Six of 10 charges against ousted CBI chief Alok Verma were unsubstantiated and 4 needed further investigation, Congress leader Mallikarjun Kharge had argued.
PM Modi started in right earnest, attacking the ‘revdi’ politics. That could have been his legacy. However, he opted for survival and started outmatching his Opposition.
Recommendations appear in Niti Aayog’s Tax Policy Working Paper Series–II. It says there is a need to shift away from fear-based enforcement to trust-based governance.
In service with the British military since 2019, it is also known as the Martlet missile. Ukrainians have also deployed these missiles against Russian troops.
Education, reservations, govt jobs are meant to bring equality and dignity. That we are a long way from that is evident in the shoe thrown at the CJI and the suicide of Haryana IPS officer. The film Homebound has a lesson too.
Mr Jaitley is in the position he is in, simply because his party gave a political color to India as a country – leave alone CBI appointments. Most likely his and many other lawyers careers and money have been made on dissent be it frivolous – obfuscative – political – monetary – collusion delay . Quite likely Mr Jaitley understands all this . This is nothing but a political exercise which involves political patronage and political benefits. The common man should not even bother trying to make sense of it.
1. I agree with Arun Jaitley. A few days ago, we were told that the three member panel comprising (a) PM Narendra Modi, (b) Chief Justice of India, and (c) leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha (Mallikarjun Kharge) has selected Rishi Kumar Shukla as Director of CBI. It was a majority and not unanimous decision of the panel, since Khargeji, as expected, dissented. 2. Hopefully, with this appointment, avoidable controversy regarding appointment to a very sensitive and highly politicized post would come to an end. 3. It is interesting to note that Khargeji thinks that R K Shukla has not worked in anti-corruption agency and hence he (Shukla) does not possess adequate experience of investigation of anti-corruption cases. 3. Citizen-voters like me wish that the Congress leader Mallikarjun Kharge is as serious about curbing corruption as he is about appointment of right person (as perceived by him) as CBI Director. In this context my query is this: is the Congress party against curbing political corruption? I am reminded of fact that just a few months ago Ghulam Nabi Azad, Congress leader in the Rajya Sabha, had opposed setting-up of Fast Track Courts, when a bill for setting-up of these Fast Track Courts, was being discussed in the Rajya Sabha. As we all know these Courts, which are being set-up as suggested by the Supreme Court, are expected to expedite trials of corruption & other cases filed against lawmakers. But then who is wishes to protect the corrupt? This is my simple question to Khargeji!
The hallucinations have a twisted logic which implies that the Chief Justice of India colluded with Modi to avert possibility of launching investigations in Rafale matter. The answers to his two questions are simple : (1) Modi never chose Ambani. As of now, there is just a JV between Dassault and a ADAG company. Whether it will get any share in the total offset amount of Rs30000 crore is not officially known, though the CEO of Dassault has confirmed in an interview that it will be just around 3% of the total offset amount. The production in the JV will be not of Rafale jets but of component of Falcon planes. (2) He reduced figure from 126 to 36 as Dassault refused to guarantee the quality of production proposed to be made at HAL. Even if Modi gets defeated in 2019, which not an unlikely scenario, the Rafale investigations will not achieve anything tangible. To link this issue with appointment of CBI chief is madness, to put it mildly. However, I also have a disagreement with Mr. Jaitley. The method of selecting CBI chief is inappropriate. Whichever party may rule, the leader of opposition , on some pretex or the other, is bound to dissent and the casting vote will always be with the CJI. Just remove the two politicians form the committee and induct professionals of proven merit and integrity.
It is double madness to say Dassault vetoes how many planes India should have for its defence, HAL or no HAL. By that time EUROFIGHTER too had flown into contention and was said to be 20% cheaper.
President Hollande was the man who discussed the stuff with Mr Modi, and he said that they were given no choice other than Anil Ambani; Dassault itself spoke approvingly of HAL barely a few weeks before AA dropped down out of the blue; foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar mentioned HAL barely a few weeks before AA arrival; AA company’s balance sheet mentions something about 30 or 36000 crores; offset partners with reference to Rafale were mentioned in the context of RAFALE manufacturing in India and not Falcon; if AA was not to be given the plum job of manufacturing Rafale, then who was to do it? L&T? TATA? MAHINDRAS? Who are the other 29 names in the list of 30 for RAFALE OFFSET PARTNERS? Can the government release the complete list of 30? Is any of them capable of taking on this herculean task?
Why was this businessman with dubious business credentials flying around WITH THE PRIME MINISTER OF INDIA on top confidential defense related visits when EVEN THE DEFENCE MINISTER of the country was not on board. Some reports say he was inaugurating a new fish market in Goa when he heard the news!!!! And his coy response was, “no I was not a part of the deal but I endorse Modi ji’s decision”. The legal question is, do you endorse official decisions on legal soundness or feudal friendship?
