Did the PMO knowingly push the deal and then back out?
The PMO insists it got to know about the deal in July 2010, and then supported moves to annul it.
It definitely knows.If it denies it is not governing at all.
There’s no loss to the exchequer yet. So why is the PMO on the defensive?
Space is part of the PM’s beat, leaving him vulnerable. Also, Devas’s untested technology was causing disquiet as it could potentially affect future plans of existing telcos.
His personal integrity is coming under attack. Spotlight on 2G spectrum scam—and the proximity to the PM—worked against the deal. The PM had to clear the air.
So, is this a scam?
Doesn’t seem to be one. The Antrix-Devas contract is legal and procedures were followed when it was signed in January ’05.
Perfectly legal.Antrix lost the Bribe it has paid as well.
Why then was it cancelled?
The government is yet to give a concrete reason beyond “national needs” and “country’s strategic requirements”.
National needs is somebody’s needs.
Is there nothing wrong in ISRO’s dealings with Devas?
Some experts say the deal was loaded in Devas’s favour, with easy payment terms and a hedge against market risk. But then, there were no takers for S-band when the contract was signed.
Yes.Some made money and the Scientist honchos walked in blindfolded.
What next?
Yes, of course, Devas will go to the courts. The government will have to change the Satcom policy and compensate.
R.I.P.
Is the PM safe?
As long as no clear link emerges between his office and the deal.
Perfectly, irrespective of who comes to power.
ISRO claims to have ordered a review in 2009. Around this time, media reports about irregularities in the deal had surfaced. Yet, Antrix continued its talks with Devas on the project till a few weeks ago. “We were in talks with Antrix for hiring a third-country launch vehicle for the satellites till the third week of January,” Devas president & CEO Ramachandran Vishwanathan told Outlook. There are other apparent contradictions. While there are reports that the Space Commission and the Department of Space were kept in the dark, Antrix executive director K.R. Sridhara Murthi wrote to the Devas CEO in February 2, 2006, stating that it had “received the necessary approval for building, launching and leasing the capacity of S-band satellite….” A copy of the letter is withOutlook. Obviously, the approval would have come either from ISRO or the Space Commission or both.
So, what could have suddenly made the prime minister so vulnerable that he had to take defensive action, namely, the press conference? “Things have changed. All of a sudden, you find there are many takers and S-band is more valuable than ever thought,” say PMO sources. Indeed, Devas’s planned services could yield some answers. “Devas’s service through a satellite transponder would have been competitive with 4G. It could have been game-changer for the sector,” says Dinayar Contractor, a cable and satellite expert. This was seen as a potential spoiler for operators who have spent thousands of crores of rupees for 3G and BWA/LTE spectrum.
With India still in the pre-consultation stage for 4G services, Devas’s service could actually supersede many levels and render many of the existing companies’ investments redundant. Currently, a portion of S-band spectrum is being used for 4G terrestrial cellular services in some countries. “This could potentially happen in India as well, but not anytime soon. Widespread 4G services should be preceded by full-fledged 3G services, which is still in a nascent stage in India,” says a source close to ISRO.
Baba Ramdev’s assets include a 300-bed multi specialty hospital, a yoga research centre, a university, an ayurvedic pharmacy, a food park and a cosmetics manufacturing unit.
Ramdev declares himself to have come in the traditions of Rishis and that he owns nothing and the Trust owns all the money!
On Digvijay Singh’s poser to Ramdev that Ramdev should first investigate those who have donted to his Trust.
Agreed.
Ramdev also alleged that a big wig in Congress has over 11,000 Crores asset.
Is Digvijay Singh/Congress prepared to inquire into the Companies, Quottachchi et al?
Both these people are providing entertainment at people’s cost.
BJP, supposedly a party with principles, sides with Ramdev for political gains and a Congres leade states that Ramdev should not speak on the subject of Corruption in Non-Political Forum!
Neither they nor we have any sense of shame.
We vote these corrupt politicians to power and venerate charlatans.
Swami Ramdev is even reported to have acquired a Scottish isle for about £ 2 million a few years ago to set up a wellness retreat. According to unconfirmed reports, Patanjali Yogpeeth has also acquired major stakes in the Aastha TV channel.
Of the 30, 12 ‘Ayes’ are assured for Congress.(Con.-8,DMK -2,NCP-1,TMC-1).
Getting another 4 will be no problem.
Final decision of the JPC is not going to be the Truth.
Funny, the accused have 10 votes.
AIADMK which forced the Government to act has one vote!
Viva la Democracy!
The government sources said, “We have decided to have a 30-member panel to accommodate smaller parties which could not have been represented in a 21-member JPC.”
20 members of the JPC will be from the Lok Sabha while 10 will be from the Rajya Sabha. The seats given to each party are based on its strength in the two Houses. In a 30 member JPC, 38 members in the House entitle a party to one seat in the panel.
