Karan Thapar: Hello and welcome to Devil's Advocate. My guest today is not just the Defence Minister, he is also the Chairman of the Group of Ministers that looked into the modernisation of Delhi and Mumbai airports. And he is the leader of the Government in the Lok Sabha, which means after the PM, no minister faces as much challenges as he does.
Here to talk about some of them is the man himself - Pranab Mukherjee.
Mr Mukherjee, let's start with the manner in which the government handled the modernisation of Delhi and Mumbai airports.
Although as many as five committees evaluated the bids perhaps as many as 15 times. You ended up with Reliance taking you to court, Sterlite threatening to do the same and several other angry and upset. Couldn't the matter have been handled more efficiently.
Pranab Mukherjee: What do you mean by handling more efficiently, I don't know. But the fact of the matter is that it took a reasonably long time. Because there were 15/16 times when the GoM met. Even before that some of the preliminary work was done by the earlier government. We endorsed it. The GoM considered the various aspects. They went by the technical consultants appointed by the ministry, of course with the approval of the Group of Ministers. Thereafter, we appointed two other committees - one inter-governmental and the Sreedharan Committee.
Thereafter when the report came, finally we appointed another Cabinet Committee of Secretaries, which looked into it. And after looking into all aspects, we came to the conclusions, which are known.
Karan Thapar: Except for the fact that comments made by the people involved are damning. Gajender Haldia said that it was untenable. Sreedharan said it was vitiated. And Businessworld magazine said that Sreedharan used the word vitiated 24 times in a 12-page report.
Pranab Mukherjee: I don't know what they mean when they say vitiated. There was no question of vitiating. We wanted to carry everybody with us. And we examined it from all angles.
Karan Thapar: Except for the fact that you ended up first with just two bids for two airports and then it was reduced to one. At the end of the day, this clearly shows that you weren't able to attract sufficient good quality bids or your evaluation procedures were faulty.
Pranab Mukherjee: No. We wanted to have good quality bids. But after all, the bids which were available, we had to decide on this.
Karan Thapar: So, you are saying that there simply weren't enough bids. You had just two, then you dropped the bar to bring others in, which means you had them brought into it.
Pranab Mukherjee: There comes the question. We wanted to re-evaluate the market. 80 per cent was the qualifying mark from the technical and developmental point of view.
Karan Thapar: And there you changed the goalpost and lowered it to 50.
Pranab Mukherjee: No. That we did because otherwise there would have been only one person left. And even the airports are two.
PAGE_BREAK
Karan Thapar: Doesn't that suggest that the first goalpost was the wrong one? Perhaps, you should have gone with a lower mark.
Pranab Mukherjee: No, it's not the question there. Because on what we had decided, at least one qualified. And he should be chosen and he should be given the option.
Karan Thapar: And the second person has gone to court.
Pranab Mukherjee: In any case, this type of bids may go to court. After all, going to court is one's fundamental right. If he is not satisfied, he will go. And they want justice from the court.
Karan Thapar: No doubt. But let me remind you what Dr Manmohan Singh as the Leader of the Opposition said in the Rajya Sabha on the 24th of August, 2001, when the BJP government's privatisation policy was under consideration. He said and I quote: "When you have only one or two bidders, problems are bound to arise," How come you lost sight of the PM's wisdom?
Pranab Mukherjee: There were not one or two bidders.
Karan Thapar: You ended up with only two and than just one.
Pranab Mukherjee: No, no. That is about the qualifying marks in respect of technical evaluation. But there were other aspects of the financial bids. That's why when we reduced the numbers. There were four bidders for each airport. It was not one or two. We chose from among four.
Karan Thapar: But don't you see, you had to change your own goalpost to bring more bids into play. Because, your own qualifications showed only two bids.
Pranab Mukherjee: Otherwise what would have happened? There was an urgency for modernisation and there is nobody who doubts about this urgency of the matter. The matter is going on from 2002 onwards.
Karan Thapar: Are you saying that you had to compromise because of that?
Pranab Mukherjee: No. I did not compromise. What I compromised was that of the available bidders who are the best, and we chose them taking into consideration the technical competence and also the financial bids where the government's revenue is more.
Karan Thapar: Then how do you explain the fact that Deepankar Mukherjee, a CPI-M MP and your ally, says this smacks of a scam.
Pranab Mukherjee: Look, they have a totally different perception. They didn't want that there should be private involvement. And they wanted that Airport Authority of India should be given this task.
