Reproduced below is a Dossier on Montek Singh Ahluwalia filed with CM 1223/ 2013 in W.P. (Civil) 1280/ 2012 in the Delhi High Court. That is followed by exposes on the corruption and treason of former Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and his partner in crime Montek Singh Ahluwalia, both of whom got appointed to the highest political offices in India despite being essentially US/CIA agents and economic hit-men.
Annexure P-3 to CM 1223/ 2013 in W.P. (Civil) 1280/ 2012 filed in the Delhi High Court in the matter of Seema Sapra v General Electric Company and Others
Conflict of Interest and Corruption involving Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia
By Seema Sapra
1. Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia is the Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission and sits in all Cabinet meetings and is invited to all Government of India Committee meetings on economic and financial policy matters. He issues press/ public statements everyday on almost every economic policy matter of the Central Government. He has been charged with having a finger in every pie. A study of his press statements and news reports about the Planning Commission discloses the latter’s interference in government matters of several ministries. The Planning Commission is de-facto interfering in government matters, processes and decisions that fall within the domain of Central government ministries. Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia’a statements on government policy and on executive decisions are capable of and in fact affect stock prices of firms listed in India
2. Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia’s elder son, Mr Pavan Ahluwalia has worked with McKinsey, and later with a Hedge Fund (Old Lane
3. Mr Pavan Ahluwalia presently manages an India
4. Laburnum Capital operates in complete secrecy with no public disclosure of the source or destination of the large amounts of funds moving in and out of its accounts. The website of Laburnum Capital claims that it manages investments for several high-net worth Indians, business houses, corporate and business families.
5. A court document filed for Mr Rajat Gupta’s sentencing hearing before the United States District Court refers to an admission by Mr Pavan Ahluwalia of his close relationship with his former boss at McKinsey (Rajat Gupta) who has also invested funds with Mr Pavan Ahluwalia in Laburnum Capital.
6. Mr Pavan Ahluwalia’s entire career has placed him in conflict of interest situations with his father, Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia’s career and role in the Indian government. After graduating from Princeton, Mr Pavan Ahluwalia appears to have worked with McKinsey both in New York and in India India India
7. McKinsey’s private clients at any given time are kept confidential.
8. During the time that Mr Pavan Ahluwalia worked for McKinsey, Mr Rajat Gupta developed and enjoyed unrestricted access to top Indian government functionaries including to the Prime Minister, Mr Manmohan Singh.
9. In 2005, Mr Pavan Ahluwalia obtained a graduate degree from Harvard Business School
10. A document in Rajat Gupta’s sentencing hearing (Case 1:11-cr-00907-JSR Document 123 Filed 10/17/12) contains the following statement from Mr Pavan Ahluwalia:
“Pavan Ahluwalia, who in 2006 was being recruited to return to McKinsey from
graduate school, writes that “[a]t the insistence of [a] McKinsey partner, I had a telephone conversation with Rajat, expecting to have to defend my reasons for not returning to the firm. To my considerable surprise, he listened intently, understood why I was making the decision I was making [not to return], and told me that he objectively thought it was the correct decision for me. Rather than try to ‘sell’ his firm, or score a point in the recruiting process . . . he was able to put my own concerns front and center and evaluate the decision from my perspective.
“Over the years that followed . . . I found him to be and incredibly generous and wise mentor. . . . [H]e went out of his way to introduce me to people, and when I decided to start my own investment firm, he became one of my first investors, as he had been for several young McKinsey alumni starting off on their own.
“Rajat never once mentioned money or wealth creation while discussing either his own involvement in principal investing or my career choices.”
11. This statement shows that Mr Rajat Gupta continued to be “incredibly generous in helping Mr Pavan Ahluwalia’s career even after the latter left McKinsey by introducing him to important people and by even investing funds with Mr Pavan Ahluwalia’s investment firm, Laburnum Capital.
