Raja links PM to all key 2G decisions

April 23, 2013

Raja_links_PM
New Delhi, April 23: In his 112-page written statement to the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) probing the 2G scam, the former Telecom Minister and prime accused, A. Raja, has said he personally met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh severalspectrum allocation times between November 2007 and July 2008 — the period when the scam was perpetrated — to keep him informed of all 2G-related decisions, and the Prime Minister agreed with him.

On Page 72, while challenging the JPC’s draft report and the CBI’s allegations that Mr. Raja had “misled” the Prime Minister, he says: “This allegation has been made by the CBI without even recording the statement of the Hon’ble PM. On what basis do they say he was misled? I hope the JPC will not commit the same blunder; if they wish to draw any conclusion on this issue, it is mandatory to record my statement and the statement of the Hon’ble PM.” But the draft report has already reached that conclusion.

Mr. Raja then goes on to give details of his meetings, letters and conversations with the Prime Minister, several of which are not in the public domain.

Mr. Raja claims that apart from seven letters between November 2, 2007, and July 2, 2010, “I had several personal discussions with the Hon’ble PM on telecom issues throughout my tenure and particularly in the period from November 2007–January 2008.” He further provides occasions and venues where such meetings took place. “These would happen on the side of Cabinet meetings or separately at his office/residence.”

The Prime Minister has made specific statements on his discussions with Mr. Raja at a TV Editors press conference and in Parliament in February 2011, but has not disclosed either the occurrence or the details of these meetings, save one held among Mr. Raja, Mr. Chidambaram, and himself on July 4, 2008, seven months after the scam broke out.

Met PM a week before scam

Mr. Raja says that after his December 26, 2007 letter, which detailed the change in the first-come first-served (FCFS) policy, “I met the Hon’ble PM in the first week of January 2008, and this issue was again discussed, and he agreed with the proposed course of action of the DoT.” If correct, the meeting would have occurred within a week prior to the award of Letters of Intent for 2G licences on January 10, 2008, and supports documents that show that on the Prime Minister’s request of December 29, 2007, Pulok Chatterji, Secretary, and T.K.A. Nair, Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister, had discussed and endorsed Mr. Raja’s modification of the FCFS policy in PMO files through notings on 1, 6 and 7, January 2008. This was highlighted in a news report, ‘New papers show PMO analysed and agreed with Raja’s actions before 2G scam,’ published in The Hindu on March 18, 2013.

Continuing with his attack on the contention that the Prime Minister was misled, Mr. Raja says: “DoT officers were in touch with PMO regularly, without even involving me, as seen by the file notings of the PMO itself.” On July 24, 2012, CBI officials deposed before the JPC that they had not gone through the PMO files. The CBI stated that it approached a “Section Officer” in the PMO to check the “authenticity” of certain documents.

In the statement, Mr. Raja details instances and the importance of his face-to-face meetings with the Prime Minister and the then Law Minister, H.R. Bhardwaj, whose advice to take the 2G spectrum issue to the Empowered Group of Ministers (eGoM), had been rejected by Mr. Raja as “totally out of context.”

Citing “several interactions” he had with the Prime Minister and the Law Minister, he says: “If either of them had desired that the eGoM should consider this matter, they would have told me and I would have acted accordingly. However, neither of them ever made this suggestion, and rather they fully understood and endorsed my course of action.”

Pointing to his re-appointment as Telecom Minister after the 2009 election, Mr. Raja says: “…surely if he [the Prime Minister] felt that I misled him or offended him in any manner, my appointment would not have happened.”

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 15,2024

amitshah.jpg

Union minister Amit Shah on Friday, November 15, said PM Narendra Modi will amend the Waqf Act despite opposition from leaders like Uddhav Thackeray and Sharad Pawar.

"Modi ji wants to change the Waqf Board law, but Uddhav ji, Sharad Pawar and Supriya Sule are opposing it," Shah said, addressing a rally at Umarkhed in Maharashtra's Yavatmal district.

"Uddhav ji, listen carefully, you all can protest as much as you want, but Modi ji will amend the Waqf Act," he said. Shah said there are two camps in the November 20 Maharashtra assembly polls, one of 'Pandavas' represented by the BJP-led Mahayuti and the other of 'Kauravas' represented by Maha Vikas Aghadi.

"Uddhav Thackeray claims that his Shiv Sena is the real one. Can the real Shiv Sena go against renaming Aurangabad to Sambhajinagar? Can the real Shiv Sena go against renaming Ahmednagar to Ahilyanagar? The real Shiv Sena stands with the BJP," Shah said.