Karan Thapar: No, even in terms of the bidding and contracting, I am now quoting from the CPI-M politburo statement issued on February 1. This is what it says: "The manner in which the bidding and contracting out to private consortia has been conducted has raised serious doubts about the legality of the process." The CPI-M politburo officially issued this statement.
Pranab Mukherjee: Whether it has raised questions over the legality or not, perhaps the best judge is the court. The court will judge it.
PAGE_BREAK
Karan Thapar:That's the problem. Reliance has taken you to court. If the Delhi High Court, when it sits on this matter on the February 13, the day after this interview goes on air, decides that the matter should be stayed, will you be embarrassed?
Pranab Mukherjee: It's not a question of embarrassment. On so many matters, the court gives direction and as per the constitutional provision, court directions are to be compiled with.
Karan Thapar: Except that if the court finds that your procedure was opaque and not transparent - which you have been accused of - that it's questionable - which you have been accused of - that it's unfair, you won't be embarrassed?
Pranab Mukherjee: I am sorry, you are pre-judging all these things, what the court is going to say. Let's wait for the judgment of this court.
Karan Thapar: Are you confident you can sail through the court without serious questions being asked?
Pranab Mukherjee: It's not a question of sailing through the court or not sailing through the court. Whatever the court will require, all the information will be provided to it and it is for them to come to the judgment after analyzing the facts of the case.
Karan Thapar: No doubt. But are you confident that you can emerge through the court case without being scathed as a government?
Pranab Mukherjee: So far as we are concerned, we are confident whatever we did, we did it to the best of our knowledge.
Karan Thapar: Did you do it correctly?
Pranab Mukherjee: We did it correctly.
Karan Thapar: You could not have improved at all?
Pranab Mukherjee:I told you, we did it correctly. Don't convert the discussion into a quiz. It's not a court that you are asking me, cross-examining me and asking me to answer in monosyllables. Let's not degenerate it into a quiz competition.
>b>Karan Thapar: Except that Minister, this will not be the first time the court ends up embarrassing the government. When the Supreme Court last month released its judgment for which it struck down the Bihar dissolution, it said and I quote: "The Council of Ministers should have verified the facts in the Governor's report before hurriedly accepting it as gospel truth. What explanation do you have for acting on the Governor's report without verifying it.
Pranab Mukherjee: I am afraid, Mr Karan. It's not only we, the Union Council of Ministers, which did this while imposing President's Rule under Article 356 of the Constitution. This has happened more than 100 times since 1950. Most of these Council of Ministers depended on the report of the Governor.
Karan Thapar: Are you suggesting that the Council of Ministers never verified Governor's report in the past?
Pranab Mukherjee: No question of verification of the Governor's report. Please read the Constitution. Two phrases are used there. One phrase is that "either on the receipt of the report from the Governor" or otherwise if the Union Council of Ministers come to the conclusion that the report from the Governor may not be possible and they are having information otherwise.
So, in the past we did never verify the authenticity of the Governor's report. Sometimes it has happened without Governor's report. Council of ministers, in this case Cabinet, imposed President's Rule on the basis of the words used in the Constitution - 'or otherwise'.
PAGE_BREAK
Karan Thapar: Are you suggesting that the Supreme Court in criticising the Council of Ministers for not verifying the Governor's report is mistaken in its criticism?
Pranab Mukherjee: Who am I to criticise the judgment of the Supreme Court?
Karan Thapar: That's what it sounds like.
Pranab Mukherjee: No, not at all.
Karan Thapar: What the SC is suggesting is very simple. They are saying that the Union Council of Ministers is not a forwarding agency for passing on the Governor's report with its stamp to the President. They are saying that you should have exercised your mind and your judgment. Since you failed to do so, they are suggesting, therefore, you are either quality of negligence or dereliction of duty.
Pranab Mukherjee: Neither of these. First of all, let me be very clear what is the constitutional scheme. The Supreme Court is there to interpret the action, to interpret the law, to interpret the constitution. The Supreme Court has suggested in the observation made in the judgment, which they have given, that the report of the Governor is not just on the basis of which the Council of Ministers came to the decision. There is no indictment for the Union Government. And it is not possible for anybody to criticise the judgment of the court. That you can do only when you are going for a revision of that. And as a member of the Government, I will not like to make any comment on the judgment of the Supreme Court.
Karan Thapar: I am not asking you to comment on the judgment on the Supreme Court. I am asking you to actually comment on the behaviour of the Council of Ministers. Let me quote what Fali Nariman, perhaps India's best and foremost constitutional expert says. He says the Council of Ministers definitely had the moral responsibility to have vetted the report of the Governor and ought not to have been so precipitated in the decision and in the communication of the decision overnight to Moscow. And then he adds, this precipitated action lies at the door of both the Council of Ministers with the PM at its head. They can't get away with that.
