New Delhi: Congress on Wednesday slammed the government over the AgustaWestland row, saying it was trying to "vilify the head of a political party" on the basis of mere "insinuation and innuendo" and was attempting to cover up for "disillusionment" with its misgovernance.
Putting up a spirited defence in the Rajya Sabha as the House took up a short duration discussion on the raging controversy, Congress member Abhishek Manu Singhvi responded point-by-point to allegations of wrongdoings levelled by the ruling dispensation against the previous UPA government.
Earlier, Bhupendra Yadav of BJP, who initiated the debate, pointed fingers at the UPA government over its role in the deal to purchase 12 VVIP helicopters.
Singhvi, while defending the UPA dispensation, attributed "innuendos" against its leaders Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi or Ahmed Patel to the "visceral hatred" of BJP.
"The interest appears to be to keep the pot boiling, not to reach a conclusion and keep finger pointing," he said alleging that the BJP was not interested in finding the real culprits.
Slamming the ruling dispensation for its "hubris" and "arrogance of power," Singhvi said the Congress is not going to be intimidated by such tactics.
Ridiculing BJP's attempt to link certain initials like "CP, VP and AP" to the deal, Singhvi cited the Hawala case in which an initial 'LKA' had featured and the High Court had said the presence of initials constituted no evidence.
It was "hypocrisy" of the ruling party in applying "double standards" as leader of the House Arun Jaitley had in the Hawala case argued initials have no evidentiary value, Singhvi said.
He said that 'AP' could stand for many people including the present Chief Minister of Gujarat.
The Congress leader said not a single allegation that was being touted was part of CBI or ED findings.
"We are relying on the interpretations and misrepresentations of an Italian court," he said adding the official translation of the judgement is still not available.
He said the name of Congress President Sonia Gandhi merely figures in one letter where it is said that she would be among the VVIPs who would fly in the helicopter.
He added that even Guido Haschke, one of the alleged middlemen, had also said that he does not know what the initial 'AP' stands for.
"I hope we collect all APs.
As former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and former Defence Minister A K Antony watched, Singhvi said while his party is not claiming "everything is hunky dory" with regard to the deal, he alleged that Modi government was trying to "foist corruption charges against those not involved."
"We believe that something wrong happened, my dispute is not that," the Congress leader said asking the government whether it was not damaging investigation and letting culprits escape, by targetting its rivals.
He said that luckily it is understood that the word 'Family', which has come up in the case, pertains to the "Tyagi family", otherwise for some people it would have meant "only one family", an apparent reference to the Gandhis.
He stressed that Antony as Defence Minister had cancelled the deal, ordered a CBI probe. The UPA government, he said had paid Rs 1586 crore but recovered Rs 2062 cr from AgustaWestland besides 3 helicopters worth Rs 900 crore were impounded.
Singhvi raised questions as to why the NDA government had allowed AgustaWestland's parent companies, including Finmeccanica, to continue to do business.
He also claimed that one such entity had been given FIPB approval and it had even participated in Aero displays at Yellahanka Air Force Station.
He debunked the claims that specifications in the AgustaWestland deal were modified in violation of established norms.
Earlier, initiating the high voltage debate, Yadav, who had given notice for a short duration discussion, said it was a "serious" matter that several decades after independence, transparency in defence deals has not been ushered in.
Yadav said that norms were repeatedly modified, even after over-ruling reservations expressed by Antony and Manmohan Singh. He wanted the real culprits to be punished.
He said a recommendation had been made to change the MI-8 helicopters for VVIP travel in 1999 when NDA was in power and it was emphasised that the procurement should not be done through a single vendor system.
Quoting extensively from a CAG report on the matter, he claimed that the single-vendor aspect was ignored, tests were allowed to be conducted abroad and even the specifications of altitude were reduced to 4500 feet from the earlier benchmark of 6000 feet.
Singhvi, however, mentioned that it was Brajesh Mishra, the Principal Secretary to then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, who had mentioned that a specification of 6000 feet should be reduced as it was leading to a single vendor situation.
Yadav also claimed that several favours were done by a "generous" UPA, including allowing trials of the helicopters to be held abroad.
The BJP member also claimed that the helicopters were purchased at a cost 6 times higher that the estimated cost and the number of the helicopters to be purchase was increased from 9 to 12.
Claiming that defence procurement procedures were not followed, he said even after paying a higher price, the warranty was reduced.
"One of the countries has taken action against the people who had paid bribes, we should take action against the people who took them, no matter which political party they belong to," Yadav said.
Singhvi, however, rejected these assertions and said that holding trials of helicopters is not a "sin" and it is allowed under the defence procurement policies.
He said the government appeared to be pressing these allegations in view of its recent electoral losses in some of the states. He also referred to a TV interview of an Italian judge in which he says that there is no evidence against Sonia Gandhi.
Before the debate began, Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar requested that he be allowed to place the facts chronologically before the House, but it was rejected by Deputy Chairman P J Kurien after opposition members vociferously protested saying such a move is against tradition.
