success of the Public distribution system that he created saw the BJP through. Both these Chief Ministers served the people well. In Rajasthan the Congress Party’s government was marred by the allegations of misconduct of ministers and MLAs. The clear message of the electorate in these States was – whereas other factors including social and political combinations may be important, it was credibility that mattered the most.
In Delhi, the Congress government had lost its credibility. Delhi was the epicenter of anti-corruption movement in the past three years. The Congress had miserably failed on this count. It was therefore obvious that the Congress was a clear loser. Ordinarily, the BJP should have swept the poll. However, a section of the electorate was impressed with the idea of experimenting a new alternative. It was a silent protest against the quality of conventional politics that gave a significant number of votes to the Aam Aadmi Party. Even though the BJP emerged as the largest party in terms of votes and seats, the election results of Delhi are a cause of introspection for the BJP. Its State leaders as also individual candidates will have to measure up to popular expectations. Installation of Dr. Harshvardhan as Party’s unquestioned leader in Delhi is a step in the right direction. The BJP has decided to nationally approach ten crore households for collecting small donations for the party’s election expenses. However, the Party in Delhi will have to do a lot more in order to strengthen the perception of its own credibility.
If the political message of the New Year is that “Credibility matters” , the Congress has still not learnt from its mistakes. Despite being routed in the four States, it has started the New Year with a baggage of two cover-ups. The Maharashtra government has rejected the report of the Commission of Inquiry which indicted several Congress leaders of considerable standing in the Adarsh scam. Such a cover-up can only defy public opinion and the popular expectation of cleaner and credible politics. Though the allegation against Shri Vir Bhadra Singh , the Chief Minister of Himachal Pradesh of impropriety, corruption, quid pro quo and conflict of interest are fairly conclusive, the Congress Party has shamelessly decided to hold demonstrations in support of the tainted Chief Minister. This is defiance of ethics which can only earn wrath of public opinion even more.
The people have clearly indicated that they want credible politics. Those who chose to defy this expectation can only risk their existence.
Posted on 02 January, 2014, No Comments Comments admin
The Prime Minister has decided to address the media on January 3rd, 2014. I would have liked to ask him the following questions.
1. In his opinion, how would history judge his tenure as Prime Minister of India?
2. Does his tenure as Finance Minister give him greater satisfaction than his tenure as the Prime Minister?
3. Since his government is perceived to be extremely corrupt, where does he feel he went wrong in not asserting himself when the situation so demanded?
4. Where does he feel he went wrong in the management of the economy which led to the breakdown of the investment cycle ?
5. Does he bear the Guilt of Institutional subversion (CBI,JPC,CVC,CIVIL SERVICE etc.) during his tenure as a Prime Minister?
Posted on 01 January, 2014, No Comments Comments admin
Subsidies are an unquantified amount given to unidentifiable section of people. Through subsidies a government does not cut down the rates or the cost. It maintains the existing rates and tariffs. It only uses the tax payers money to subsidize a section. The more you subsidize the more you will have to eventually raise the taxes. Through subsidization a government thinks of the short term gains. It leaves a debt for tomorrow. A subsidy may prove counter productive for the more vulnerable sections. Take the illustration of the scheme to subsidize water for those consuming less than 20 kilo litre of water through a metered system. Subsidies make the health of the supply organizations vulnerable. The real challenge is that those outside the water supply system must be connected to it. Laying down pipelines in every locality, installation of taps in every house can only be provided by a healthy board and not a financially vulnerable DJB. The water subsidy has completely ignored the weakest section of Delhi. The poorest of the Delhi have been kept out of the water subsidy scheme. Localities without a pipeline, households without a tap, households without a meter, households with defective meters are not entitled to any subsidy. Households in the NDMC area, particularly of those lesser paid employees, households in Delhi Cantonment area have all been kept out of the water subsidy. This subsidy ignores the weakest and includes a small layer of people with metered consumption.
Delhi has about 18 lakh water connections. Of these 8.5 lakh have functional meters. About 5 lakh meters are non functional or defective. The rest are un-metered. A very large number of jhuggis in Delhi have no water connection and are not covered by the free water scheme. They are reliant only on tankers. A very large number of unauthorized colonies have no pipelines and are yet to be covered by laying of water pipelines. There are no individual house connections and hence they are outside the purview of the free water scheme. Many of the cooperative housing societies have bulk connections, Individual flats are not metered. They too cannot obtain free water. Some of Delhi’s middle class whose connections are metered and who keep their consumption below 20 Kilo litres i.e. 666 litres per day alone are entitled to the free water scheme. Those whose consumption exceeds the 20 kilo litres mark would be charged for the entire consumption with a hike of 10% in tariff. Delhi thus gets divided into four categories. The first is those who have no taps or pipeline connections. They are outside the scheme. Those with defective or no meters would also be outside the scheme and paying for water. It is only those with functional meters and consuming below 20 kilo litres per month who get the benefit. The others with functional meters who consume above 20 kilo litres would pay 10% extra. The scope of the benefit has narrowed down to just some of the households falling in one of the above four categories. And this category is not the most vulnerable section.
