BRIEFCASE
MoD says that Attorney General advised asked them to quit
The advice came in February 2015
However AG Rohatgi says that he doesn't collect advising anything
The Ministry of Defence (MoD), after fighting hard to become a party to the Italian legal proceedings in their case against Finmeccanica and its firm AgustaWestland, quietly quit the process in February 2015. In doing so, MoD chose to not appeal against the accused and lost out an opportunity to seek monetary compensation.
While justifying the actions of the MoD, the spokesperson said it was the Attorney General (AG) who advised them in February 2015 and the ministry 'proceeded accordingly'. The ministry had earlier said the advice to quit was given by the Solicitor General (SG). Upon asking, both these authorities denied ever giving such an advice.
The question that emanates from this is what prompted the MoD's move to pull out?
"I DONT'T KNOW WHY, BUT THEY QUIT. I RESPECT THAT"
Speaking to this correspondent in his Milan office Attorney Gian Luca Grossi who represented the MoD at the lower court at Busto Arsizio where the trial went on from June 19, 2013 to October 9, 2014 said, "MoD was civil party in the trial, in the first stage in Busto Arsizio. It came in only at the end of the first trial there. Then India decided to not go ahead with the appeal. Lower court gave a clear verdict saying there was impossibility of bribery. MoD decided to quit the trial. I don't know why, but they decided to quit. I respect that." When asked what did he advice the MoD, he said, "I think our advice was to stay on, stay inside also in the second degree at the Tribunale (Court of Appeal). I told them I was not confident (about their exit). It wasn't a very easy decision but 51 per cent I would have stayed against 49 per cent to pull out. He added, "If I had the choice in my hands, I probably would've (stayed). When you make a choice, take a path, even if you find some problems in walking, you have to go ahead."
In the sentence of the Milan Court of Appeals of April 7, 2016, MoD is shown as a 'non appelante' - a party which had not appealed.
According to Grossi, India lost out on a chance to not just secure a moral victory by being a party when the recent order came out but also monetary compensation. "If you want your money back, you go the civil court. If you want to secure reputation and restoration, then you go to the criminal one," he said. In effect, India went to the criminal court and opted against going to the civil one.
When INDIA TODAY approached AG Rohatgi, he initially sought time to respond. Reverting at a later date Rohatgi said, "I have advised the MoD on aspects pertaining to blacklisting of various companies under the Finmeccanica umbrella but in so far as the issue you are raising, I have no recollection of having done so."
Since in one of the responses the MoD had named the SG as the one who advised them, he too was approached. SG Ranjit Kumar too distanced himself from the issue. He said, "The matter never came to me nor have I given any advice."
Earlier, the Defence Ministry spokesperson had stated, "Our goal in becoming a party in the lower court was to get access to evidence and documents. We did get that. Joining the appeal would not have yielded much."
THE BLAME GAME
Former Defence Minister and senior Congress leader AK Antony had accused the present government of trying to aid Finmeccanica and AgustaWestland by allowing a backdoor entry into India markets, something the government has vehemently denied. In July 2014, the NDA had, its ministers claimed, put on hold all acquisition and procurement cases involving Finmeccanica and allied firms.
As per the recent statement in the Parliament by Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar, the MoD had made an advance payment of Euro 250.32 million to AgustaWestland, only Euro 199.62 million was recovered after a deduction of Euro 50.70 million for the three helicopters India took the delivery of. "In addition, the government also suffered an estimated loss and damages of Euro 398.21 million on account of cancellation of the contract with AgustsWestland International Limited (AWIL)," Parrikar said.
Since in one of the responses the MoD had named the SG as the one who advised them, he too was approached. SG Ranjit Kumar too distanced himself from the issue. He said, "The matter never came to me nor have I given any advice."
Earlier, the Defence Ministry spokesperson had stated, "Our goal in becoming a party in the lower court was to get access to evidence and documents. We did get that. Joining the appeal would not have yielded much."
THE BLAME GAME
Former Defence Minister and senior Congress leader AK Antony had accused the present government of trying to aid Finmeccanica and AgustaWestland by allowing a backdoor entry into India markets, something the government has vehemently denied. In July 2014, the NDA had, its ministers claimed, put on hold all acquisition and procurement cases involving Finmeccanica and allied firms.
As per the recent statement in the Parliament by Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar, the MoD had made an advance payment of Euro 250.32 million to AgustaWestland, only Euro 199.62 million was recovered after a deduction of Euro 50.70 million for the three helicopters India took the delivery of. "In addit
ion, the government also suffered an estimated loss and damages of Euro 398.21 million on account of cancellation of the contract with AgustsWestland International Limited (AWIL)," Parrikar said.