It is surprising how calmly Mr Jaitley accuses somebody else for giving “political color” to something which should be above politics. I fully agree with him; but doesn’t he know that Mr Rishi Shukla had already been “politically tainted”, so using “political color” in matters concerning him can only be expected? Mr Shukla was the DGP of Madhya Pradesh during the BJP rule there, but during the recently conducted state elections he was “on leave”, or was perhaps asked to go on leave. Why? I have offered the following comment to another of THE PRINT’s articles on the same subject of CBI director’s selection, so I don’t know if they will allow me to repeat it here. But I’m copying it below all the same, just in case they do:
Today’s THE FREE PRESS JOURNAL on its page 5 (flowing on from page 1) gives interesting data presented by Mr Kharge about 5 contenders for the CBI chief’s post.
Of all the five, Rajiv Rai Bhatnagar has 170 months of experience in investigation, 25 months in anti-corruption. If for brevity I write it as 170/25, then other contenders figures are:
Sudeep Lakhtakia: 155/14
A.P. Maheshwari: 147/14
Rishi Kumar Shukla: 117/0.
Today’s THE INDIAN EXPRESS mentions that the fifth contender, S. Javed Ahmad has a total experience of 303 months (his anti-corruption experience is not mentioned separately, but should be substantial looking at his overall figure which is a good 130 months more than the next senior most contender, R.R. Bhatnagar).
It is clear from the above that Rishi Shukla has minimum overall experience, and ZERO in anti-corruption. (A Supreme Court verdict had stated that a CBI director should have high experience in anti-corruption.) His appointment is “political” is clear from the fact that he was removed from the post of DGP of Madhya Pradesh within days of the Congress forming a government there. So, perhaps he was seen as a “BJP man”, a fact that is confirmed by his winning favour with Mr Modi.
This appointment will assure that CBI will not open the Rafale investigation for at least another 2 years, which will be the tenure of Rushi Shukla.
This is very interesting. If the BJP loses in 2019 general election, then the Rafale investigation will begin sometime in 2021. It will near completion in 2-3 years after that, around 2023-24. Haha, just about the time of NEXT general election in 2024! So what are the implications of this — are we going to have a BJP-mukt government for 10 straight years??!! My God, am I hallucinating or what?
(My euphoria is based on my belief that Mr Modi will never, NEVER be able to defend 1) why he chose Anil Ambani, and 2) why he reduced the figure from 126 to 36).
The rationale for associating the LoP with the exercise is to ensure impartiality and the selection of someone who is completely apolitical, given the nature of the cases he will be dealing with. The effort should be to secure unanimity in the decision making process.
Yes, but this article would be more credible if the removal of the CBI post holder had been done in a clear and transparent manner. Positions of high responsibility must be filled by people of integrity and beyond suspicion. But what emerges from the boondoggles that have taken place in various structures these days is a hint of partiality. It is a pity because the governors pass and change, but the officials remain because it is they who assume the continuity of the state. This aspect seems to be ignored.
Mr Jaitley is in the position he is in, simply because his party gave a political color to India as a country – leave alone CBI appointments. Most likely his and many other lawyers careers and money have been made on dissent be it frivolous – obfuscative – political – monetary – collusion delay . Quite likely Mr Jaitley understands all this . This is nothing but a political exercise which involves political patronage and political benefits. The common man should not even bother trying to make sense of it.
1. I agree with Arun Jaitley. A few days ago, we were told that the three member panel comprising (a) PM Narendra Modi, (b) Chief Justice of India, and (c) leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha (Mallikarjun Kharge) has selected Rishi Kumar Shukla as Director of CBI. It was a majority and not unanimous decision of the panel, since Khargeji, as expected, dissented. 2. Hopefully, with this appointment, avoidable controversy regarding appointment to a very sensitive and highly politicized post would come to an end. 3. It is interesting to note that Khargeji thinks that R K Shukla has not worked in anti-corruption agency and hence he (Shukla) does not possess adequate experience of investigation of anti-corruption cases. 3. Citizen-voters like me wish that the Congress leader Mallikarjun Kharge is as serious about curbing corruption as he is about appointment of right person (as perceived by him) as CBI Director. In this context my query is this: is the Congress party against curbing political corruption? I am reminded of fact that just a few months ago Ghulam Nabi Azad, Congress leader in the Rajya Sabha, had opposed setting-up of Fast Track Courts, when a bill for setting-up of these Fast Track Courts, was being discussed in the Rajya Sabha. As we all know these Courts, which are being set-up as suggested by the Supreme Court, are expected to expedite trials of corruption & other cases filed against lawmakers. But then who is wishes to protect the corrupt? This is my simple question to Khargeji!
Will Mr Jaitley please explain why Asthana, the root cause of all the evil that now plagues the CBI, was parachuted into the CBI in the first place?
