The Supreme Court on Wednesday commenced its hearing on pleas seeking a court-monitored probe into the procurement of 36 Rafale fighter jets from France.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justices S.K. Kaul and K.M. Joseph is also likely to peruse the pricing details of the jets submitted by the government in a sealed cover.
One of the petitioners, Advocate ML Sharma asserted that reports filed by the government in the court revealed “serious fraud” in the decision making process after May 2015. He also urged that the matter should be heard by a five-judge bench.
Later, the counsel appearing for Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Sanjay Singh told to the apex court that pricing of the Rafale deal were revealed in the Parliament twice, hence, the submission of government that the details cannot be made public was not acceptable. Thereafter Senior Supreme Court lawyer, Prashant Bhushan, argued that there are various anomalies in the deal.
Bhushan, appearing for former Union minister and one of the petitioners Arun Shourie, submitted to the court that the government’s argument of secrecy clause being in place is a “bogus” one.
“There was no sovereign guarantee from the side of the France government in the deal. On pricing, there can’t be any secrecy issue when the government itself disclosed the price in Parliament. It’s a bogus argument for government to say they can’t disclose pricing. In a new deal, Rafale jets cost 40 percent more than earlier deal,” said Bhushan.
Petitioners Arun Shourie, Yashwant Sinha, and Prashant Bhushan told the Supreme Court that the government short-circuited fresh tender process for 36 Rafale jets to procure them through restricted Inter-Government Agreement mechanism. Bhushan also argued that the deal was changed because Prime Minister Narendra Modi wanted to make Ambani’s Reliance a partner.
“Nobody knew the change of the deal. Even the defense minister was not aware of the deal. Deal suddenly changed from 126 to 36 aircraft, from making in India to offset. The Reliance Company has no experience no credibility, it has never manufactured an aircraft,” he argued.
Bhushan also stated that almost four years have passed, but no aircraft has been delivered till now. He also raised questions as to why the number of aircraft was reduced to 36 from 126.
“Who took the decision for 36 jets? On what basis did the Prime Minister announce the deal for 36 jets? He had no authority. There is a gross violation of procedure in the decision-making process. We are shown this mirage that first aircraft will be delivered by September 2019,” he said.
Bhushan further argued that the government being unaware about the offset partner in the deal is contrary to the procedure laid down, as the norm requires the defence minister to approve the partnership.
Alleging that the Government tweaked rules to give Dassault authority over executing the offset contract without Defense Ministry’s clearance, Bhushan said, “Government changed offset rules after a new deal on Rafale to let Dassault execute offset contracts without Defence Ministry clearing the partner. The then President Hollande said government gave the option of Reliance as the offset partner and we didn’t have any other option.”
In a setback to petitioners in the Rafale deal case, the Supreme Court has said that there is no need to disclose pricing details to the petitioners. Discussion on deal price will be held only if we allow it, the bench headed by the CJI says. “Any debate on pricing of the Rafale deal comes only if this Court decides those aspects needs to come in the public domain,” CJI Gogoi said.
Post Your Comments