<b>XI LOK SABHA DEBATES, <i> Session IV (Budget) </i> </b> XI LOK SABHA DEBATES, Session IV (Budget) Tuesday , February 25, 1997 / Phalguna 6, 1918 (Saka)
Type of Debate: SHORT DURATION DISCUSSIONS (RULE-193)
Title: Regarding the need to constitute a Committee on Bofors 155 mm Howitzer Gun deal. TEXT : MR. SPEAKER: On the issue of the motion being tabled by Mr. Jaswant Singh, I request all of you to limit to two speakers. Besides the Mover, there will be two Members each from the Congress party and the BJP and one Member each from the smaller parties.SHRI PRAMOD MAHAJAN (MUMBAI - NORTH EAST): Sir, there is a premium on the smaller parties in the House because one can form a Government with the smaller parties.
MR. SPEAKER: This is a democracy.
SHRI SOMNATH CHATTERJEE (BOLPUR): What is all this long discussion?
MR. SPEAKER: I do not know, that is what the hon. Member wanted.
SHRI JASWANT SINGH (CHITTORGARH): I will just explain.
SHRI NIRMAL KANTI CHATTERJEE (DUMDUM): Mr. Speaker, Sir, it started with the Zero Hour. We are taken by surprise with the idea that there is already a motion in the name of our great Jaswant.
MR. SPEAKER: That is why I am restricting the speakers, but everybody wants to speak.
SHRI NIRMAL KANTI CHATTERJEE (DUMDUM): What is the motion?
MR. SPEAKER: Today, it is the question of admissibility which will be discussed. Whether the notice given under Rule 184 is admissible or not has to be decided. I am only allowing two Members.
SHRI JASWANT SINGH (CHITTORGARH): I am not on the motion proper.
MR. SPEAKER: No, it is the admissibility only.
SHRI JASWANT SINGH (CHITTORGARH): I am only on the rationale, the reason that has persuaded me -- I do apologise for the state of my throat, I shall make endeavours to be as clear as possible -- to submit for your consideration a motion under Rule 184, and what I had suggested as the content of that motion. If you permit me, I can read it out. That being not in accordance with the rules, I can give the substance of it.
What I have suggested is that under Rule 184 of this House, a Committee of both the Houses be constituted to go into all aspects of the Bofors gun deal in the light of the documents since received from the Swiss authorities and to consider the Government's response thereto. I must as far as possible crave to you that this is not a debate on the merits or demerits of my submission. It is only a submission about why it should be under Rule 184 and why I feel there is need for constituting a Committee.
I think it is appropriate at this stage for me to mention that it was 16th April 1987, if I recollect right, when the Swedish Radio first divulged the facts about the procurement of this weapon system by India. I recollect very well that even then when I raised this issue, I had no concept, I had no idea whatsoever that ten years down the line, near about ten years now from 1987 to 1997, I would still be in Parliament; or even more poignantly and tellingly that ten years down the line we would still be discussing Bofors. I think that fact is both a fact of sadness and a fact that carries within it great many lessons for all of us.
I would be remiss at this stage if I did not place on record my personal sense of appreciation that the fact that we have today access to certain information is principally not because of what the successive Governments have done but principally we owe it to one intrepid lady journalist working in Switzerland, Ms. Chitra Subramaniam. We owe it to some remarkable journalism demonstrated by the Hindu and Mr. N. Ram, and in that period by the Indian Express, and also by Mr. Arun Shourie. I would be remiss if I did not place on record that we have access to the documents that we have today because of the then team of investigations appointed by the then Prime Minister comprising Arun Jetley, Madhavan and Bhure Lal. Because of what they did, the country has today access to the documents that we have.
Here it is necessary for me to share a caution with the entire House. This is a caution that I share on the basis of my experience of this entire issue of Bofors.