Pranab Mukherjee: No, that is the opinion of Fali Nariman. I not necessarily agree with it.
Karan Thapar: Let me quote the facts to you. The Cabinet met close to midnight and 2 am in the morning you faxed the proclamation.
Pranab Mukherjee: You need not narrate the facts to me. Because I am a part of it. I know when did the Cabinet meet. I know under what circumstances did the Cabinet meet. I know when the communication was made to the President. Therefore, let's not go into that aspect.
Karan Thapar: But the Supreme Court is saying that the Government, the ministers, the Prime Ministers, the head of the government, should have exercised their minds in judgment. They did not. They are suggesting that you were negligent or you are guilty of dereliction. You are not concerned?
Pranab Mukherjee: The Supreme Court did not make that type of conclusion from the observations, which you are making.
Karan Thapar: It's inherent in the Supreme Court judgment.
Pranab Mukherjee: No, it's your conclusions of the SC judgment.
Karan Thapar: It's inherent in it.
Pranab Mukherjee: No.
Karan Thapar: It is.
Pranab Mukherjee: The SC judgment you are interpreting in a particular way you like. And it is not necessary for me to agree with these conclusions.
PAGE_BREAK
Karan Thapar: When a decision of the Cabinet is struck down as unconstitutional, illegal and arbitrary, all of which are terms that the SC used. Does the council of ministers feel no responsibility?
Pranab Mukherjee: First of all, you have to know how the Government functions. You have to know this.
Karan Thapar: That excuses this.
Pranab Mukherjee: There is no question of that. Perhaps, you are determined to come to your own conclusion, and to prove that is the only conclusion one could arrive at.
What happened? The SC said that this presidential proclamation of imposing President's Rule is malafide. On the basis of which it was done - the Governor's report - was not correct. The Governor tendered his resignation. There was no indictment of the functioning of the Union Government on this particular aspect.
Karan Thapar: So, the Government has a clear conscience?
Pranab Mukherjee: There was only one part of a lengthy judgment, a phrase you are using to suit your own conclusion. I don't agree to that.
Karan Thapar: So, there is no need for anyone in the Government to accept responsibility?
Pranab Mukherjee: If Union Government's responsibility was there, the Government would have taken the responsibility.
Karan Thapar: The Prime Minister talks about setting the highest standard in public life. He talks about idealism, ethics and morality. Where are all these things gone now?
Pranab Mukherjee: Look, why are all these things you are bringing in unnecessarily. Only to score a point when there is no point. All these things, if you go on repeating certain words which have no relevance, surely I am not going to reply to that. There is nothing to do with all these things which you are talking of. Please understand the whole thing. You have not understood the whole thing at all.
Karan Thapar: I have.
Pranab Mukherjee: No, I am sorry to say.
Karan Thapar: You said, the buck stops with the Governor. I am saying it doesn't.
Pranab Mukherjee: No.
Karan Thapar: You are saying it doesn't.
Pranab Mukherjee: Neither has the Supreme Court said that the buck stops there. Neither has the Supreme Court used the word dereliction of duty. Neither the SC used the word negligence.
Karan Thapar: Minister, you are getting so technical. Intelligent people read meaning into what the SC is saying.
Pranab Mukherjee:No, don't try to be over smart, Mr Karan. You are trying to be over smart, Which I am not allowing you to be. You are putting your words by using the phrase used in the judgment that the Union Government should have verified the authenticity of the Governor's report.
Karan Thapar: People are listening to you.
Pranab Mukherjee: People are listening to me. And people are appreciating my answer. They are not appreciating your distorted interpretation of the judgment of the Supreme Court. SC observed, as per your own statement, that the Union Government should have verified the authenticity of the report of the Governor.
PAGE_BREAK
Karan Thapar: And you didn't. And I am saying that amounts to negligence and you are denying it.
Pranab Mukherjee: Whatever I have stated, don't ask me to repeat it and I told you that you don't expect me that you are a judge or a prosecutor and I am in the court. I am not going to be led by you to answer in the mode you want me to answer.
Karan Thapar: Not at all.
Pranab Mukherjee: Let me answer the question which you have put. Question is here simple - whether the Government should have verified the authenticity of the report which it received from the Governor.
My point is that in umpteen number of case in the past since the days of the introduction of the new Constitution, the Union Government has never done that. It is an simple as that.