"Rahul Baba used to say that his government would credit money in the accounts of the people instantly. You were unable to fulfil your promises in Himachal, Karnataka, and Telangana," he said.

Shah said the Mahayuti alliance has promised that women will get Rs 2,100 per month under the Ladki Bahin Yojana. "Kashmir is an integral part of India and no power in the world can snatch it away from us," Shah said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 11,2024

birensingh.jpg

The Manipur Kuki MLAs have released a statement calling out Solicitor General Tushar Mehta's 'lies' in the Supreme Court. In a joint statement, the MLAs, including those from the Bharatiya Janata Party, said they had not had any meeting with the Chief Minister since May 3, 2023, nor did they intend to meet him in the future as “he was the mastermind behind the violence”.

As per the MLAs, the SG lied about state CM N Biren Singh speaking to Kuki MLAs to control the situation there, in order to halt a Supreme Court probe into the leaked tapes which allege that Singh has been complicit in the violence that broke out between Kukis and Meitis there.

"We...clarify that we have never had any meeting with Chief Minister, Shri N. Biren Singh since May 3, 2023, nor have any intention to meet him in future as he is the mastermind behind the violence and ethnic cleansing of our people from the Imphal valley, which is continuing till today, the latest being the brutal killing and burning of Mrs Zosangkim Hmar on November 7, 2024," the letter read, while condemning the recent 'barbaric' killing of the woman there, and noting the SG's assertion is 'tantamount' to misleading the top court.

“We, the undersigned ten MLAs, have come to know that during the Supreme Court hearing held on November 8, 2024, the Solicitor General of India submitted that ‘CM is meeting all Kuki MLAs and trying to bring the situation down to get peace’. In this connection, we hereby categorically state that this submission is a blatant lie and tantamount to misleading the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India,” the statement said.

The Supreme Court, while hearing a petition by a Kuki organisation, asked that it submit audio tapes to substantiate its claim that the Chief Minister was instrumental in inciting and organising violence in the northeastern State.

Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta orally informed the court that the Chief Minister was meeting all the Kuki-Zo MLAs and that peace in the State had come at a huge cost.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 13,2024

buldozerjustice.jpg

New Delhi: The Supreme Court took a firm stance on ‘bulldozer justice’ today, affirming that the Executive cannot bypass the Judiciary and that the legal process must not prejudge the guilt of an accused. In a significant judgment, the bench led by Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan set new guidelines for demolition practices, responding to petitions challenging the controversial bulldozer actions taken against individuals accused of crimes.

The rise of this practice, termed 'bulldozer justice,' has seen authorities in various states demolish what they claim to be illegal structures belonging to accused individuals. However, multiple petitions questioned the legality and fairness of this approach, bringing the matter before the court.

Justice Gavai highlighted that owning a home is a cherished goal for many families, and an essential question was whether the Executive should have the authority to strip individuals of their shelter. “In a democracy, the rule of law protects citizens from arbitrary actions by the state. The criminal justice system must not assume guilt,” stated the bench, underscoring that due process is a fundamental right under the Constitution.

On the principle of separation of powers, the bench reinforced that the Judiciary alone holds adjudicatory powers and that the Executive cannot overstep these boundaries. Justice Gavai remarked, “When the state demolishes a home purely because its resident is accused of a crime, it violates the doctrine of separation of powers.”

The court issued a strong warning about accountability, stating that public officials who misuse their power or act arbitrarily must face consequences. Justice Gavai observed that selectively demolishing one property while ignoring similar cases suggests that the aim might be to penalize rather than enforce legality. “For most citizens, a house is the product of years of labor and dreams. Taking it away must be an action of last resort, thoroughly justified,” he said.

In its directives under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court established new demolition guidelines. These include:

Mandatory Show-Cause Notice: No demolition should occur without first issuing a show-cause notice. The person served has a minimum of 15 days or the duration stated in local laws to respond.

Transparency of Notice Content: The notice must include specifics about the alleged unauthorized construction, the nature of the violation, and the rationale for demolition.

Hearing and Final Order: Authorities are required to hear the response of the affected individual before issuing a final order. The homeowner will have 15 days to address the issue, with demolition proceeding only if no stay order is obtained from an appellate authority.

Contempt Proceedings: Any breach of these guidelines would lead to contempt proceedings. Officials who disregard these norms will be personally accountable for restitution, with costs deducted from their salaries.

Additionally, the court mandated that all municipal bodies establish digital portals within three months, displaying show-cause notices and final orders on unauthorized structures to ensure public transparency and accountability.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.