12. In 2006, after graduate school, Mr Pavan Ahluwalia joined Old Lane
13. Old Lane had substantial India Old Lane
14. One significant investment by Old Lane India Hyderabad Old Lane
15. Old Lane also invested in the KVK group of companies (KVK Energy and Infrastructure) which was awarded the 1,200Mw KVK Nilachal power project in Orissa. Old Lane funds were also used by Hyderabad-based KVK Energy and Infrastructure Ltd (KEIL) to buy back all the Rs 45 crore equity (25.5%) held by the troubled Maytas Infra in KVK Nilachal Power Ltd after concerns were raised about Maytas stake in the power project. KVK raised Rs 106 crore from Old Lane India Opportunities Fund in October 2007 and later raised an additional US$20 million from Old Lane
16. KVK Nilachal first signed an MoU with the Orissa state government on September 26, 2006 for 600 MW, which was enhanced to 1200 MW through the supplementary MoU signed on October 17, 2008 for setting up the power plant at Rahangol village in Cuttack
17. Mr Hari Aiyar is also the Managing Partner of Build India Capital Advisors (BIC). Citi’s joint venture India infrastructure business, was according to its website, established to seek long-term capital growth potential within India
18. Old Lane had special Indian focussed funds including the Old Lane India Opportunities Fund, established in July 2006, and sized at $518 million with a 10-year life. This fund was dedicated for long-term investment opportunities in India, primarily in the infrastructure and real estate sectors. There was an Old Lane Mauritius fund for investments into India.
19. There is no transparency about whose money was being invested in India by Old Lane and also about what contributions and deals resulted from Mr Pavan Ahluwalia’s employment at Old Lane. There is also no transparency about the compensation that Mr Pavan Ahluwalia earned from Old Lane during his time there.
20. Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia has been a significant and very vocal proponent of private investment in Indian infrastructure in his capacity as a policymaker and as participant in important infrastructure related executive decisions for the government of India. Yet for the last seven years, he has been in direct conflict of interest situations on account of his son, Mr Pavan Ahluwalia roles at Old Lane and later at Laburnum Capital.
21. Old Lane (which was set up in 2006) was acquired by Citigroup in 2007 and if Mr Pavan Ahluwalia worked for Old Lane between 2007 and 2009 (as it appears he did), then Pavan Ahluwalia was, during this period, a Citigroup employee.
22. In 2007, Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia was appointed to the Group of 30. (Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia has since then left this group.) Established in 1978, the Group of Thirty is a “private, nonprofit, international body composed of very senior representatives of the private and public sectors and academia.” Its stated aim is “deepen understanding of international economic and financial issues, to explore the international repercussions of decisions taken in the public and private sectors, and to examine the choices available to market practitioners and policymakers.” The groups website describes its influence as impacting “the current and future structure of the global financial system by delivering actionable recommendations directly to the private and public policymaking communities.” This association with the Group of 30 by Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia also raises conflict of interest concerns.
24. A January 4, 2007 Asian Age news report reported that Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia at that time was also a member of the Commission on Growth and Development set up by
the World Bank and the Institute of International Finance (The Global Association of Financial Institutions). According to the Asian Age report the “Institute of International
Finance has included Dr Ahluwalia in the group of trustees for overseeing the "principles for stable capital flows and fair debt restructuring in emerging markets". The Commission on Growth and Development (informally known as the Growth Commission) is described on the website of the World Bank in the following terms:
the World Bank and the Institute of International Finance (The Global Association of Financial Institutions). According to the Asian Age report the “Institute of International
Finance has included Dr Ahluwalia in the group of trustees for overseeing the "principles for stable capital flows and fair debt restructuring in emerging markets". The Commission on Growth and Development (informally known as the Growth Commission) is described on the website of the World Bank in the following terms:
“Launched in April 2006, the Commission on Growth and Development brings together twenty-two leading practitioners from government, business and the policymaking arenas, mostly from the developing world. The Commission is chaired by Nobel Laureate Michael Spence, former Dean of the Stanford Graduate Business School, and Danny Leipziger, former Vice-President, World Bank, is the Commission's Vice-Chair.
Over a period of four years the Commission sought to gather the best understanding there was about the policies and strategies that underlay rapid and sustained economic growth and poverty reduction. The Commission's audience is the leaders of developing countries.
The Commission was supported by the Governments of Australia, Sweden, the Netherlands, and United Kingdom, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, and the World Bank.