Every attempt at prematurely burying Bofors results in this issue resurrecting itself and shooting in our face. By premature burial, I mean, when we attempt to push the issue before it is fully and finally resolved. That also is the reason why I am persuaded to move a Motion under Rule 184. (Interruptions)
SHRI NIRMAL KANTI CHATTERJEE (DUMDUM): Do we take your certificate about the quality of Bofors?
SHRI JASWANT SINGH (CHITTORGARH): Absolutely, I will answer that question.
The question today is not about the quality of the weapons system. The question never was about the quality of the weapons system. But if you permit me to respond to it, I will answer this query also. The question is really about the illegalities and irregularities attendant upon the obtaining of this weapons system. We would be deflected from the central purpose of this inquiry, if we got into the maze and the complications of the quality of one weapon system against another. Therefore, I submit in all humility that it is time that we addressed ourselves fully, resolutely and decisively. If we finally want to get rid of this curse that has afflicted our system because the damage that Bofors has caused to us is incalculable. Let me share with you why has this damage been incalculable.
Personally, the very first thing that I am saying in a very real sense is that the fair name of India did get sullied from that period onwards and until we resolve it that blot on us shall remain. I say this with true sorrow. The trails of Bofors whether directly or indirectly have taken the lives of two Prime Ministers, one of Sweden and one of India. The prime of the Indian Prime Minister's creative life - somewhere a chain of circumstances - robbed him of his contribution. I was his political adversary. I remain his political adversary. But his loss is certainly a loss to the contribution that he would have made. He was in the pink of his life. The creative years were ahead of him.
1238 hours (Mr. Deputy-Speaker in the Chair)
I also feel that the elections of 1989 became a single-issue election and the Party that had won 400 plus seats earlier lost because of this. It was a very heavy price India has to pay. We have all paid this price. Even more important is that it was on account of Bofors that from 1987 onwards, decision-making processes, particularly, about obtaining of complex weapons system was virtually paralysed in the Ministry of Defence and it has taken ten years for the Ministry of Defence to place its first major order since 1987. From 1987 Bofors 155 mm Howitzer to the recent placement of a supply of Sukhoy aircraft has taken ten years. This has caused us paralysis for ten continuous years.
We perverted on account of Bofors system. The Bofors system got perverted the institutions, persons, the Joint Parliamentary Committee, Parliament itself, the Ministry of Defence, the Comptroller and Auditor General, the Central Bureau of Investigation, the then Prime Minister, the Prime Minister's Office, all these institutions were got dragged into this dragnet of Bofors.
I also want to place it on record that it was on account of Bofors the person that I think was amongst truly the most capable Defence Ministers that the Independent India had, he had to lose his job. It was on account of Bofors yet again that a distinguished Member of the Congress party, a man of gentility and a man otherwise of great discretion and learning, lost his job as the Minister of External Affairs.
The Service Officers, the Chiefs of Staff, and the retired Generals who had been dragged into the controversy of Bofors, is part of that price that we are paying and we are continuing to pay. I do submit to this Assembly and to this Government, now ten or eleven years down the line, please recognise that enough is enough. We cannot simply close the chapter. I wish we could close the chapter. The Leader of the Congress Party had suggested in a softer voice that we close the chapter. If we could, we could have closed the chapter many years earlier, provided certain things had been done. That is why, I submit, let us learn from the mistakes that we had committed. When the discussion takes place, it shall be my endeavour to say as to what are the things that we must not do. On the top of the list, I have written here, when the discussion is finally conceived, it shall be my endeavour to say what we must not do. I do not think the debate is any longer denigrating anybody. No purpose will be served by denigrating them. The price had already been paid. But the consequences of the actions that were taken or actions not taken still visit upon us. To those we shall have to attend. If we do not attend to them, then, we simply will not be able to rid ourselves of the continuous ghost of Bofors.