Karan Thapar: Let us leave it to the people of India to decide whether that's a convincing and adequate answer. They will have noticed that you have certainly lost your cool in giving it.
Mr Mukherjee, let's start with issues that you face as Defence Minister of India. Late last year, three senior Naval officers were peremptorily dismissed from service on grounds that they had leaked official secrets without going through a court-martial and without being given a chance to defend themselves in the court of inquiry. As a result, one of them has taken the Government to court and the second has alleged that he was tortured into making fake confessions. Should not this matter have been handled better?
Pranab Mukherjee: First of all, it is not correct to say that they were not given any chance to defend themselves in the court of inquiry.
Karan Thapar: They say so themselves.
Pranab Mukherjee: If they have said, they will have to prove it. Court of inquiry gave them the chance and as per the decision of the court of inquiry, the naval authorities decided to dismiss them from service. And that's the judgment they have been given.
Karan Thapar: The Outlook magazine, various reports on TV channels and the three officers themselves have reportedly said and no one from the Naval headquarters has denied the fact that they were denied a right to defend themselves. They have repeatedly said that and no one contradicted.
Pranab Mukherjee: I don't know what had been reported or not. But the court of inquiry, they gave the chance to the persons concerned.
Karan Thapar: So, you are saying to me categorically as the Defence Minister that you know that they were given a chance to defend themselves.
Pranab Mukherjee: Look, this is a matter which is disposed off at the service level. You will have to understand the functions of the Government.
Karan Thapar: So certainly, you are backing off on this point.
Pranab Mukherjee: No, I am not backing off. Neither I am backing, nor I am moving forward. If you don't know the functioning, I can't help it.
Karan Thapar: This is why I bring it up. The Navy Act guarantees every officer faced by a board of inquiry the right to defend themselves. But when this board examined witnesses, this right was denied to these gentlemen.
Pranab Mukherjee: Question is, no right was denied to any gentlemen. The court of inquiry gave them the chance and after applying their mind, they came to the decision. And the decision is correct.
PAGE_BREAK
Karan Thapar: If they were guilty of leaking official secrets, which is perhaps tantamount to treason, why were they not court-martialled? Why were they simply let off with the simple decision.
Pranab Mukherjee: The problem with you is you come to your own conclusion. It has also been reported in newsmagazines and newspaper reports which you are talking of that those were the commercial intelligence and it is not treason.
Karan Thapar: It is leakage of official secrets. It is a serious offence in the eyes of the services.
Pranab Mukherjee: Leakage of official secrets doesn't mean treason, Mr Karan. Nowadays, we have passed the Right to Information Act. Large number of official information, which were considered as secret information, will be declassified and will be given to you and it has nothing to do with treason. No, it's no treason.
Karan Thapar: You are saying to me that the lapses are guilty sufficient to merit dismissal but not a court-martial.
Pranab Mukherjee: Exactly.
Karan Thapar: In other words, the jail term that would have followed if they were guilty of a court-martial is the one that is unjustified in their case.
Pranab Mukherjee: No, not that, What I understand is that the punishment which has been meted out to them is adequate for the type of criminality involved in it.
Karan Thapar: What about the people to whom they allegedly supposed to have leak the information? Why has no action been taken against them?
Pranab Mukherjee: Those who were directly involved, action has been taken against them.
Karan Thapar: No, there are three gentlemen, it's alleged in the papers, who received the official information, which is secret, Why has no action been taken against them.
Pranab Mukherjee: Why does action have to be taken against them. This is commercial information.
Karan Thapar: It was made available illegally.
Pranab Mukherjee: People want to have commercial information. They deployed their services. Action would be taken against them. We will see to it that no order is given to them.
Karan Thapar: But the press says the reason why no action has been taken against the recipients of the information because one of them, a certain Mr Ravi Shankaran, is the nephew of the Navy Chief.
Pranab Mukherjee: No question of that.
Karan Thapar: There is no attempt to protect him?
Pranab Mukherjee: There is no question of protecting anybody. Because I must be clear and I must tell you that the Navy Chief immediately tendered his resignation to me.
Karan Thapar: On what ground?
Pranab Mukherjee: That there maybe some doubt. One of the persons concerned appears to be a relative of 'my wife'.
Karan Thapar: Not appears to be, he is. His wife's nephew. Wife's sister's son.
Pranab Mukherjee: Yes, so what? But he has nothing to do with it. The question is Mr Karan you are making allegations against one gentleman. If you don't allow me to defend him, then there is no need of having this talk.
PAGE_BREAK
Karan Thapar: I am not making any allegation. I am raising an issue that have been in the Press.