Posted on 31 December, 2013, No Comments Comments admin
Yesterday I released to the media a letter that I had written to the Prime Minister on the cases of corruption against Shri Vir Bhadra Singh, the Chief Minister of Himachal Pradesh. Along with the letter I have annexed 20 documents totaling 258 pages. I have also sent a copy of that letter to the Director CBI so that the agency can investigate the allegations.
I was surprised at the reaction of the Congress Party in what appears to be a clear cut case of corruption. The Party has challenged me to produce the evidence. The entire evidence is documentary and submitted both to the Prime Minister and the Director CBI. The evidence is also available on my website.
On the allegation of the Chief Minister being a beneficiary of the unaccounted money I have enclosed the copies of the VBS diaries seized during the Income Tax raid on the ‘Ispat Group’. On the issue of user of the unaccounted money I have enclosed details of how an unknown LIC agent Anand Chauhan opened a bank account in Simla, deposited 5-1/2 crore of rupees and issued cheques from the account for the benefit of the Chief Minister and his family members’ LIC policies. The Chief Minister has admitted that the money belongs to him and has revised his Tax returns so as to create a fake defence that this money was legitimately earned by him.
On the third allegation of a quid pro quo being with a power generating company, I have annexed documents of favours being granted to the said company. I have further produced documents establishing that the Chief Minister and his wife received money from the said company and that his family members became shareholders in another company of the same group which he favoured. I would request the Congress Party and in particular its leaders Smt. Sonia Gandhi and Sh. Rahul Gandhi to examine this evidence and make a public declaration why they feel that Shri Vir Bhadar Singh is still innocent.
Shri Vir Bhadra Singh has said that he would consider filing a Defamation action against me. He is certainly entitled to do so. In that event I would be pleading truth as defence and cross examining him on each of these issues.
Posted on 28 December, 2013, No Comments Comments admin
During the election to the Uttar Pradesh Vidhan Sabha, the Congress Vice-President, Shri Rahul Gandhi, referred to promises made by other political parties and tore a piece of paper in disapproval. This was a solitary incident on the basis of which a view could not be formulated whether this was a contrived anger or a political style. Subsequently in 2011, during the debate on the Lokpal Bill in the Lok Sabha, he suggested a constitutional amendment and claimed that his speech was a game changer. Earlier this year, after the monsoon session of Parliament, the Central Government proposed an amendment which would enable convicted MLAs/MPs to enjoy substantial privileges available to a member of a legislative body. The Congress Party and its high command had approved the proposal. The Cabinet had okayed the proposal. At a Press Conference he claimed that the proposal was a ‘non-sense’. He has now disagreed with Maharashtra Government’s proposal to reject the Commission of Inquiry report on ‘Adarsh Scandal’.
Is this a contrived anger and a manufactured dissent aimed at image correction or is it a genuine expression of opinion? The Congress Party and its governments have a scandalous record on the issue of corruption. It has recently decided to align with a convicted Lalu Yadav. The anger was missing. In the 2G spectrum allocation scam where a monumental loss has been caused to the National Exchequer, the Congress Party has tried to put a lid on the scandal by producing a spurious JPC report which carried no credibility. It exonerates the guilty and blames the NDA government. In the Coal block allocation scandal, the illegally allocated blocks are yet to be cancelled. There is no urge in him to stand up and protest. He remained a mute spectator when day after day scams took place in relation to the Commonwealth Games.
A crusade against corruption has to be continuous and consistent. It cannot be sporadic. It can not be a put-on exercise. Sporadic reactions dramatized before the media are only intended to show oneself as different even though you are still a part of the same cesspool. If Shri Gandhi feels so strongly on the Adarsh issue, the guilty must be prosecuted and certainly not be the Country’s Home Minister. This anger is not natural , it is contrived. This is a case of a manufactured dissent.
Posted on 27 December, 2013, No Comments Comments admin
Yesterday’s verdict in the 2002 Riots case accepting the report of the SIT and dismissing the protest petition has an extremely important lesson for all. What is the extent to which false propaganda can subvert a debate when the facts are otherwise. A section of the media and some NGOs thrived on implicating Narendra Modi and making inaccurate accusations. The extent to which it led to subversion of the debate on this issue needs to be introspected. A Chief Justice of India without looking into all facts chose an inappropriate expression ‘Nero’. Will he now retract? An editor used the extreme expression ‘mass murderer’. Outside the country some nations otherwise friendly to India, held their own ‘kangaroo court’ and decided to proclaim Modi guilty. They chose to ignore the fact that no other Indian politician since Independence had gone through the kind of scrutiny that Modi went through in the 2002 riots case. The highest court of the land monitored the case against him. They chose the best officers who could investigate the case against him. The investigation team examined hundreds of witnesses. The SIT grilled the Chief Minister for over nine hours. When the SIT exonerated him still through a Supreme Court scrutiny, an Amicus Curiae opinion, a protest petition and eventually a judicial mind examined the case. After a due process of law, the court opined that there was not a shred of evidence against Modi.