Secondly, Sir, I would like to submit that whatever we do today, we should neither diminish India nor devalue Parliament. This Parliament is certainly not only the Chamber of inquisition but the Parliament is also the only Chamber that can provide a check and provide a balance upon the Executive. I agree, Sir, that in obtaining all these documents, whether this Government or the previous Governments, had given commitments to the Government of Switzerland. Those commitments are international commitments. Those commitments have to be upheld because it is the obligation of India to uphold them. It is because of this, Sir, that whereas we must be meticulous in our appearance to the commitments that had been given, we have to simultaneously assert the role, relevance and continue the effectiveness of the Legislature. It is this balance that has to be found and for finding this balance I have suggested a course. I appeal to the Government and to all of you that whatever we do, there must not even be an appearance of it. Now, in attempting to reach at the truth, there are evasions, delays and prevarications. Therefore, I have suggested a discussion under Rule 184 and the constitution of a Committee. You might say that the Parliament cannot be provided with documents and papers that have come from Swtizerland. That is only one part of the totality of what Bofors are. Therefore, we must understand what we mean by all the papers. If there are certain papers which cannot be made available because the Government is claiming privilege about those papers, that is only the beginning of it. All papers about Bofors which are in the possession of the Government, the Ministry of Defence and which were not shared either with the Parliament or with the then JPC must, now, be made available to the Parliament. When the Audit Bureau of Sweden shared information with the then Government of India, they withheld that information from us. If that information is available with the Government, it must be made available to us also.
If it is not available with the Government, it must be obtained from Sweden.
There is information available with the media. Indeed, The Hindu have publicly asserted that in their possession is the document relating to a particular lawyer, a trustee lawyer and that they are ready to share the details about that lawyer provided the Government or the investigative agencies ask them for that. We must do so. Whatever we do, it must be a coordinated, effective and an efficient action.
I am astonished at the publicity that the investigative agencies are seeking on a daily basis about this case. This is not at all necessary. No investigative agency in the world presents itself in front of Television cameras and offers boxes seized and then suggests as if it is some kind of a great achievement. It is no achievement by the investigative agency, I am sorry. The investigative agencies are supposed to investigate quietly, outside the glare of publicity. That is the index of their efficiency, not the time that they are able to obtain on the State captive media itself.
Sir, I submit and it is my advice to the hon. Prime Minister, I really wish he were here, not to give assurances to the Parliament. I would like to share three assurances given separately by three different Prime Ministers. The first, in whose time this entire controversy arose, shared with the House saying, "Do not tell us, who was the actual guilty, just point the direction in which we should look and we will do the best." I do not need to narrate the entire chain of events that followed after that. Another Prime Minister followed and he informed the whole of the country, "I will reveal the names in 14 days time."
SHRI RAJESH PILOT (DAUSA): You were also partners of that Government.
SHRI JASWANT SINGH (CHITTORGARH): Yes, we were supporters of the Government, without doubt.
SHRI RAJESH PILOT (DAUSA): You must say that you were not with that Party.
SHRI JASWANT SINGH (CHITTORGARH): What my friend, Shri Rajesh Pilot is suggesting is a classical situation of guilt through association. If guilt through association is the thesis that you are propounding, then I think, you should really reflect then the association that you are presently maintaining ... (Interruptions)
SHRI RAJESH PILOT (DAUSA): Shri Jaswant Singhji, if you recollect the speeches of the team in 1989 elections, whether this side or that side, there was only one voice in Rajasthan or in every part of the country, `names are in our pocket, within fourteen days we will declare them.' Please accept the guilt because you are sharing that, not we. We have said it and we still maintain that the truth must come out. It is the policy of our party that the truth must be told to the nation and I would go one step further -- people who are not with us -- and I would say that if anybody is involved of any nature, nation must know. The nation must know the truth as to who is involved. We are totally on that line.
SHRI JASWANT SINGH (CHITTORGARH): Mr. Deputy-Speaker Sir, I think, this is... (Interruptions)
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER : Please, let him continue.
