What can power do to a political party’s financial health? Quite a lot, it seems. An RTI query by a Chennai-based ac..
Highly insidious cover-up; collective conspiracy of silence : Bofors
The Bofors ghost has resurfaced a quarter century after the
April 16, 1987 revelations of kickbacks on Swedish state radio as
former Swedish Police Chief Sten Lindstrom has said there was no
evidence to suggest that former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi had
taken any bribe in the $ 1.3 billion gun deal, though he alleged
that Gandhi "watched the massive cover-up" in India and Sweden and
"did nothing."
Another damaging remark made by Lindstrom against Rajiv Gandhi in
an interview to Chitra Subramaniam for a New Delhi-based website
thehoot.org published on April 24, 2012 is as follows: "Ardbo,
(Bofors managing director), had written in his notes that the
identity of N (Arun Nehru) becoming public was a minor concern but
at no cost could the identity of Q (Quattrochi) be revealed because
of his closeness to R (Rajiv Gandhi)."
Lindstrom told the interviewer that the $1.3 billion deal with
India for the sale of 410 field howitzers, and a supply contract
almost twice that amount was the biggest arms deal ever in Sweden.
"Money marked for development projects was diverted to secure this
contract at any cost. Rules were flouted, institutions were
bypassed and honest Swedish officials and politicians were kept in
the dark," he said.
The former Swedish police chief was quite vocal about Quattrocchi’s
involvement Sample his remarks: "The evidence against Ottavio
Quattrrocchi was conclusive. Through a front company called A.E.
Services, bribes paid by Bofors landed in Quattrocchi’s account
which he subsequently cleaned out because India said there was no
evidence linking him to the Bofors deal. Nobody in Sweden or
Switzerland was allowed to interrogate him.
"Ardbo was terrified about this fact becoming public. He had hidden
it even from his own marketing director Hans Ekblom who said
marketing middlemen had a role, but not political payments. Ardbo
was also concerned about the role of Arun Nehru who had told Bofors
in 1985 that his name and Rajiv Gandhi’s name should not appear
anywhere. As the stories began to appear, Ardbo knew what I knew.
He had written in his notes that the identity of N (Nehru) becoming
public was a minor concern but at no cost could the identity of Q
(Quattrocchi) be revealed because of his closeness to R (Rajiv
Gandhi). He had also mentioned a meeting between an A.E. Services
official and a Gandhi trustee lawyer in Geneva. This was a
political payment. These payments are made when the deal has to be
inked and all the numbers are on the table. I spent long-hours
interrogating Ardbo. He told me Nehru was the eminence grise but
not much more. He said often that he would take the truth with him
to his grave. I met him a little while before he passed away.
"Under pressure from Swedish and Indian media and with the threat
of a cancellation of the contract hanging over them, Bofors sent
its top executives to India with the one-point task of giving out
the names. Nobody of any consequence received them."
Lindstrom gave a clean chit to Bollywood superstar Amitabh Bachchan
saying that the case against Bachchan and his family was planted in
a Swedish newspaper Dagens Nyheter (DN) by Indian
investigators.
Lindstrom acted as the whistleblower in the Bofors case and had
leaked over 350 documents to Chitra Subramaniam who wrote dozens of
investigative reports for various Indian newspapers. The documents,
which included payment instructions to banks, open and secret
contracts, hand written notes, minutes of meetings and Ardbo’s
explosive diary, formed the basis for the first- ever transfer of
secret bank documents from Switzerland to India.
Our Correspondent adds: Leader of the Opposition in Rajya Sabha
Arun Jaitley said, "Lindstrom’s interview confirms a ‘political
payment’ was made. He admits there was conclusive evidence against
Italian businessman Ottavio Quattrocchi whose proximity to Gandhi
family is well known."
He quoted from the Lindstrom interview that (Bofors Managing
director Martin Ardbo was also concerned about the role of Arun
Nehru who had told Bofors in 1985 that "his name and Rajiv Gandhi’s
name should not appear anywhere".
In his interview, Lindstrom has said, "Ardbo knew what I knew. He
had written in his notes that the identity of N (Nehru) becoming
public was a minor concern but at no cost could the identity of Q
(Quattrocchi) be revealed because of his closeness to R (Rajiv
Gandhi). He had also mentioned a meeting between an AE Services
official and a Gandhi trustee lawyer in Geneva. This was a
political payment."
BJP spokesperson Ravi Shankar Prasad told reporters that the entire
Government of India at that point of time was out to save
Quattrocchi, including then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi.
