The Sounds Of Saintly Silence

Mrs Sonia Gandhi has been criticized by several people onaccount of her foreign origin. She lived in Cambridge, England, where she metRajiv Gandhi. She eventually married into India’s most famous family. Aftermarriage she successfully assimilated into an Indian lifestyle. Since enteringpolitics her conduct has been dignified and gracious.

Her entry into politics was preceded by tragic incidents. Herhusband had no idea of entering politics. But the plane crash that killed hisyounger brother, Sanjay Gandhi, compelled Rajiv to take his place. Sanjay’sdeath remains a mystery. It is mandatory for the government to institute acommission of inquiry into all airplane crashes. Justice ML Jain was appointedas a one-man Commission to probe the plane crash that killed Sanjay. But forinexplicable reasons, in violation of mandatory law, that inquiry was stopped.The cause of the plane crash remains a mystery.

After Rajiv became general secretary of the Congress to help hismother, Indira Gandhi was shot dead. Her death too was never satisfactorilyexplained. The Justice Thakkar Commission appointed to inquire into her deathruled that an inquiry commission into the conspiracy angle should be appointedbecause "the needle of suspicion pointed" at Mr RK Dhawan who had beenIndira Gandhi’s personal secretary. The police arrested one Kehar Singh, afamily friend of one of the assassins, Beant Singh. Without any credibleevidence, it charged him with conspiracy to kill Indira Gandhi. Kehar Singh washanged. The evidence was so farcical that the Supreme Court itself reminded thePresident that he had the power to commute the death sentence. Later, JusticeThakkar became chairman of the Law Commission. Mr RK Dhawan was rehabilitated byRajiv Gandhi. He rose to become a minister.

Subsequently Rajiv Gandhi's assassination too raised severalunexplained questions. Connections of several prominent Congress leaders to thesuicide bomber who took Rajiv’s life were never satisfactorily explained.After Rajiv’s death, as Congress fortunes began to flounder without a dynasticleader in command, Mrs Gandhi became the Congress president. The tragedy ofthree unnatural deaths in her family that propelled her entry into politics canonly evoke deep sympathy for her. In light of this, criticism of her foreignorigin sounds uncommonly churlish and uncouth.

However, Mrs Gandhi now is no longer the daughter-in-law or wifeof a prime minister. She is the Congress President in her own right. She mustaddress certain issues which she has appeared to overlook up till now. Theserelate to circumstantial evidence pointing to corruption by her party.

It would be incorrect to infer that Mrs Gandhi’s inexperiencein business enables some colleagues to misuse the Congress name for committingcorruption. Mrs Gandhi has old links with business. On 26 February 1973 she wasappointed as Managing Director of Maruti Technical Services Private Ltd. SanjayGandhi was the only other Director. For five years she drew a salary of Rs 2,000per month plus commission and perks. By the time she resigned on 21 January,1975 she had earned over Rs 80 thousand. However, Income Tax authoritiesdisallowed part of the remuneration "as excessive because she had noqualification to be able to render any technical service to the company".Incidentally, since January 1, 1974 the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA)forbade any foreign national -- which she was at that time -- from holdingeither shares or office of profit. Along with her husband Rajiv, and SanjayGandhi, she also held controlling shares in Maruti Heavy Vehicles. Aschairperson of several trusts which received government aid, Mrs Gandhi usedclout with dexterity. According to The Statesman of 3 September 1995, sheacquired, through the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation, a building worth Rs 100 crores.

Mrs Gandhi was not personally connected to the infamous Boforsdeal negotiated by Rajiv Gandhi as Prime Minister. However, one of the accused,Mr Ottavio Quattrocchi, recently stated with pride that he was her close familyfriend. Earlier the London bank accounts of Mr Quattrocchi which were frozen bythe Indian government had been unfrozen. Mr Quattrocchi was free to withdraw hismoney. The CBI stated that it had no evidence involving Mr Quattrocchi in the Bofors deal. Some time ago the Director of the CBI had visited USA and theBahamas in search of evidence against Mr Quattrocchi. He found none. The mattershould have been allowed to rest there.

Unfortunately public scepticism remains unabated. As governmentsand CBI directors change, so does the CBI script on Bofors. Today the UPAgovernment is in power. Mrs Gandhi is chairperson of the National AdvisoryCouncil that guides the government. Mr Quattrocchi against whom the CBI finds noevidence today was nailed in no uncertain terms by CBI in April 1998. MrQuattrocchi had petitioned the Delhi High Court seeking an end to the CBIinvestigation against him. The CBI responded with a 30-page counter-affidavit.It gave a detailed account of Mr Quattrocchi’s role as the owner of AEServices in making payoffs and using political influence to swing the award infavour of Bofors. The late Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi was also unequivocallyindicted by CBI for engineering the corrupt deal. Most of the material hadappeared earlier in the media. But for the first time CBI gave officialconfirmation of the involvement of Rajiv Gandhi and his confidants, including MrQuattrocchi, in the Bofors payoffs. Mr Quattrocchi’s proud assertion about hiscloseness to the Gandhi family was turned against him in the CBIcounter-affidavit. It recorded: "The families of the then Prime Minister ofIndia and Mr. Ottavio Quattrocchi were on very intimate terms." Because ofthat "the process of negotiations suddenly picked up.."

The question arises: was CBI lying then or is it lying now? Thishad best be resolved by CBI officials themselves.

The Congress party role in the Volcker affair is beinginvestigated. Both former Foreign Minister Mr Natwar Singh and the Congressparty were named as beneficiaries in Iraq’s Oil-For-Food programme. Pendinginvestigation, Mr Natwar Singh has resigned. But who was responsible for moneybeing paid to Congress? As Congress President, should not Mrs Gandhi institute aparty probe into the affair? How did President Saddam’s government conclude itwas benefiting the Congress party? Important functionaries of that governmentare accessible in Iraq. Has Mrs Gandhi contacted them? After conferring a favourto the Congress party did anyone from the Iraqi government or its embassy get intouch with Mrs Gandhi? If not, the Iraqi ambassador was inexplicably derelict induty. Mr Natwar Singh carried a letter from Mrs Gandhi to President Saddam.Should not the contents of that letter be made public?

Now a new scandal has erupted. It involves the Congress in theRs 16000 crores French Scorpene submarine deal. According to media allegations,the deal was opposed by the Central Vigilance Commissioner (CVC), FinanceMinister Chidambaram, and the Prime Minister. Nevertheless it was signed. MrAbhishek Verma has been named as the middleman who collected the payoff. He isthe son of the late Congress MP Shrikant Verma who also was the Hindi tutor ofRajiv Gandhi. According to Outlook, during negotiation with Mr Verma thesubmarine company official wanted confirmation of the 4% payoff demand from theCongress party treasurer. Outlook reported Mr Verma writing: "I hopeThales (the submarine company) doesn’t think the Congress has a shop and theyare negotiating with them. ALL negotiations would be done by ME."

A Thales company spokesman claimed these email messages to beforgeries and threatened legal action. But reservations about the deal by CVC,FM and PM remain. Should not Mrs Gandhi question Defence Minister PranabMukherjee about why the deal was signed? And also question Mr Abhishek Verma?

As Congress President, Mrs Gandhi has constructive responsibilityfor all actions of the party. Should she not act to clear the air? And safeguardher own reputation?

Rajinder Puri can be reached at rajinderpuri2000@yahoo.com