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

Pathak: Father, son abused position, Cong in the clear

  • Print
  • Mail This Article
  • Comments
  • Add to favorites
  • Handing the Congress party a clean chit in the Iraqi oil-for-food scandal, the Justice R S Pathak inquiry panel today indicted former External Affairs Minister K Natwar Singh and his MLA son Jagat for “misusing” their position to help persons close to them bag Iraqi oil contracts which were sold in the international market for commissions.

    In his report, submitted to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh this evening, Pathak said no money was traced to the father-son duo but their kin Aditya Khanna and Jagat’s friend, Andaleeb Sehgal, received commissions from foreign companies in exchange for oil coupons given by the Saddam Hussein regime in 2001.

    Justice Pathak was appointed the inquiry authority in November last year to probe into allegations that Singh and the Congress party were non-contractual beneficiaries of kickbacks resulting from sale of oil coupons gifted by the Iraqi government. The allegations were contained in the report of the Volcker Committee to the UN.

    Ads by Google

    The Pathak report, which went through reports of the Enforcement Directorate and the immigration department on the travels of Singhs, Andaleeb and Khanna, concluded:

    Natwar Singh and Jagat “misused” their position

    Andaleeb and Khanna received money in two transactions in two banks, one based in the UK

    Natwar wrote three letters to the Iraqi “oil man” introducing Andaleeb

    Andaleeb and Khanna travelled to UK and places in the Middle East

    No money transaction showed up in the Congress bank account

    Reacting to the findings of the report, the BJP questioned the probe panel’s decision to exonerate Congress, wondering as to how the ruling party could be given a clean chit in a matter which indicted one of its leaders. BJP spokesman Ravi Shankar Prasad asked, “On what basis was a carte-blanche given that Congress had no role to play?”

    The CPM and CPI, which support the UPA coalition, declined immediate comment, saying they would do so after “studying the report”.

    The report, which dwelt less on the Congress, has given extensive “evidence” on the Singhs, Andaleeb and Khanna. Senior counel T R Andhiyarijuna and Raju Ramachandran who acted as the “commission’s counsel” said: “We led with the evidence from various sources obtained by the commission”.

    Sources said: “the telephone conversation transcript between Andaleeb and Khanna were also submitted as evidence”. Andaleeb and Khanna, sources said, were in regular touch with “two persons” in the Middle East, one an Indian and the other from “that region”. The “money link” could be traced only to “these two persons” as of now, they pointed out.

    What Volcker said

    Volcker named Natwar and Congress as “non-contractual beneficiaries’’ of Iraqi oil sales in 2001

    According to Volcker, Natwar was in category of individuals who either sold or gave their rights to buy oil from Saddam’s Iraq to oil companies. In his case, it was allegedly to Switzerland-based Masefield AG

    Natwar, Volcker said, had rights for four million barrels of oil, of which 1.9 million barrels were lifted by Masefield. The Congress also allegedly had rights for four million barrels. Only one million barrels were lifted in one go, again by Masefield AG, said Volcker

    Comments
    Post comment

    Be the first to comment.

    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.