The working of the Defence Ministry will come up for discussion and
Jaitley will make a special intervention to raise the matter on
that day. Jaitley also raised the matter at the BJP parliamentary
Party meeting here on Wednesday.
The Congress has taken a selective view of Lindstrom’s statement on
Bofors to exonerate Rajiv Gandhi, but remained evasive on the
revelation that Amitabh Bachchan’s name was planted by Indian
investigative agencies in the kickback case.
Khurshid ruled out the possibility of re-opening the case and along
with Congress spokesman Rashid Alvi sought a public apology from
all those especially Opposition BJP for misleading the country by
making ‘wild allegations’ against Rajiv Gandhi for the past 25
years thereby tarnishing his image and hurting his family
members.
However, on Rajiv soft pedaling the investigation to protect
Quattrocchi, Alvi said that the government cannot be blamed
as CBI had filed case against the Italian businessman in courts of
Italy, Malaysia and Argentina and all of them said that there was
no case against him. "We have done our best, what more can be
expected of us," he said.
On Amitabh’s name being planted, Alvi said that people and the law
don’t take any decision on the basis of statement of one policeman.
Relying on one person’s statement is not proper as nothing else has
come out on the issue.
Rejecting the BJP’s demand for a fresh probe, Salman said that the
government was not going to fall into the trap of opposition
demanding a debate on an issue that is closed and buried.
"There was a detailed investigation and there were Supreme Court
and High Court proceedings that took place and the decision that
came endorsed those proceedings. I don’t think we can continue to
reopen these issues... We don’t want a new chapter to be opened.
The final decision of the Supreme Court should not be reopened,"
Khurshid said adding, "I don’t think we should continue for the
rest of the life of the present generation of politicians to reopen
this every few months.
What Lindstrom said
* (On Rajiv Gandhi’s role) There was no evidence that he had
received any bribe. But he watched the massive cover-up in India
and Sweden and did nothing. Many Indian institutions were tarred,
innocent people were punished while the guilty got away. The
evidence against Ottavio Quattrrocchi was conclusive.
* I was disappointed with the role of many senior journalists and
politicians during that period. They muddied the waters.
* Many politicians who had come to my office claiming they would
move heaven and earth to get at the truth if they came to power,
fell silent when they held very important positions directly linked
to the deal. What was shocking in the whole Bofors-India saga was
the scale of political involvement in Sweden breaking all rules
including those we set for ourselves. Bofors was a wake-up call for
most Swedes who thought corruption happens only far away in Africa,
South America and Asia.
Rajeev Sharma
Share Your View via Facebook
top trend
-
In 8 yrs, Cong income up by seven times : An RTI query
-
India's first Stereoscopic 3D Movie on Swami Vivekananda
Vivekananda house at Chennai, India - housing a cultural heritage museum in memory of Swami Vivekananda, launched India&..
-
Evangelism or Christianisation in India
Is converting to another religion wrong? Is anger against person responsible for conversion right? What is making societ..
-
Khan in 'Sheh' of Congress?
''Brand SRK'' has become Bigger than even Shah Rukh Khan himself. From being among actors who pay the hi..
-
Karachi Industrialist's delegation invites Modi to Pakistan
Gujarat CM Narendra Modi, who is being seen as an emerging national leader in India, even by his critics, is literally goi..
what next
-
-
"Coal allocations since 1993 are arbitrary and illegal", Says Supreme Court
-
Palestine, 6 billion people and second hand opinions
-
Malegaon 2006 vs. Malegaon 2008 - Blast Politics
-
Who will investigate Chidambaram & Co for the Dabhol Loot?
-
Narendra Modi prepares to climb the ramparts of the Red Fort
-
The Great Jindal Swindle
-
AAP's insidious anti-Hindu agenda
-
Nagma - Sonia Gandhi's Star Soldier
-
Aam Aadmi Party : Anti-Modi stalking horse
-
What in God's name is Teesta Setalvad's agenda?
-
-
-
Time to rethink : Saffron surge and the secular debacle - Sri Sri Ravi Shankar
-
India's Wishlist for Prime Minister Narendra Modi
-
My first meeting with Narendra Modi - Sri Sri Ravi Shankar
-
Telangana - Divide and Rule?
-
Myths vs Facts about RSS
-
The Two States: Telangana and Seemandhra
-
Answering Media on Questions to Narendra Modi, but will they venture into responding these queries?
-
#AAPCon : Dilli ke log ban gaye Mamu
-
Secularism is just synonymous with Sanatan Dharm
-
Beware of the Hoax called Aam Aadmi Party
-
Comments (Leave a Reply)