Congress will have eight members in the Committee from the Lower House and three from the Upper House.
BJP will have four members from the Lok Sabha in the committee, one of which it will give to ally Shiv Sena which is not getting any representation. The main opposition will also have two members from the Upper House.
The DMK will have two members and AIADMK will have one member in the panel.
The Swiss magazine sent me a communication saying that I might have it wrong.
Yet the same magazine in its reply to Swamy’s query has studiously avoided confirming/denying the Story( as it has done to my piece),yet asks for Subscription!
I have marked it in bold letters in the following story.
Also note the revelation by Rajiv Gandhi.
Story:
The shocking exposure came from Switzerland itself. The most popular magazine of Switzerland, Schweizer Illustrierte, [dated November 11, 1991] did an expose of 14 politicians of developing nations who, it said, had stashed their bribes in Swiss banks. The title of the expose in German read “Fluchgelder — Die Schweizer Konten der Dictatoren”. In English it meant, “Curse of money — The Swiss bank accounts of the Dictators”. Rajiv Gandhi figured in the expose as one with slush funds in secret accounts. Schweizer Illustrierte is not some rag. It is the Number One Swiss magazine and sells some 2,10,000 copies. Its readership is 9,18,000 — some 15 per cent of Swiss adults. The magazine had mentioned specific amounts in secret Swiss accounts of different leaders with their pictures alongside.
The report under the picture of Rajiv Gandhi, translated into English, read: “2.5 billion francs on the Indian secret accounts in Switzerland” of “Rajiv Gandhi, Indian”. Today the amount of 2.5 billion Swiss Francs equals 2.2 billion US Dollars. But as Rajiv was no more by then, it must become the family inheritance. The other leaders captured by the magazine were: Suharto of Indonesia (25.5 billion), Haile Selassie of Ethiopia (22.5 billion), Mobutu of Zaire (6 billion), Shah Pehlvi of Iran (5.7 billion), Saddam Hussein of Iraq (800 million), and Nicolas Ceausescu of Romania (500 million). The figures of slush money mentioned were in milliarden (meaning ‘billions’) units of Swiss Francs. Had Rajiv been alive then, the expose would have caused a political tsunami in India.
The box item above shows the pictures and the amounts of the leaders as appearing in the magazine.
More than the slush money charge it is the family’s silence about it, which is baffling. The number one magazine in Switzerland had made the damning charge that Rajiv Gandhi had left behind slush funds of $2.2 billion and yet the family has kept mum for 18 years now. How could any honest person tolerate such a serious charge? Well, one could say that the family might not have challenged it because it was published in far away Switzerland. But Dr Subramanian Swamy had included the Schweizer Illustrierte expose in his write-up “Do You know your Sonia?” in his party, the Janata Party, website, seven years ago, in 2002. It is still on the Party’s website. Photocopies of the expose in the Swiss magazine are shown at pages 51 to 53 of Dr Swamy’s write-up; also an e-mail from the magazine addressed to Dr Swamy on February 22, 2002 at page 50. The e-mail confirms what the magazine had reported.
The e-mail reads:
“Dear sir,
We refer to your e-mail of April 4, regarding an article in our magazine Schweizer Illustrierte of November 11, 1991. In this article — Fluchgelder – Die Schweizer Konten der Dictatoren — is Rajiv Gandhi named with tot 2.5 Milliarden CHF on secret accounts. If you want the magazine please indicate the exact address.
Yours faithfully,Ringer Ltd.Margot Todisco”.
The fax and telephone numbers of Margot Todisco are also given in the mail. The e-mail is in box alongside here. Yet no one from the Congress or from the family has sued Dr Swamy till date, nor challenged him. The Swiss expose also prominently figured in the advertisement that some NRIs had put out in the New York Times to protest against Sonia Gandhi when she visited the US in the year 2007. The Indian National Overseas Congress (INOC) filed a defamation case against the ad, expressly “not to defend itself, but Sonia Gandhi”. The New York Supreme Court dismissed the case holding that only Sonia Gandhi, not the INOC, had the locus to sue. But she would not dare sue. Thus, neither in Switzerland where Schweizer Illustrierte exposed Rajiv’s secret account with billions 18 years ago in 1991, nor in India where Dr Swamy had put it on his party’s website seven years ago in 2002, or in the US where the NRIs had boldly advertised the expose two years ago in 2007, would the Gandhi family challenge the expose.
In criminal law the conduct of the accused is an important piece of evidence. What does the family’s conduct show here excepting that it has something to hide.