Motivation
The Commission has been brought together by the belief that the world's challenges - poverty, environment, misunderstandings within and between nations, vast differences in living standards within and across countries - are best met in conditions of rising and sustained prosperity, and expanding economic opportunities.
The Commission was established "to take stock of the state of theoretical and empirical knowledge on economic growth with a view to drawing implications for policy for the current and next generation of policymakers."
…
The Commission was funded by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the governemnts of Australia, Netherlands, Sweden, and the United Kingdom, and the World Bank.”
25. While Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia’s participation in the Commission on Growth and Development raises certain questions about whether he obtained prior Government authorisation and whether his participation was in his personal capacity or as a representative of the Government of India, Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia’s association with the Institute of International Finance was clearly a case of conflict of interest and more so, because his son – Mr Pavan Ahluwalia, was at that time employed by Vikram Pandit/ Citigroup.
26. The mission statement of the Institute of International Finance (of which Citigroup would be a constituent) reads:
The Institute of International Finance, Inc. (IIF), is the world’s only global association of financial institutions. Created in 1983 in response to the international debt crisis, the IIF has evolved to meet the changing needs of the financial community. Members include most of the world’s largest commercial banks and investment banks, as well as a growing number of insurance companies and investment management firms. Among the Institute’s members are commercial and investment banks, sovereign wealth funds, asset managers, hedge funds, insurance companies, multinational corporations, law firms, export credit agencies, multilateral agencies, development banks, and other organizations providing products and services to financial services community. The Institute currently has over 450 members headquartered in more than 70 countries in Africa, the Middle East, North and South America, Europe, and Asia.
Mission
The Institute of International Finance is committed to being the most influential global association of financial institutions. We strive to sustain and enhance our distinctive role on the basis of the professional excellence of our research, the unmatched breadth of our membership, our extensive relationships with policymakers and regulators, and the strength of our governance.
Our mission is to support the financial industry in prudently managing risks, including sovereign risk; in developing best practices and standards; and in advocating regulatory, financial, and economic policies that are in the broad interest of our members and foster global financial stability.
Main Activities
In fulfilling this mission, the IIF’s main activities are to:
· Provide high-quality, timely, and impartial analysis and research to our members on emerging markets and other central issues in global finance.
· Systematically identify, analyze, and shape regulatory, financial, and economic policy issues of relevance to our members globally or regionally.
· Develop and advance representative views and constructive proposals that influence the public debate on particular policy proposals, including those of multilateral agencies, and broad themes of common interest to participants in global financial markets.
· Work with policymakers, regulators, and multilateral organizations to strengthen the efficiency, transparency, stability and competitiveness of the global financial system, with an emphasis on voluntary market-based approaches to crisis prevention and management.
· Promote the development of sound financial systems, with an emphasis on emerging markets.
· Provide a network for members to exchange views and offer opportunities for effective dialogue among policymakers, regulators, and private sector financial institutions.
· Define, articulate, and disseminate best practices and industry standards in such areas as risk management and analysis, disclosure, corporate governance and regulatory compliance.
· Support education and training efforts of our members in priority areas.”
27. The Public Health Foundation of India is another example of unsavoury and undesirable links between McKinsey and Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia. There are several controversies surrounding the PHFI which are not covered by this note. PHFI’s bank account is with Citibank. PHFI’s status as a public authority or a private entity is in doubt. The CIC has called PHFI a public authority and stated that a contrary opinion would cast doubt on the integrity of public officials on the PHFI board like Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia. The PHFI itself contended that Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia was part of PHFI in his private capacity. The constitution of PHFI raises many conflict of interest questions quite apart from Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia.
28. According to its website, PHFI’s legal status is as follows:
“The Public Health Foundation of India (“PHFI”/ “the Foundation”) was registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 vide registration certificate number 54840 dated 8 February 2006.
PHFI has been granted an exemption under section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, vide letter number DIT(E)/12A/2005-06/P-1044/05/313 dated 16 June 2006. The Foundation has also obtained exemption u/s 80G(5)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
The Foundation has been registered under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 1976 for carrying out activities of social nature with registration number 231660927 dated 26 September 2008.
