People's Democracy(Weekly Organ of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) |
Vol. XXXVII
No. 46 November 17, 2013 |
Lavlin
Verdict: Inevitable Ending
Of a McCarthyian
Conspiracy
K
K Ragesh
THE term McCarthyism refers to the practice of
making unfair
allegations or using unfair investigative techniques,
especially in order to
restrict dissent or political criticism.
The
In Kerala too the
same evil design of McCarthyism
is at work
against the CPI(M) and its state secretary Pinarayi Vijayan so
as to keep the
Party and its leaders under the smokescreen of suspicion. It
includes
manufacturing fabricated tales against the CPI(M) leaders,
propagating
unfounded accusations time and again, arranging to file suits
in the courts so
as to keep the propaganda alive, periodically introducing
false testimony and
hence proliferate a scathing campaign etc. This is being done
on such a level
that it may even astonish Joseph McCarthy! However, the recent CBI special
court verdict
discharging the CPI(M) state secretary Pinarayi Vijayan in the
SNC Lavalin case
because “the charges leveled are groundless, frivolous and
unsustainable” is
undoubtedly a blow on the face of those anti-communist
conspirators.
The CBI special
court while discharging the CPI(M) state secretary Pinarayi
Vijayan and six
others from the list of the accused in the SNC Lavalin case
came down heavily
on the investigating agency with vehement criticism. The court
held that “a
person having a modicum of law in his cranium cannot accept
such an absurd
proposition propounded by the prosecution and the prosecution
cannot be
permitted to project such an absurd proposition in support of
its case”. The
charge sheet submitted by the CBI vividly vindicates the fact
that all the
allegations leveled against Pinarayi Vijayan are politically
motivated. In fact,
the CBI did not have any substantial evidence to substantiate
any of its
accusations made in the charge sheet.
UNFOUNDED
ACCUSATIONS
The major
accusation of the CBI was that all the accused abused their
respective official
positions with fraudulent and dishonest intention and thereby
awarded the
contract for renovation and modernisation of the Pallivasal,
Sengulam and
Panniyar (PSP) power projects at an exorbitant cost to the SNC
Lavlin, Canada
at a fixed rate by violating all rules and regulations. The
CBI further alleged
that in furtherance of the criminal conspiracy the accused did
not execute a
binding agreement with the SNC Lavlin in the matter of
receiving the grant of
Rs 98.3 crore assured for Malabar Cancer Center (MCC) and thus
shown undue favour
to SNC Lavlin, causing wrongful loss to the government
exchequer and
corresponding wrongful gain to SNC Lavlin. The finding of the
CBI is that it is
the non-execution of a binding agreement that enabled the SNC
Lavlin to back
out from its commitment to arrange the grant and further
argued that as the
Lavlin had spent only Rs 12.05 crore for the MCC project, thus
caused loss of
the rest of the amount, i.e. Rs 86.25 crore. The CBI, contrary
to the venomous
campaign unleashed by some quarters against Pinarayi Vijayan
by manufacturing a
fabricated mystery on Technicalia, had to agree that Lavlin
had spent Rs 12.05
crore for the MCC project through its
(emphasis added) consultant Technicalia.
The court noted
that the CBI has no case that any of the accused obtained any
valuable thing or
pecuniary benefit in connection with the deal. The CBI in its
affidavit filed
before the court earlier, in reply to a query of the court
whether any
evidences were left
out to
prove a monetary gain, affirmed that there
was no evidence to prove that Pinarayi Vijayan or any
middlemen had made any
monetary gain. The CBI, which did not accuse any monetary
gain, invents that
the main consideration in awarding the supply contract
(Addendum) to the SNC
Lavlin was the offer of grant of Rs 98.3 crore to set up
Malabar Cancer Center
(MCC) at Thalassery. In its eagerness to appease its political
masters, the
central investigating agency ridiculously accused Pinarayi
Vijayan for taking
utmost concern and interest to set up the MCC. The CBI in its
charge sheet
blatantly accuses Pinarayi Vijayan of appointing his personal
staff member as a
special officer and initiating land acquisition proceedings
and further argues,
even after relinquished the post of electricity minister, he
was keeping in
touch with the special officer concerning the establishment of
the MCC! The CBI
was too blind to appreciate the commendable earnestness shown
by Pinarayi
Vijayan to materialise a dream project so as to serve the
interest of the
general public, but ludicrously depict such diligence as
fraudulence.
HOLLOWNESS
EXPOSED
The hollowness of
the CBI’s arguments got exposed in the court. The court while
analysing the
argument of the CBI that the consideration for awarding supply
contract is the
offer of grant for establishment of MCC asked the CBI whether
such a
consideration can be branded as a consideration without any
public interest.