Pranab Mukherjee: The very first thing is that the Naval Chief wanted to tender his resignation. I went through the case. I went through the whole face-sheets and I came to the conclusion that his integrity is beyond questions. Therefore, there is no question of accepting his resignation and there is no question of protecting him. He didn't seek any protection.
Karan Thapar: Except for the fact that when people are innocent, they don't resign. They fight to protect their honour.
Pranab Mukherjee: That is your calculation.
Karan Thapar: That is the common man's conclusion.
Pranab Mukherjee: I don't agree with that. That is your conclusion.
Karan Thapar: Then let me repeat my question.
Pranab Mukherjee: I don't agree with this part of the question. Please go to some other question.
Karan Thapar: Clarify for me then on what ground did the Naval Chief offer his resignation?
Pranab Mukherjee: I have clarified, whatever was necessary to be done have been done. And there is no question to doubt that there is any malafide intention on anybody. The court of inquiry that looked into the matter came to the conclusion and gave the right type of punishment.
Karan Thapar: Except for the fact that in the Press and television, and certainly in defence circles a disquiet has been created. Do you not feel the need as a Defence Minister for the reputation of the Navy to set things straight?
Pranab Mukherjee: I am quite confident that the reputation of the Navy is intact. It is safe. And there is no question that the reputation of the Navy would not be protected.
Karan Thapar: Let us turn to the second issue that perhaps for many is almost as controversial that you have to tackle as Defence Minister. The confusion over the state of cross-border infiltration from Pakistan into Jammu and Kashmir. Different members of the Government say different things on different day. For the record, let me ask you what is the state of cross-border terrorism today as we speak?
Pranab Mukherjee: What is the confusion, let me understand first.
Karan Thapar: Well, I tell you. On the December 10, Army Chief Gen JJ Singh said there has not been any increase in infiltration from across the border. On January 19, he says unfortunately infiltration continues unabated. On the January 20, he says it has been contained to a great extent. Every day, it's the impression created that something new and different has been said.
Pranab Mukherjee: I am afraid, Mr Karan, that you are just in the habit of coming to wrong conclusions. Infiltrators do not notify to you or to me that 'look I am going to infiltrate on that date'.
Karan Thapar: So, the levels go up within 24 hours.
Pranab Mukherjee: See, when infiltration takes place and when they are detected, we say that infiltration has taken place. Up to January 19, there was no infiltration because every day we monitor these things.
PAGE_BREAK
Karan Thapar: And on January 20, it went up?
Pranab Mukherjee: Yes, when six people came in, it went up. So, what's the confusion?
Karan Thapar: All right. Let me give you another example of this confusion. This time perhaps even worse. A confusion this time not within the Army headquarters. This time between you and the Home Minister. The Home Minister on May 11 said in the Lok Sabha that infiltration had come down by 61 per cent, a precise figure he gave. In July, you said and I am quoting you: "The number of cases of infiltration is increasing every month. It went up in May." You said it went up further in June and it went up in July.
Pranab Mukherjee: That's the problem with you. Because I told you that it came down from January to April. May onwards it has started increasing and, in the same reply I said, I am apprehending it would increase when the passes will be totally clear. It is the pattern.
And what Mr Home Minister said? He gave an average of the whole period making a comparative study with the previous year.
Karan Thapar: Then let me quote what his deputy said in December. For the last eight months, it has come down every single month which means it could not have gone up in May, or June or July as you said. Suddenly, Sriprakash Jaiswal is contradicting you. You seem to be contradicting Shivraj Patil. The Army Chief seems to be contradicting himself. The country seems to read different things in the paper every single day.
Pranab Mukherjee: Because the problem with you people is you expect that the infiltrators should give notice and a journalist like Mr Karan will ask me the questions on infiltration, number of infiltrators. So I shall have to be ready for that to give him the correct figure. Infiltration is an act which takes place stealthily. And all infiltration facts are estimates. Nobody can precisely say that this number of infiltration is taking place because they don't stand in a queue for our people to count. So that when Mr Karan Thapar is going to question the Defence Minister, I shall have to give him the exact figure.
Karan Thapar: Except for the fact that this is the core concern and ministers say different things on different day. And the Army Chief contradicts himself.
Pranab Mukherjee: No, not at all. Not at all.
Karan Thapar: So you think that this is a perfectly acceptable state of affairs?
Pranab Mukherjee: Of course.
Karan Thapar: Defence Minister, on that note, a pleasure talking to you on Devil's Advocate.
Comments
0 comment