PHFI has been registered as a Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (SIRO) by the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research under the Scheme on Recognition of Scientific and Industrial Research Organisations (SIROs), 1988 Vide No. 14/482/2008-TU-V dated 23 April, 2011 for the period from 1 April 2011 to 31 March 2014.”
29. OECD guidelines titled “Managing Conflict of Interest in the Public Service” dated 2003, recognize that family interests can create a potential conflict of interest situation for public officials. Reproduced below are extracts from these OECD guidelines:
“A “conflict of interest” is:
A conflict between the public duty and private interests of public officials, in which public officials have private-capacity interests which could improperly influence the performance of their official duties and responsibilities.
A sound conflict-of-interest policy pays particular attention to:
● Policy-makers and public office holders working in the most senior positions.
The financial or pecuniary interests of officials are generally considered as the principal causes of conflict of interest. However, a forward-looking policy should also describe examples of other causes, such as related-party business undertakings, personal relationships and non-financial personal interests that can be relevant in a very complex public sector environment. In addition, affiliations with for-profit or non-profit organisations, or with political or professional organisations, can also give rise to new and difficult examples of conflict. Public organisations have the primary responsibility to define particular situations and activities that are incompatible with their public function.
Organisational procedures should enable public officials to identify and disclose relevant private interests that potentially conflict with their official duties. Such procedures should make public officials aware that they must promptly disclose all relevant information about a conflict when taking up office (initial disclosure), and later, when relevant circumstances change (inservice disclosure). An effective disclosure process ensures that the responsibility for providing sufficient details on the conflicting interest rests with individual officials, and this requirement is explicitly communicated in employment and appointment arrangements and contracts.
Organisations need to consider reviewing existing management arrangements on a regular basis, to assess whether they remain adequate in recognizing potential risk areas. Changing practices and expectations, for example in areas such as additional employment and “outside” appointments, post-public employment, use of “inside” information, public contracts, new forms of gifts and other benefits, and different family and community expectations in a multicultural context, can generate new forms of risk.
New forms of relationship have developed between the public sector and the business and non-profit sectors, giving rise for example to increasingly close forms of collaboration such as public/private partnerships, selfregulation, interchanges of personnel, and sponsorships. New forms of employment in the public sector have also emerged with potential for changes to traditional employment obligations and loyalties. In consequence, there is clearly an emerging potential for new forms of conflict of interest involving an individual official’s private interests and public duties, and growing public concern has put pressure on governments to ensure that the integrity of official decision-making is not compromised.
While a conflict of interest is not ipso facto corruption, there is increasing recognition that conflicts between the private interests and public duties of public officials, if inadequately managed, can result in corruption. The proper objective of an effective conflict-of-interest policy is not the simple prohibition of all private-capacity interests on the part of public officials, even if such an approach were conceivable. The immediate objective should be to maintain the integrity of official policy and administrative decisions and of public management generally, recognising that an unresolved conflict of interest may result in abuse of public office.
This objective can generally be achieved by ensuring that public bodies possess and implement relevant policy standards for promoting integrity, effective processes for identifying risk and dealing with emergent conflicts of interest, appropriate external and internal accountability mechanisms, and management approaches – including sanctions – that aim to ensure that public officials take personal responsibility for complying with both the letter and the spirit of such standards.
A “conflict of interest” involves a conflict between the public duty and private interests of a public official, in which the public official has private-capacity interests which could improperly influence the performance of their official duties and responsibilities.
Where a private interest has in fact compromised the proper performance of a public official’s duties, that specific situation is better regarded as an instance of misconduct or “abuse of office”, or even an instance of corruption, rather than as a “conflict of interest”.
In this definition, “private interests” are not limited to financial or pecuniary interests, or those interests which generate a direct personal benefit to the public official. A conflict of interest may involve otherwise legitimate private-capacity activity, personal affiliations and associations, and family interests, if those interests could reasonably be considered likely to influence improperly the official’s performance of their duties. A special case is constituted by the matter of post-public office employment for a public official: the negotiation of future employment by a public official prior to leaving public office is widely regarded as a conflict-of-interest situation.
Public officials should avoid private-capacity action which could derive an improper advantage from “inside information” obtained in the course of official duties, where the information is not generally available to the public, and are required not to misuse their position and government resources for private gain.