Second: family benefited from KGB, says book
The second expose, Rajiv Gandhi figuring again, is that the first family of the Congress accepted political payoffs from the Russian spy outfit, the KGB. In a highly acclaimed book The State Within a State: The KGB and Its Hold on Russia-Past, Present, and Future by Yevgenia Albats, a journalist on Moscow News and Izvestia, the author writes: “A letter signed by Victor Chebrikov, who replaced Andropov as the KGB head in 1982, noted: the USSR KGB maintains contact with the son of the Premier Minister Rajiv Gandhi (of India).
R Gandhi expresses deep gratitude for the benefits accruing to the prime minister’s family from the commercial dealings of the firm he controls in co-operation with the Soviet Foreign trade organisations.
R Gandhi reports confidentially that a substantial portion of the funds obtained through this channel are used to support the party of R Gandhi.” (p223) The author also cites the KGB letter and file reference. In Dr Swamy’s write-up on Sonia, KGB’s letter in Russian is attached at page 45 and its English translation at pages 43 and 44.
On February 2, 2011,Schweizer Illustrierte sent me a comment which is provided at the end of this article.
I again checked the link.
The information in German seems to confirm the information on Rajiv Gandhi.
May be I got my translation wrong.
If some one can confirm that the information on Rajiv Gandhi is wrong as per the magazine’s published Record,I hereby tender a Public Apology to Sonia Gandhi,Rajiv Gandhi and Family.
I have a few questions.
Why did the magazine take 10 years to deny?
Why does Sonia Gandhi keep quiet?
What is the stand of India Today, Subramanian Swamy , S.Gurumurthy and the Indian Express?
Also note that the magazine , in its communication, has not denied it out right.
It says ‘as we think you might have cited it wrong’
Typical statement which while not confirming also does not categorically deny it.
If Schweizer Illustrierte’s article is wrong ,has Sonia Gandhi received an apology from them?
Questions, questions every where , not an answer to blink.
In an article written on March 18th 2009: INDIA has $1.4 Trillion of Illegal money stashed in Swiss Banks – Time to bring it home !, I wrote in the first para: “Rajeev Gandhi’s untimely death left Sonia Gandhi extremely wealthy. The true extent of her wealth became known only when the Soviet archives were thrown open following the collapse of the Soviet Union. KGB archives revealed that as far back as 1982, when Indira Gandhi was still prime minister, Soviet trading agencies were channeling funds into a company controlled by her son and future Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi.
This was also brought to light by Harvard Russian scholar Yvgenia Albats in her book The State Within A State: The KGB and Its Hold on Russia. The Swiss news-magazine Schweizer Illustrierte (November 11, 1991) provided more details. Citing newly—opened KGB records, it reported that Sonia Gandhi, widow of the former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, was controlling a secret account worth 2.5 billion Swiss francs (about 2 billion dollars at current exchange rates) in a Swiss bank in her minor son’s name.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material the use of
which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This material is being made available in efforts to advance the
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democratic, scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is believed
that this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research, comment, discussion and educational purposes by
subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For more information
go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes of
your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.
Since newsgroup posts are being removed
by forgery by one or more net terrorists,
this post may be reposted several times.
It is a surprise that India is still hiding behind ‘Secrets’.
A Credit Suisse banker has been arrested in connection with a long-running US tax evasion investigation and could be one of several individuals likely to face charges this week as prosecutors turn their focus from institutions to bankers and wealthy clients, said people familiar with the matter.
Christos Bagios was arrested about two weeks ago on entering the US and is in transit to a detention centre in southern Florida, according to the Bureau of Prisons’ website and people familiar with the matter.
Switzerland yesterday ended months of uncertainty over the diluting of bank secrecy when its parliament finally approved legislation allowing the transfer of the names of thousands of American clients of UBS suspected of evading tax owed to the US authorities.
The decision followed days of parliamentary wrangling that had threatened to delay a crucial treaty between Bern and Washington authorising the transfer. This could have triggered a crisis in bilateral relations and threatened the future of UBS, Switzerland’s largest bank.
Under the agreement, negotiated last August, Switzerland promised within a year to pass to the US authorities the names of 4,450 wealthy American UBS clients suspected of having undeclared accounts at the bank.
The bilateral agreement followed a lengthy US investigation that showed UBS had broken laws by helping Americans with offshore Swiss accounts evade tax through elaborate financial structures such as sham companies in Hong Kong and Panama.
In February 2009 UBS, the world’s second-biggest wealth manager, agreed to pay $780m to settle criminal charges.
However, the US authorities pursued a linked, but separate, civil action requiring the bank to release the names of about 19,000 US clients with offshore Swiss accounts.
Differences were only resolved last August through a special treaty between Bern and Washington, in which the Swiss promised to deliver the 4,450 UBS client names within a year.
Swiss parliamentary approval then became necessary after a top Swiss court ruled this year that the Bern-Washington deal broke the country’s bank secrecy law and the government should have gained parliamentary acceptance first.
You must be logged in to post a comment.