... (Interruptions)
SHRI NIRMAL KANTI CHATTERJEE (DUMDUM): Sir, if they were not there at that time in the Parliament, they should check up the record and it is explicit why we had to boycott... (Interruptions) We do not regret that we were not associated with that kind of a finding and they are not yet shameful about it... (Interruptions)
MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Please sit down. Please take your seats.
SHRI JASWANT SINGH (CHITTORGARH): Sir, he is a dear friend and old friend. I welcome what my friend Shri Rajesh Pilot has said. It was not my intention when making my submission; it is not my intention now to engage in competitive accusation, `I did this. You did this.' I think, the issue has gone well beyond that. If we do not even now recognise that this issue has really caused us such an immense harm and it has gone beyond competitive trading of charges, `You traded against me. I traded against you.'; there is a collectivity of the House, which is now being tested. ...(Interruptions)
SHRI SANAT MEHTA (SURENDRA NAGAR): It is better late than never. ...(Interruptions)
SHRI JASWANT SINGH (CHITTORGARH): I know, better indeed.
I have cited two Prime Ministers and their assurances to this House. Sir, therefore, the third Prime Minister in this very Parliament and in a context, which is not a happy context, which came to be called against certain hon. Members of the then Parliament, when the House remonstrated and said, `We do not know. We are not informed. How will we be kept informed?' assured the House, `I will personally deal with Bofors and monitor the Bofors on a day to day basis and I will keep you informed'. ...(Interruptions) Why do I say this? It is only to submit to the present hon. Prime Minister in all seriousness -- I submit it recognising the great load that he carries -- do not give any personal assurance to the Parliament on how you will deal with the case. That again is the reason why, Sir, I am drawing the responsibility of this Parliament into it.
Now, there is a suggestion that I share with the Government -- please now at last no dissimulation, no pretext, no cover-up and no other incidents of the July 22, 23, 1993 variety. Do I have to point out that incident? I think, it was on July 22, 1993 that seven names were publicly announced in Switzerland. Should I repeat those names? They are: Svenska; AE Services; Jubilee Finance; three Hinduja brothers; Shri Win Chaddha; an Italian tradesman or freebooter or whatever by the name of Quattrocchi. After all this is known -- this is July middle of 1993 -- till date no Government has made a serious effort to get Shri Win Chaddha back; no Government has made any effort whatsoever even to query informally the three Hinduja brothers. And of course, not only was no effort made to restrain this Italian gentleman. There are suggestions. I do not know. The Government has to explain. There are suggestions that there was connivance in permitting this Quattrocchi to leave India. Now, that is why I say that this will no longer work. This is not an answer. I am astonished. All of them -- this Italian gentleman, Quattrocchi, Mr. Win Chaddha, the Hindujas -- despite the papers that have appeared, despite what the Swiss Courts have said, have said, `We have nothing to do with it'. All of them were caucus and knew India's system. Every other country in the world is able to extradite people that they want to extradite.
We alone continue to fail. There stayed a man in Kong Hong needed for havala case and he escaped with Dawood Ibrahim. We were never able to extradite him. When Singapore comes across the financial scandal of major proportion, they are able to extradite from Germany a man that they want within three months. We are not able to extradite. I think the Government has to answer this.
Either there existed a connection between Snamprogetti and Bofors and if there existed no connection, then what was the payment made for? Was there any connection between Italy and Sweden that Sweden will quietly pay money to Italy? What is this? Either Bofors was fooled to pay Quattrocchhi seven-and-a-half million dollars. For what? For doing nothing. And Bofors are such fools that they disturbed all their existing arrangements to pay Quattrocchhi seven-and-a-half million dollars almost at the penultimate stage of the entire proceedings. Or, on the other hand, Quattrocchhi was such a hoodie, such a wizard that he not only fooled all of us but he fooled Bofors, Switzerland, Sweden and everyone and took seven-and-a-half million dollars quietly and in comfort flew away to Kuala Lumpur. (Interruptions) Whatever may be the reason, the fact remains. This is the fact. He has received the money. He has received the payment.
[NEXT PAGE]