Supporting transparency and scrutiny
● Public officials and public organisations are expected to act in a manner that will bear the closest public scrutiny. This obligation is not fully discharged simply by acting within the letter of the law; it also entails respecting broader public service values such as disinterestedness, impartiality and integrity.
● Public officials’ private interests and affiliations that could compromise the disinterested performance of public duties should be disclosed appropriately, to enable adequate control and management of a resolution.
● Public organisations and officials should ensure consistency and an appropriate degree of openness in the process of resolving or managing a conflict-of-interest situation.
● Public officials and public organisations should promote scrutiny of their management of conflict-of-interest situations, within the applicable legal framework.
More focused examples of unacceptable conduct and relationships should be provided for those groups that are working in at-risk areas, such as the public-private sector interface, government procurement, regulatory and inspectorial functions, and government contracting. Specific attention needs to be given to functions which are subject to close public scrutiny or media attention.
Review “at-risk” areas for potential conflict-of-interest situations
a) Additional employment – Define the circumstances, including the required authorisation procedures, under which public officials may engage in ancillary (“outside”) employment while retaining their official position.
b) “Inside” information – Make sure that information collected or held by public organisations which is not in the public domain, or information obtained in confidence in the course of official functions, is understood to be privileged, and is effectively protected from improper use or disclosure.
c) Contracts – Consider the circumstances in which the preparation, negotiation, management, or enforcement of a contract involving the public organisation could be compromised by a conflict of interest on the part of a public official within the public organisation.
d) Gifts and other forms of benefit – Consider whether the organisation’s current policy is adequate in recognising conflicts of interest arising from traditional and new forms of gifts or benefits.
e) Family and community expectations – Consider whether the organisation’s current policy is adequate in recognising conflicts of interest arising from expectations placed on public officials by their family and community, especially in a multicultural context.
f) “Outside” appointments – Define the circumstances, including the required authorisation procedures, under which a public official may undertake an appointment on the board or controlling body of, for example, a community group, an NGO, a professional or political organisation, another government entity, a government-owned corporation, or a commercial organization which is involved in a contractual, regulatory, partnership, or sponsorship arrangement with their employing organisation.
g) Activity after leaving public office – Define the circumstances, including the required authorisation procedures, under which a public official who is about to leave public office may negotiate an appointment or employment or other activity, where there is potential for a conflict of interest involving the organisation.”
“Where an official has failed to declare a relevant interest situation, or has allowed a conflict-of-interest situation to continue unresolved, or has in fact allowed a private-capacity interest to improperly influence the performance of their duties, the definition provided by the Guidelines encourages clarification of what is actually at stake. For example, where the official concerned has failed to declare a relevant interest, the draft Guidelines suggest that such a situation would be better regarded as an instance of misconduct, and not as a simple “conflict of interest”. By contrast, where an official has acted improperly or corruptly so as to receive a bribe or to give an illegitimate advantage to a family member (etc.), it would be preferable to treat the matter as “abuse of office”, or as corruption (depending on the specific circumstances), rather than as a conflict-of interest situation, even though a conflict of interest was fundamental to the corrupt conduct.
In this definition, “private interests” are not limited to financial or pecuniary interests, or those of direct personal benefit to the official. Personal affiliations or relationships, debts and other obligations, religious or ethnic associations, professional and party-political alignments, and family interests, may come within the scope of the definition if those interests could reasonably be considered as likely to influence improperly the official’s performance of their duties.”
30. Several OCED countries also include extra-occupational activities within the definition of a potential conflict of interest.
31. Another example of conflict of interest involves Dr Isher Ahluwalia who is married to Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia. Dr Isher Ahluwalia was appointed Chairperson of a government committee constituted in May 2008 called the High Powered Expert Committee for estimating the investment requirements for urban infrastructure services. The final report was released in March 2011. The McKinsey Global Institute published a report in April 2010 titled “India’s urban awakening: building exclusive cities, sustaining economic growth”. This report was described as the result of a study also commenced by McKinsey in 2008 The McKinsey report thanked members of McKinsey’s academic advisory committee for this project which included Dr Isher Ahluwalia and three others. The McKinsey report attracted a lot of publicity for McKinsey and presumably resulted in several new business engagements. Dr Isher Ahluwalia’s contemporaneous association with and advice to McKinsey’s project on urban development while she was Chairperson of a High Powered Government of India Expert Committee for estimating the investment requirements for urban infrastructure services was a clear case of conflict of interest.
32. Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia’s younger son, Mr Aman Ahluwalia is a lawyer practicing in Delhi. Mr Aman Ahluwalia’s wife, Ms Shilpa Mankar, is also a lawyer and is a partner in the Banking practice at the law-firm, Amarchand Mangaldas. This family connection again raises a conflict of interest concern regarding Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia as he plays a key role in formulating and implementing banking and financial policies in the Government of India.
33. Even more curious is Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia’s association with the International Center for Alternative Dispute Resolution (ICADR). ICADR functions under the Ministry of Law & Justice, Department of Legal Affairs, Government of India. The ICADR website introduces the organization as follows:
“The justice dispensing system in India has come under great stress for several reasons, chief of them being the huge pendency of cases in courts underlining the need for Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) methods. The Government of India thought it necessary to provide a new forum and procedure for resolving international and domestic commercial disputes quickly.
The ICADR is an autonomous organization working under the aegis of the Ministry of Law & Justice, Govt. of India with its headquarters at New Delhi and Regional Centres at Hyderabad and Bengaluru. The Regional Centres of ICADR are fully funded and supported by the respective State Governments.
The Chief Justice of India is the Patron of ICADR. At the regional level, the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court is the Patron of the Regional Centre of ICADR. Dr. H.R.Bhardwaj, Former Union Minister for Law & Justice, Government of India is the Chairman of ICADR. The Governing Council of ICADR comprises of several eminent personalities drawn from various fields.”
The ICADR is an autonomous organization working under the aegis of the Ministry of Law & Justice, Govt. of India with its headquarters at New Delhi and Regional Centres at Hyderabad and Bengaluru. The Regional Centres of ICADR are fully funded and supported by the respective State Governments.
The Chief Justice of India is the Patron of ICADR. At the regional level, the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court is the Patron of the Regional Centre of ICADR. Dr. H.R.Bhardwaj, Former Union Minister for Law & Justice, Government of India is the Chairman of ICADR. The Governing Council of ICADR comprises of several eminent personalities drawn from various fields.”
34. The Governing Council of ICADR comprises of a long list of persons including Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia, some well-known and influential lawyers, and the law Secretary. Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia’s presence in the governing council of ICADR is very surprising. It appears that Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia is extending his influence into legal circles in order to help his son, Mr Aman Ahluwalia’s career as a lawyer.
35. Even a cursory survey of news reports about Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia (who incidentally garners more press coverage than any of his colleagues in the Government of India including the Prime Minister) shows that Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia routinely comments on/ lobbies for government policy issues and government decisions that do not fall within his domain as Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission. Several of such interjections by Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia raise conflict of interest concerns.
36. Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia uses official government resources for his extra-occupational activities and for his private interests including those of his immediate family.
37. As an example, during a trip to the United States in June 2009 (around the time that Mr Pavan Ahluwalia was engaged in transitioning from Old Lane to his own investment firm, Laburnum Capital), Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia addressed investors in New York as part of a USIBC meeting (See Business Standard article dated June 29, 2009). Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia had travelled to Washington DC to participate in a meeting of the High Level Commission on the Modernization of World Bank Group Governance. Addressing investors and asking them to invest in India is not the job of the Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission. It would be relevant to determine how many of the investors addressed by Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia during this trip invested in his son, Mr Pavan Ahluwalia’s hedge fund.
38. Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia’s role in approving the Enron Dabhol project (for which act of corruption the Indian exchequer continues to pay the price) has already been highlighted.
39. The Government of India and Indian citizens should note that while Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia touts private investment in Indian infrastructure, his own son, Mr Pavan Ahluwalia is the direct beneficiary of such investment opportunities for the private sector in Indian infrastructure. The Planning Commission under Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia set up a High Level Committee on Financing Infrastructure. This Committee proposed that private equity funds and venture capitalists could be permitted to be part of bidding consortia for infrastructure projects. Again Mr Pavan Ahluwalia runs such a private equity fund and Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia’s role involves clear conflict of interest and corruption.