The court observed that “the prosecution is simultaneously
attempting to brand
the act of awarding supply contract a dishonest and fraudulent
act abusing the
official position of the accused and also an act taking into
consideration the
offer for grant for establishing MCC at Thalassery, a laudable
object involving
public interest” and held that the “allegations are mutually
contradictory and
destructive”. The court while rejecting the charge pronounced
that when the
contract was awarded taking into consideration a laudable
object, no fraudulent
or dishonest intention can be charged against the accused on
that score.
The CBI’s charge
that Pinirayi Vijayan entered into a non-binding agreement in
the form of MoU
on 25th April 1998 instead of a legally binding agreement in
the form of MoA
for MCC to be established with the grant offered to be
arranged by the SNC
Lavlin. The CBI further argued that it is the absence of a
legally binding
agreement that facilitated the Lavlin to back out from its
commitments. The MoU
to renew the PSP project was signed between SNC Lavlin
and the KSEB in
August 1995; subsequently an implementation/consultancy
agreement was
signed in February 1996. All these developments occurred under
the UDF
government when Congress leader G Karthikeyan was the
electricity minister.
The court observed
that till the execution of the consultant’s agreement dated
24th February 1996
there was no proposal to provide any grant for establishing
any community
development programme, including a cancer hospital at
Thalassery. The court
also notes that Pinarayi Vijayan was not there in the scene
during that period.
The proposal for a cancer hospital was mooted for the first
time by the high
power delegation led by Pinarayi Vijayan during October 1996
i.e. 11 months
after the execution of the MoU and seven months after the
execution of
Memorandum of Agreement (MoA). Taking note of the documents
submitted before
it, the court held that there is absolutely nothing on record
to show that SNC
Lavlin had given any promise to fund or make available grant
from any other
Canadian agencies for the establishment of the MCC till the
execution of the
supply contract. Thus the court asked how a legally binding
MoA can be executed
between the government of Kerala and SNC Lavlin when there was
no promise made.
The court rejected the arguments of the prosecution and asked
if it was a
belated promise from SNC Lavlin how that promise can be the
basis of a legally
binding MoA.
The court exposed
the mysterious intention of the CBI by stating that “the
prosecution in the
charge practically conceded the performance of promise, if
any, on the part of
the SNC Lavlin touching this undertaking and that is evident
from the charge
sheet that SNC Lavlin had shelled out Rs 12.05 crore from its
purse”.
It is to be noted
that the MoU for the MCC was signed on 25th April 1998, more
than a year after
the execution of the supply contract (Addendum was signed on
10th February
1997). Hence it
vividly establishes the
fact that the MCC grant was not at all a consideration for the
contract given
to the SNC Lavlin as the CBI argued. In fact, the proposal to
set up the cancer
hospital was by way of general assistance package which was
being offered by
certain developed countries to third world countries. It was
in June 1997,
during the visit of the delegation led by E K Nayanar, the
late chief minister,
to
One should not
lose sight of the fact that Pinarayi Vijayan relinquished the
post of
electricity minister on 19th October 1998. Even though the SNC
Lavlin submitted
the MoA to be executed with the state government to the
subsequent UDF
government, it did not take any step to execute the MoA even
after repeated
reminders from the Canadian agencies. The execution of the MoA
was absolutely
necessary for the Lavlin to arrange funds from various
Canadian agencies such
as CIDA and EDC. The CBI while levelling false allegations
against Pinarayi
Vijayan conveniently hid such crucial issues, thanks to the
‘caged parrot’ that
echoes its political master’s voice.
The premier
investigating agency was not ashamed of painting the effort to
reduce the
foreign loan component from Rs 173 crore to Rs 157 crore as a
crime! The CBI
termed it as an arbitrary move arguing that the delegation was
without a
technical member in the team but deliberately undermined the
fact that a technical
member has nothing to do with the Canadian loan. The court
rejected the
allegations of the CBI and held that “if the accused had any
intention to help
the SNC Lavlin for making unlawful enrichment, such
substantial reduction in
the amount would not have been made”. During the UDF period
when Congress
leader G Karthikeyan served as the electricity minister, the
original
consultant contract was signed on 24th February 1996 and the
total amount
earmarked was Rs 181.57 crore, including the equipment cost of
Rs 157.47 crore.
It is vividly
clear that all the accusations levelled by the CBI in the
charge sheet are made
without any backing of evidences. The court did not accept any
of the charges
levelled by the CBI against Pinarayi Vijayan. In fact, it
effectively punctured
all the cock and bull stories, nurtured and propounded by the
anti-communist
camp, and that were incorporated in the charge sheet by the
CBI.