The hallucinations have a twisted logic which implies that the Chief Justice of India colluded with Modi to avert possibility of launching investigations in Rafale matter. The answers to his two questions are simple : (1) Modi never chose Ambani. As of now, there is just a JV between Dassault and a ADAG company. Whether it will get any share in the total offset amount of Rs30000 crore is not officially known, though the CEO of Dassault has confirmed in an interview that it will be just around 3% of the total offset amount. The production in the JV will be not of Rafale jets but of component of Falcon planes. (2) He reduced figure from 126 to 36 as Dassault refused to guarantee the quality of production proposed to be made at HAL. Even if Modi gets defeated in 2019, which not an unlikely scenario, the Rafale investigations will not achieve anything tangible. To link this issue with appointment of CBI chief is madness, to put it mildly. However, I also have a disagreement with Mr. Jaitley. The method of selecting CBI chief is inappropriate. Whichever party may rule, the leader of opposition , on some pretex or the other, is bound to dissent and the casting vote will always be with the CJI. Just remove the two politicians form the committee and induct professionals of proven merit and integrity.
It is double madness to say Dassault vetoes how many planes India should have for its defence, HAL or no HAL. By that time EUROFIGHTER too had flown into contention and was said to be 20% cheaper.
President Hollande was the man who discussed the stuff with Mr Modi, and he said that they were given no choice other than Anil Ambani; Dassault itself spoke approvingly of HAL barely a few weeks before AA dropped down out of the blue; foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar mentioned HAL barely a few weeks before AA arrival; AA company’s balance sheet mentions something about 30 or 36000 crores; offset partners with reference to Rafale were mentioned in the context of RAFALE manufacturing in India and not Falcon; if AA was not to be given the plum job of manufacturing Rafale, then who was to do it? L&T? TATA? MAHINDRAS? Who are the other 29 names in the list of 30 for RAFALE OFFSET PARTNERS? Can the government release the complete list of 30? Is any of them capable of taking on this herculean task?
Why was this businessman with dubious business credentials flying around WITH THE PRIME MINISTER OF INDIA on top confidential defense related visits when EVEN THE DEFENCE MINISTER of the country was not on board. Some reports say he was inaugurating a new fish market in Goa when he heard the news!!!! And his coy response was, “no I was not a part of the deal but I endorse Modi ji’s decision”. The legal question is, do you endorse official decisions on legal soundness or feudal friendship?
It is surprising how calmly Mr Jaitley accuses somebody else for giving “political color” to something which should be above politics. I fully agree with him; but doesn’t he know that Mr Rishi Shukla had already been “politically tainted”, so using “political color” in matters concerning him can only be expected? Mr Shukla was the DGP of Madhya Pradesh during the BJP rule there, but during the recently conducted state elections he was “on leave”, or was perhaps asked to go on leave. Why? I have offered the following comment to another of THE PRINT’s articles on the same subject of CBI director’s selection, so I don’t know if they will allow me to repeat it here. But I’m copying it below all the same, just in case they do:
Today’s THE FREE PRESS JOURNAL on its page 5 (flowing on from page 1) gives interesting data presented by Mr Kharge about 5 contenders for the CBI chief’s post.
Of all the five, Rajiv Rai Bhatnagar has 170 months of experience in investigation, 25 months in anti-corruption. If for brevity I write it as 170/25, then other contenders figures are:
Sudeep Lakhtakia: 155/14
A.P. Maheshwari: 147/14
Rishi Kumar Shukla: 117/0.
Today’s THE INDIAN EXPRESS mentions that the fifth contender, S. Javed Ahmad has a total experience of 303 months (his anti-corruption experience is not mentioned separately, but should be substantial looking at his overall figure which is a good 130 months more than the next senior most contender, R.R. Bhatnagar).
It is clear from the above that Rishi Shukla has minimum overall experience, and ZERO in anti-corruption. (A Supreme Court verdict had stated that a CBI director should have high experience in anti-corruption.) His appointment is “political” is clear from the fact that he was removed from the post of DGP of Madhya Pradesh within days of the Congress forming a government there. So, perhaps he was seen as a “BJP man”, a fact that is confirmed by his winning favour with Mr Modi.
This appointment will assure that CBI will not open the Rafale investigation for at least another 2 years, which will be the tenure of Rushi Shukla.
This is very interesting. If the BJP loses in 2019 general election, then the Rafale investigation will begin sometime in 2021. It will near completion in 2-3 years after that, around 2023-24. Haha, just about the time of NEXT general election in 2024! So what are the implications of this — are we going to have a BJP-mukt government for 10 straight years??!! My God, am I hallucinating or what?
(My euphoria is based on my belief that Mr Modi will never, NEVER be able to defend 1) why he chose Anil Ambani, and 2) why he reduced the figure from 126 to 36).
The rationale for associating the LoP with the exercise is to ensure impartiality and the selection of someone who is completely apolitical, given the nature of the cases he will be dealing with. The effort should be to secure unanimity in the decision making process.
Yes, but this article would be more credible if the removal of the CBI post holder had been done in a clear and transparent manner. Positions of high responsibility must be filled by people of integrity and beyond suspicion. But what emerges from the boondoggles that have taken place in various structures these days is a hint of partiality. It is a pity because the governors pass and change, but the officials remain because it is they who assume the continuity of the state. This aspect seems to be ignored.