SHORT NOTE ON

DELHI STUDY GROUP PROGRAM ADDRESSED BY LEADER OF OPPOSITION IN UPPER HOUSE OF INDIAN PARLIAMENT SHRI. ARUN JAITLEY

The Delhi Study Group (DSG) conducted a talk on ‘Current Political Situation’ at the Constitution Club, New Delhi on 22nd September, 2011. DSG is a prominent NGO of Delhi comprising of lawyers, doctors, engineers, architects and social workers. The Chief Speaker was Shri. Arun Jaitley, Leader of Opposition, Rajya Sabha. The gathering of 350-400 eminent Delhi citizens was also addressed by Mr. Vijay Jolly, Ex. Delhi State Parliamentarian &  President of Delhi Study Group along with Ms. Pinky Anand, Senior Advocate & Gen. Secretary and Mr. Mohammed Afzal, President, National Muslim Front. The gathering was attended by Senior opinion makers & foreign diplomats. Other prominent office bearers of Delhi Study Group namely Mr. Ashok Garg, Mr. Manoj Arora, Mr. Surya Praksh Khatri, M.S. Sirsa & Mr. Vijay Mehta were also present on the occasion.

President Delhi Study Group Mr. Vijay Jolly highlighted the activities of NGO’s and various seminars and functions conducted under its flagship. In his brief speech, Mr. Jolly very effectively put forward the gross mis-governance and paucity of quality leadership in present UPA-II regime led by Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh. Mr. Jolly stated that Delhi Study Group had supported the anti corruption movement of noted Gandhian Mr. Anna Hazare. But the reported statement of Anna Hazare terming the proposed chariot travel in India by Senior BJP Leader Shri. L.K. Advani as a gimmick was disapproved and condemned by DSG leader Mr. Vijay Jolly on the occasion. Mr. Jolly stated that Mr. Advani in his five decade of public life had always stood for high moral standards in public life. It was Mr. Advani who during the last Indian parliamentary polls in 2009 had demanded that the public money stashed in Swiss banks be repatriated to India. So the adverse remark by Anna Hazare on Advani has caused immense pain to all right minded citizens in India.

Ms. Pinky Anand, Senior Advocate, highlighted various misdeeds and scams of UPA government. She highlighted the misdeeds of P.C. Chidambaram and his active knowledge in the 2 G Scam.  Ms. Anand pointed out the gross mal-governance and lack of effective leadership in India. She stated that middle class citizens are struggling hard to cope with the crisis created due to galloping inflation. She lambasted the Central Government for not handling Anna Hazare’s and Baba Ramdev’s movement properly which eventually led to complete chaos and exposed the inability of the present UPA leaders to handle such sensitive issues affectively. She also emphasized that arrest of Anna Hazre was completely uncalled for and led to unprecedented upsurge of Indian masses support for Anna’s cause.

Mohammed Afzal in his speech threw light on the status of Muslims in India. He also highlighted how Muslim community at large has been badly cheated throughout by Congress regimes since independence. Mr. Afzal said that Mr. Jinha & Pt. Jawahar Lal Nehru both were Presidents of Congress and played a key role in the partition of India. Thus Indian Muslims have no faith and trust in the present UPA regime where the Congress is the key ally. He also decried  targeting of patriotic forces led by RSS  based on  the mis-concept  of saffron terror in India.

Shri Arun Jaitley, Leader of Opposition, Rajya Sabha while addressing the topic “Current Political Situation” stated that present UPA Government is increasingly at war with its own self.  Even amongst the Ministers, distrust has set in.  Let alone a Party, the Congress does not even appear to be a coalition.  A civil war like situation has emerged amongst senior ministers of the UPA. The   Prime Minister and the UPA Chairperson are mute spectators.  The legitimacy of the Government has been eroded. 

Mr. Jaitley said that there are several questions which the Home Minister, Shri P. Chidambaram has to answer in relation to the fixation of the value of the 2G spectrum in 2008.   It is not an internal matter of the government.  It involves public revenue. 

BJP Leader Shri. Jaitley stated that Shri Pranab Mukherjee, the Finance Minister is entirely incorrect in refusing to elaborate on the ground that the matter is sub-judice.  Even on 25 March, 2011 when the mater was sub-judice, a note approved by him reached the Prime Minister office.  The culpability of the government or its ministers  is not merely a legal question.  The country is entitled to know the rationale behind the Finance Minister and Finance Ministry’s opinion as to why the predecessor Finance Minister  and the Ministry acted in the matter  in a particular manner so as to cause wrongful loss to the Public Exchequer.  This issue is not internal to the government and the UPA.  It is an issue in public domain and both Shri Pranab Mukherjee and Shri P. Chidambaram must answer these questions .  If no answers are given, the nation is entitled to presume that there is truth in the allegations of corruption in the matter. 

