And the leftward shift in Europe is no electoral capriciousness or mere fickle-minded mood swing of the electorate. Rather, they are firmly rooted in the material conditions of austerity, not only in Europe but even to some extent in America. Ten years of austerity as a result of the Eurozone crisis has left the population reeling. Japan has been sinking under the weight of austerity for more than a decade.
The purchase of the 36 aircraft was a unilateral decision of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and that the decision was taken without even consulting with the then Defence Minister of the country — Manohar Parrikar. That exactly is the violation. Did the Court forget to ask the Government to submit the process followed for the procurement of 36 aircraft? If so, on what confidence and based on what evidence did the Court stat in Para 22 that “Broadly, the processes have been followed”?
Unlike what the Central Government hopes to secure with its application, the Rafale judgment now stands vitiated by reason of what is said in para 25; it is one of the critical pillars supporting the judgment. Therefore, the outcome of the judgment can no longer be the same should para 25 lose those critical conclusions of “facts” that never took place. Hence, the Court will have to summarily remove its own judgment and rehear the issue.
The way the Supreme Court bench endorsed the decision making process involving the Prime Minister is astonishing. This is the only area gone into by the three judges and the judgment clearly shows that they have ignored some of the major stages of the process involving serious violations on the part of the Indian Government. The apex Court has failed to perform its supreme duty as the custodian of the nation.
This is a joint statement by Yashwant Sinha, Arun Shourie and Prashant Bhushan in response to the Supreme Court's December 14, 2018 verdict on the Rafale deal. All three were petitioners, along with a few others, in a batch of public interest litigation demanding a probe by a joint parliamentary committee into the Rafale deal, wherein 36 Rafale fighter jets were bought instead of 126 aircrafts as per the earlier deal, a decision taken by Prime Minister Narendra Modi himself, much like his choice of offset partner in Anil Ambani's brand new defence company.
Urjit Patel’s term as the head of the Reserve Bank of India would surely be reckoned as one of the most tumultuous time. Demonetisation was thrust upon him almost immediately after he took over the reins, while, some of the worst board members of the Reserve Bank were foisted upon to breathe down his neck. Without them around, the governor might not have left peremptorily.
The Indian National Congress and other political parties will be pigmies before cash-rich saffrons on eve of the 2019 Lok Sabha polls, thanks to the dubious electoral bond scheme introduced by the BJP government early last year, through the Finance Act 2017. Already, a staggering majority of the bonds have been issued to the BJP by corporate donors, as the Election Commission data have shown. This must be challenged in court.
As Sudhansu Mohanty, former comptroller general of defence accounts and financial adviser of defence services explained to a business daily, loosely, the letter of comfort can be said to be like letter of intent used in international contracts — may be morally binding but not legally binding and enforceable-somewhat like the Indian sagaai before the marriage.
Like Dassault, Ambani’s companies are also indebted and defaulters. Is it an agreement to meet their losses and defaults by looting the public money? Both Dassault and Ambani’s firm are sharing the loot of public money. Hence the only way out is to totally cancel the deal. Dassault and Anil Ambani are beneficiaries of the loot, of which Prime Minister Narendra Modi is the chief catalyst.
The apex court has reserved the judgment on a clutch of four Public Interest Litigations filed by six persons, namely — the first two by Advocates M L Sharma and Vineet Danda, a third by AAP MLA Sanjay Singh, and the last one jointly filed by former finance minister Yashwant Sinha, former telecom minister Arun Shourie and lawyer Prashant Bhushan.
The reported squabble over Reserve Bank’s accumulated “Kuber’s wealth” and government’s claim to a part of it is neither here nor there. The money belongs to the country, and not definitely to the RBI because it has been carefully stacked away by RBI over the years. At the same time, one particularly government has no right to fritter away the resources.