Finance Minister Arun
Jaitley’s 40 minute reply to Rahul Gandhi’s attacks on the Rafale deal on
Wednesday in Lok Sabha had all the qualities of a legal luminary and an orator
but it had no answers to the pointed questions raised by the Congress President
against the manner the Prime Minister Narendra Modi unilaterally announced the
deal. The FM made all the insinuations against the Congress leader and his
family without touching the pertinent issues regarding the decision making
process. The only point which had some relevance was the point that the Supreme
Court dismissed the petitions demanding court mentioned probe but this judgment
of the Supreme Court given on December 14
last year, was also based on the
government note with documents given in sealed cover which had not been verified.
Now after the opening of
the Supreme Court on January 3 following winter vacation, a review petition has
been filed before the apex court by the trio- Yashwant Sinha, Arun Shourie and
Prasant Bhusan seeking a review of the Dec 14 judgment that upheld the
Government’s decision making process in purchasing Rafale planes, based on the
sealed documents provided by the Government. In fact, the review petition is
seeking a recall of the judgment. Whether the Supreme Court agrees to the
recall of the judgment or not, the facts in the review petition are so strong
that the apex court has to go into the review petition and assess the situation
afresh after the verification of the official documents.
Only last year, the Supreme
Court reviewed its 2013 decision on
retaining Section 377 which
criminalises gay sex by overruling the Delhi High Court judgment
decriminalizing it in 2009 and gave
verdict annulling the section 377 apart from suggesting other forward looking
changes. In Rafale case, the issues are no less important and the documentary
evidences given by the petitioners in the review petition are sufficient to
draw their attention to an immediate review. In Sabarimala case, the Supreme
Court has agreed for an open hearing on January 22.Here also, there is a case
for an open hearing where the HAL Officers Association as also the engineers
associated with the negotiations, can be called.
Interestingly, the centre
has also submitted an application for correction in the December 14 judgment
regarding the submission of the report of the CAG on the pricing issue and its
status before Parliament. This is an embarrassing issue for the learned judges
of the bench headed by the Chief Justice because the Government petition points
out that the errors were committed because of the non understanding of the
tense in the language used in the Government note given in the sealed cover.
Since the clear signal on the decision making has been given on this erroneous
understanding of the Government note, it is all the more necessary for the apex
court to clear the air by coming out perfect and clean. The review petition
gives the learned judges that opportunity.
The fact is that the centre
cleverly drafted its note on the CAG report on pricing. The centre’s submission
had recorded that under paragraph 25 of the judgment, it had stated that
pricing details were shared with CAG and that the report was examined by the
PAC. Only a redacted oirtion of the report was placed before the Parliament, the
judgment said. Since there is no ready CAG report yet, the centre had to
clarify in its submission by saying that the centre’s note used the word ”is”
which describes the procedure followed normally. Similarly, the judgment used
the word “was” in respect of the presentation of a portion of redacted report
in Parliament, whereas the centre only wrote “is” to describe the normal
course. There is every reason to believe that this manner of writing is like
Mahabharat’s Aswathama Hata iti Gaja episode. The centre tried to mislead the
judges through clever wording.
The Supreme Court has
mentioned in its judgment that its decision to deny a probe is primarily from
the standpoint of the exercise of jurisdiction under article 32 of the
constitution of India which has been invoked in the present group of petitions.
On pricing, the Court has refused to get drawn into the debate between the Modi
government and the opposition on whether the higher or better price was struck
for the 36 aircraft that was previously on offer.” It is certainly not the job
of this court to carry out a comparison of the pricing details in matters like
the present’, the judgment said. So what is Arun Jaitley talking about by
stating that the Supreme Court has cleared the Modi government of all charges
leveled by Rahul on Rafale deal?
Finance Minister is an
articulate person and he is the best available fire fighter right now of the
Modi government. It is quite possible that
Jaitley himself was not fully aware before of the Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s
sudden announcement in Paris on new Rafale deal on April 10, 2015.It was
like a decision was taken first and then
the follow up meetings and documents were made ready to justify the decision.
The Finance Minister spoke for 40 minute at the instance of the Prime Minister
by focusing on the lapses of Gandhi family rather than the details of the
Rafale deal since that has been given clean chit by the apex court. This is no
way a vital defence acquisition issue is dealt with. A detailed review by the
Supreme Court bench is of imperative need at this hour to find out the truth.(IPA Service)
The post Arun Jaitley Had No Answers To Rahul’s Five Questions On Rafale appeared first on Newspack by India Press Agency.