40. Even Mr Pavan Ahluwalia’s engagement under a World Bank funded Project on privatization of water supply in Delhi several years ago was the subject of conflict of interest concerns because of Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia’s connections to the World Bank.
41. Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia has throughout his career displayed a brazen attitude towards and has openly flouted basic principles of good governance and conflict of interest. His conduct would never have been tolerated in an OECD country with their strict laws about conflict of interest and public officials.
Reproduced below is a post from http://ariseasia.blogspot.in/2012/06/know-your-superleadersi-montek.html further exposing Montek Singh Ahluwalia ad his partner in crime former Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.
Reproduced below is a post from http://ariseasia.blogspot.in/2012/06/know-your-superleadersi-montek.html further exposing Montek Singh Ahluwalia ad his partner in crime former Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.
"JUN
6
Know your Superleaders(I)- Montek Ahluwalia
Prime Minister Mamohan Singh has his closest confidant
,Montek Singh Ahluwalia. Montek is the supercabinet. He is the Deputy Chairman
of Planning Commission with Cabinet Status , but his name figures in more
committees than most of the Cabinet Ministers. One sees him everywhere and
anywhere. Though, he should be concerned with merely planning process, he comes
in surprising defence of the government against civil society’s attack on
corrupt government. On trip to Myanmar,
he was seen closeted with the PM more than the Foreign Minister or PM’s own
Principal Secretary. He has been anoited the Sherpa for the G-20 talks. He is
seen batting here and there, like a virtual PM.
Recently when the Nalanda University scam broke out and Amartya Sen and
his coterie dissociated, the PM appointed a high powered Nalanda Monitoring
Committee under Montek.
There was a disproportionate coverage about this man in the
tehelka magazine of 19th May by Rohini Mohan,”Riddler on the Roof”. An iconic image about his intellectual prowess
has been falsely created in the media and such articles, done without home
work, rather help to create more riddles about undeserving men. Let us trace the iconic rise of this
Supercabinet “intellectual”.
He was born in Ambala on
24 November 1943. Later, he
graduated with a B.A. (Hons) in economics from St. Stephen College. He received his M.A.
from Oxford university and then M.Phil from Oxford itself. He never enrolled for
PhD. So, he is not academically a doctorate.
IIT Roorkee conferred him the PhD
(Honoris Causa) at the 11th Convocation Ceremony of the institute held on 12
November 2011.
Ahuluwalia, after graduating from University of Oxford,
joined World bank in 1968 under Hollis Chenery and Robert MacNamara. He
always boast that he became the youngest
"Division Chief" in the World Bank's bureaucracy as Chief of the Income Distribution Division.
His rise to power came along with the graph of Manmohan Singh. While Manmohan
was the Finance Secretary under the Janta party government, he engaged Montek
as Economic Adviser in Ministry of Finance in 1979. An impression was given all
around that Montek like Manmohan was all for socialist economy and
redistribution of income. Montek was known during Oxford days for his
friendship with veteran Marxist economist like Prabhat Pattnaik. Once, he
joined the government machinery through nepotism and not through any
competitive examination; he never looked back. Like his mentor, he is the
product of patrimony practiced by India’s corrupt elite.
He held a the posts
of Special Secretary to the Prime Minister; Commerce Secretary; Secretary in
the Department of Economic Affairs. When Manmohan became the finance Minister
in 1991 after I.G.Patel refused the same, he appointed Montek as the Finance Secretary in the Ministry of Finance.
Later he was elevated as the Member of
the Planning Commission and Member of the Economic Advisory Council to the
Prime Minister. An impression is given all around that he is a civil servant or
that he is an Indian Economic Service officer. But, he is none. He has passed
no competitive examination to reach to the top just like his mentor.
In 2001, he was appointed as the first Director of the newly
created Independent Evaluation Office of the International Monitory Fund. He
resigned the position on 4.7. 2004 to take up the position of Deputy Chairman
of the Planning Commission when Manmohan
Singh became the Prime Minister in May,2004.