LOP Rajya Sabha Mr Jaitley fieled questions to Home Minister of India Shri P. Chidambaram as :

Admittedly on 22.11.2007 the Ministry through Finance Secretary, Shri D. Subba Rao, wrote to his counterpart in Deptt. Of Telecommunication.  He raised the correct questions, namely--   “In particular, it is not clear how the rate of Rs.1600 crore,  determined as far back as in 2001, has been  applied   in 2007 without any indexation, let alone current valuation.  Moreover, in view of the financial implications, the Ministry should have been consulted in the matter before you have finalized your decision.” Notwithstanding this clear position, Shri A. Raja, Telecom Minister decided to allot the spectrum both and in particular fix the entry fee at Rs. 1651 crores which was arrived at by a mechanism prevailing in 2001.  This happened on 11th January, 2008. 

Fully aware of the situation, the then Finance Minister, Shri P.Chidambaram, on 15.1.2008 sent a note to the Prime Minister wherein he stated – “Spectrum is a scarce resource.  The price for spectrum should be based on its scarcity value and efficiency of usage.  The most transparent method of allotting spectrum would be through auction.”  Notwithstanding this opinion for allotments already made the Minister observed  --  “In such cases, the past may be treated as a closed chapter. …. …”

The Finance Minister, thus, altered the position which his Ministry had taken in relation to the excesses of Mr. A. Raja.  He further changed his opinion in as much as the Prime Minister made a statement on 24.2.2011 in the Rajya Sabha stating –

“Contrary to the assertion of the Leader of Opposition, the record clearly shows that the then Finance Minister while he initially had a different view which he sent to me on 15th January, 2008,subsequently consulted the Minister of Telecommunication and the two Ministers worked out and agreed  on the spectrum charges which was reported to me in a meeting on July 4, 2008.”

Now the note of the Finance Ministry dated 25/3/20111 approved by the Finance Minister clearly mentions that the loss of revenue has occurred because “Thus the Ministry of Finance implicitly agreed to the imposition of the same entry fee as prevailing in 2001 for licences allotted upto 31st December, 2008”. 

Should the then Finance Minister not be telling the country as to why his Ministry changed its position from 22.11.2007 where it had insisted either on indexation  or determination of the current value.  Has not his act of agreeing to the Ministry of Telecom’s proposal not caused wrongful loss to the Government of India and a pecuniary advantage to the allottees of the licensees? Was this not done ‘knowingly’ since from the letter of the Finance Ministry on 22/11/2007 it is clear that the Ministry knew that the current value would have been different from the 2001 rate which was being charged. 

Mr. Jaitley fielded questions to Finance Minister Shri Pranab Mukherjee as : -

A Finance Minister is the protector of the national exchequer.  By sending the note dated 25/3/2011 the Finance ministry has rendered an exemplary service to the Nation.  It has, as a protector of India’s revenue, placed on record  what it perceives to be the factual position.

The charge that the interest of revenue was compromised with, is not being made only by a judiciary which is accused of over-stepping or by an enthusiastic auditor, the CAG or by a motivated Opposition.  It is being made by a most experienced and probably the wisest man in the Government.  Shri Pranab Mukherjee cannot hide behind the plea of sub-judice.    It is a matter which relates to public interest and ministerial conduct.  It is not merely the determination of criminal culpability.  People have the right to know the full truth in relation to the circumstances under which this note was written.  We do hope that  having rendered such a long service to the nation, Shri Pranab Mukherjee will not shirk from his public responsibility to make a full and frank disclosure.

And finally Mr. Arun Jaitley posed a few questions to the Hon’ble Prime Minister of India Dr. Manmohan Singh as : -

What was the Hon’ble Prime Minister doing when national loot was taking place?  The issue dealt with a matter of revenue protection, public interest and determining the value of a natural resource through an economic process.  The Prime Minister heads the Council of ministers. He just can’t delegate the responsibility to two ministers and abandon his responsibility particularly when his own correspondence with Shri A. Raja reveals that he had a lurking suspicion that all was not well.  Should the Prime Minister not inform us what steps he took in the matter of protecting India’s resources and revenue.

A vote of thanks was proposed by Shri. Vijay Mehta, Treasurer Delhi Study Group with a promise to meet soon at another intellectual meet / gathering organized by the NGO as soon as possible.