Where does that leave the United States opinion on this issue? Modi has not applied for US visa since 2005. My personal advice also has been that he should not apply for a US visa. The American stance on the issue has clearly been one determined by their ‘kangaroo court’. To proclaim Modi guilty even when there was no evidence against him despite investigations and re-investigation amounts to immature diplomacy. It constitutes interference in India’s internal affairs. This myopic American stance has the potential of recoiling back at them. It also sets a precedent for a reciprocal response. It is time the Americans reflect on how they have boxed themselves into this untenable situation.
Posted on 26 December, 2013, No Comments Comments admin
There is a fundamental difference between truth and falsehood. Truth holds together. Falsehood is full of contradictions. It falls apart. This is exactly what has happened to a conspiracy of falsehood hatched by Narendra Modi’s opponents in relation to the 2002 Gujarat riots.
The Gujarat riots of 2002 are a painful chapter in recent Indian history. The burning of the Sabarmati Express and the subsequent riots have cost us many valuable lives, injured many and led to a large scale loss of property.
Regrettably, a charge has been made against the State Government led by Shri Narendra Modi that it was responsible for the conspiracy behind the riots. The truth is otherwise. The total number of persons arrested both for preventive and punitive actions are 1,00,488. This is more than the number of persons arrested in any other caste or religious tension in India. More people died in police firing during disturbances than in any other riot. This negates the allegation of police connivance. 4272 cases were registered. 1168 of these cases have been decided and hundreds of accused have been convicted. Most of these actions have been taken by the Gujarat Police.
For the first time in 2006 i.e. four years after the riots it was alleged that the Gujarat Police was conspiring with the accused. Nine major cases were referred to a Special Investigating Team (SIT) constituted by the Supreme Court. This Team was headed by Dr. R.K. Raghavan, a former CBI Director and comprised of officers who did not belong to Gujarat Cadre. The SIT investigated the cases, arrested some more accused and partly amended the charge-sheet filed by the Gujarat Police. The Supreme Court accepted the charge sheets filed by the SIT and complimented it for its fairness.
Since there was no evidence of involvement of Shri Narendra Modi or his Government in any of the SIT reports, a fresh complaint was filed by Mrs. Zakia Jaffrey on 8/6/2006. She alleged that the Chief Minister and 63 others had conspired for a constitutional break-down as a result of which there was a larger conspiracy to engineer riots in the State. None of these allegations were present in her statement to the Nanavati Commission three years earlier in 2003. A large number of averments in her complaint were factually false. The crux of her complaint was that Late Shri Harin Pandya and the then Superintendent of Police Shri Sanjeev Bhat were present in a meeting in Chief Minister House on 27/2/2002 at Gandhinagar wherein the CM had signaled to the officers that the Hindu community should be allowed an outburst for its anger. Realizing that the phone records of Late Harin Pandya showed his presence at Ahmadabad and not Gandhinagar, she did not press this allegation any further. All eight senior officers present in the meeting were examined by the SIT. They were clear that Sanjeev Bhat was not present in the meeting nor had the Chief Minister made any such statement. Records are available to indicate that Sanjeev Bhat was present at that time in Ahmadabad and years later was conspiring with a few persons to concoct evidence to show his possible presence in Gandhinagar. The Supreme Court on 27/11/2007 directed the SIT to look into this matter also. The SIT examined all the 63 alleged conspirators. They examined the Chief Minister for over nine hours. Every relevant witness was examined and a report submitted to the Supreme Court on 24/4/2011 that the complaint did not make out any case against Shri Narendra Modi. Not being satisfied with the report of the SIT, she pressed to appoint an amicus curiae who gave his opinion on 25/4/2011 It was on 12/4/2011 that the SIT was asked to file its report under section 173 of the CRPC before the Magistrate. It was at liberty to obtain the report of the amicus curiae. Since then the Magistrate has examined all the evidences, protest petitions of the complainant, heard arguments in detail and finally accepted the closure of the case against Shri Narendra Modi. Truth has prevailed. The conspiracy of falsehood to implicate the Chief Minister in an offence stands exposed.
The above facts lead to certain irresistible conclusions. The Congress Party and its sponsored NGOs are unable to fight Shri Narendra Modi politically. They have attempted to use the CBI, the SIT, petitioning before courts and a media campaign of vilification against him. None of these appears to have succeeded. There were too many loopholes in the falsehood which was propounded. A small group of officers had guided this political strategy of the Congress and the NGOs. They fabricated evidences. Some websites conducted sting operations to substitute falsehood for truth.
Politically, Shri Narendra Modi emerges stronger in this adversity. He faced a lynch mob, a hostile group in the media and some motivated NGOs. He did not allow his own focus to be disturbed. He concentrated on his primary task of working for Gujarat’s development and succeeded in communicating directly with the people. This enabled him to succeed in the State elections of 2002, 2007 and 2012. At the end of the day, his popular sanction has been buttressed by a judicial verdict which accepts the SIT exoneration of Shri Narendra Modi and blames those who were concocting the evidence against him. He goes into the 2014 campaign untainted by propaganda. Propaganda can never be a substitute for legally admissible evidence.