Sign In / Register
Make This My Home Page | Feedback |RSS
You are here: IE »   Story

How Quattrocchi walked free

  • Print
  • Mail This Article
  • Comments
  • Add to favorites
  • The manner in which investigations and prosecutions in the Bofors case were consistently and spectacularly bungled is proof enough that whoever took the Bofors money is supremely powerful.

    Over the last two decades, there was always someone in the CBI, the courts, the law ministry who was batting for the accused rather than the government. Somehow, Ottavio Quattrocchi always managed to be a step ahead of our law enforcement agencies. And despite the sound and fury in the media and in the Parliament, the suave Italian businessman has ended up laughing all the way to the bank.

    Quattrocchi's final triumph came on Tuesday when the Solicitor General announced that the Indian government planned to withdraw all cases against him. Quattrocchi has been let off even though many legal experts considered his involvement in the Bofors scam to be an open and shut case. Not because of the investigative skills of our CBI but because the Swedish government, the Swiss courts and investigative journalist Chitra Subramaniam had provided a wealth of documentary evidence against him. In how many corruption cases can you actually succeed in finding out the number and name of the owner of the bank account into which the money was paid? All this evidence was sufficient for Interpol and the Swiss and British courts, but not the Indian authorities.

    Ads by Google

    Here is a brief run-down of the cover-up:

    Though the scam came to light in 1987, no FIR was registered as long as Rajiv Gandhi's government was in power. The FIR was registered only in 1990 during the Janata Dal regime and a letter rogatory sent to Swiss and Swedish authorities.

    ... contd.

    Next123
    IS THE BJP AN ALTERNATIVE TO CONGRESSBy: Venu | 16-Oct-2009 Reply | Forward The BJP is just a carbon copy of the Congress and there is nothing to differentiate between the two. The only difference are the labels in which they operate. One prides itself as following the so-called "secularism" and the other the much maligned so-called "Hindutva". Neither there is any difference in the economic policies or programmes they espouse nor in rank bad governance. This being so, how can the BJP be ever considered as a good alternative to the Congress ?? It is a choice between the devil and deep blue sea.
    THE EXACT MEANING OF THE WORD NEUTRALBy: Venu | 15-Oct-2009 Reply | Forward May be in the dictionary of people like Suchithra, blasting away the Nehru family led Congress and singing paegns in favour of the RSS/BJP amounts to being a neutral. I know the meaning of neutral and I stand up to that. I do not just criticize this or that party just for the sake of it and only blame the system as a whole because I know the background of Indian society. I am not like people like Suchithra who finds everything bad with the Congress and all things rosy with the BJP. That is real hypocrite for you and the worst thing is that they slam others in their own names.
    Indeed hypocracyBy: suchithra | 15-Oct-2009 Reply | Forward Indeed bashing one party alone
    Thank youBy: Venu | 15-Oct-2009 Reply | Forward So yourself accept that you are a hypocrite. Thank you.
    You indeed By: suchithra | 30-Oct-2009 Reply | Forward Yes i accept
    Doesnt seems to argue with sundar who claims no proof for bofrosBy: suchithra | 15-Oct-2009 Reply | Forward People like Venu who claim to be neutral are indeed hyprocrates
    WHO IS A HYPOCRITE - YOU OR IBy: Venu | 15-Oct-2009 Reply | Forward I do not speak for Sundar. But since you called me a hypocrite, I need to respond. As I said, hypocrites are those who cannot stand up to the truth. I know I am neutral and have no party or religious affiliation unlike you and your favourite past time only seems to be bashing the Nehru family and Congress. Apart from that, you are okay with the rest. Can there be a bigger hypocrite than you ?
    accept hypocracyBy: suchithra | 15-Oct-2009 Reply | Forward Why you didnt argue with Sundar?You said you dont favour any party
    YOU ARE LEAST QUALIFIED TO CALL ME ONEBy: Venu | 15-Oct-2009 Reply | Forward See, I could not respond to every Tom, Dick and Harry for whatever gibrilish they write. Since, you intercepted me in a debate, I thought of engaging you in a meaningful debate. But, for some strange reason you lost your temper midway during the debate. Moreover, I wanted to change your perception of always thinking about one dynasty and a Party and their supposed wrong doings. That I thought was top level hypocrisy on your part and exhibited narrow thinking without looking into the real problem.
    TO SUCHITHRA By: Venu | 15-Oct-2009 Reply | Forward Will the RSS or BJP be bold enough to say that they are against reservation policy as a whole whether it is on the basis of caste or religion ?? Not saying so and targeting religious based reservation only is an epitome of double standards and height of hypocrisy. The States controlled by BJP have only been extending reservations even if goes above the prescribed reservation quota by the Court. Therefore, it is the BJP as a party which practises double standards and not me. If you dare, you can counter me on this.
    TO SUCHITHRA - WHO IS CONFUSED, YOU OR IBy: Venu | 15-Oct-2009 Reply | Forward First cool down yourself and never lose your temper in a debate. If you do so, it means you are on a weak pitch. I never confused others like you do. You stated that Modi's Gujarat does not have reservation and everybody is treated equally for which I said that it is not so and reservation policy is very much applicable in Gujarat like in any other State in this Country. If it is not so, you can give me proper evidence to rebutt me. Moreover, the double standards of the BJP is only borne out by its stand on reservations. If it is against reservations, then it must stand up and say that it is totally against the reservation policy as a whole whether it is on the basis of caste or religion. It cannot be specific and target just a religious based reservation which is only rank double standards. For your information, our Constitution does not debar reservations based on religion.
    Poor understanding abilityBy: suchithar | 15-Oct-2009 Reply | Forward I doubt your understanding ability.I never said no reservation in Guj.I gave example of Bhuj to say all are treated equally.I talked about reservation when you mentioned muslims are good enough every where.If they are good why is your govt makes reservation to minoroties as main agenda in election?
    KNOW THE TRUTHBy: Venu | 15-Oct-2009 Reply | Forward It is not that only the Congress makes an agenda in election for reservations to different sections of people. Every party does that and remember Mandal commission was revived only by the Janata Party in 1977 and implemented by VP Singh supported by the BJP from outside in 1989.
    YOU ARE ONLY TWISTING AND NOT IBy: Venu | 15-Oct-2009 Reply | Forward See your own statement which reads as "So why reservations, if they are good. Rather than reservation, work genuinely for all, that is what Modi did". What does that mean to you ?? And you are here calling me a hypocrite when the fact that in Gujarat there are reservations for various castes like in any other State. That is the reason I countered it. Now you have jumped to Bhuj and stated that you have said in that context which does not appear so since you responded to my statement about the status of Muslims. You are now trying to twist the issue out of context.
    Post a Comment
    Name:
    Email:
    Title:
    Maximum characters allowed     
    Comment:
    TERMS OF USE:
    The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).
    I agree to the terms of use.