An impression is always given about his intellectual prowess. His profile
on Planning Commission site reveals that he has authored a book during 1970s.
Recent tehelka article also attributes how this book became an authoritative
work on income distribution and catapulted him to fame. The article mentions, “Few know, however, that Ahluwalia’s earliest
work as a young economist in the World Bank was on poverty. In the
mid-seventies, he wrote the book Redistribution with Growth.” The article
quotes Abhijit Banerjee saying, “ It was in this storm of change that
Ahluwalia wrote his book on redistribution of wealth.” What is this great book
which Montek wrote? His profile
reveals the work in discussion as “
Re-distribution with Growth: An Approach to Policy”. This was jointly
authored by H. Chenery, C. Bell,
J. Duloy, R. Jolly, and Montek Singh .
The book was published by the Oxford University Press in 1975.
the architect of the book was Chenery, Montek’s godfather and not the Ambala boy.
Hollis Chenery
Hollis Burnley Chenery (January 6, 1918 – September 1, 1994)
was the leading development economist
associated with USAID . He became the World Bank's Vice president for
development policy from 1972 through to 1982. Now, Chenery was not only Monty’s
boss at World Bank, but also a reputed scholar and double the age of Montek. To
appropriate the work and mentorship of Chenery in this book in discussion is an
intellectual forgery. One can check the biodata of Chenery and this work also
figures in the list of books that he contributed. Thus, to drumbeat a book as his own while the same was a
compilation of essays by leading economists and that included an essay also by a young World Bank staffer,
Montek; as the intellectual work of Montek is ostentatious fraud by the man.
One will be amused to find that his CV contains as
silly “intellectual work” as Memorial
lectures, presentations before NDC &
Planning Commission. Here are some anecdotal pieces :
Speech of Shri Montek Singh Ahluwalia, Deputy Chairman,
Planning Commission during 53rd National Development Council Meeting held at
Vigyan Bhavan, New Delhi on 29th May, 2007
Sardar Patel Memorial Lecture by Montek Singh Ahluwalia,
Deputy Chairman, Planning Commission on 'India 2020 : A New Tryst with Destiny'
on 25th October, 2005
54th Convocation Address by Montek Singh Ahluwalia, Deputy
Chairman, Planning Commission to the Students of Maharaja Satyajirao University
of Baroda on 8th October, 2005
Jawahar Lal Nehru Memorial Trust Lecture - India in a
Globalizing World at London on 20 April, 2005
Discussants Comments on the Paper on Financial Policies and
the Prevention of Financial Crisis in Emerging Markets(Source : Economic and
Financial Crisis in Emerging Market Economies by Frederic Mishkin, NBER
Conference, Vermont) – 2003
http://planningcommission.nic.in/aboutus/history/index.php?about=spemsabody.htm
Even then, his total intellectual contribution adds up to
64, not even 8% of what this blogger has contributed. There are hardly 12
papers of merit . Before, he was directly appointed on kin-clan patrimonial
system by Manmohan Singh as Economic Adviser in Finance ministry in 1979, he
had to his credit merely 5-6 papers of
some merit. So, the claim of his extraordinary genius lies exposed. Most
of Indian Economic Service officers are better placed than this Ambala man,
given an opportunity.
If he is not the
genius from the Mars, how did he rise so swiftly? The answer lies in the
operation of pseudo-intellectual cartel. Once, the Soviet Union disintegrated,
the horde of “scholars” with upbringing
in western universities penetrated Indian economic policy establishment. Freed from the Soviet
hand, it was the American hand to scratch, rub, squeeze Indian economy for the
pleasure of western hegemonists. Montek’s each step is guided with the same
intent to serve the English masters rather than his own neighbourhood in
Ambala.
Montek’s role in Harshad Mehta Scam
With the end of the bipolar world system, it was imperative
for the Americans to open up new market
for the free movement of their finance capital, which disjunctured from
industrial capital. This was the result of the collapse of Bretton Woods system
that hinged upon the primacy of dollar
as international reserve and transaction currency and convertibility of gold
and dollar. When Nixon ended the system of dollar –gold convertibility on 15th
August,1971; dollar became a fiat currency. America learnt a complex trick to
run the global Ponzi scheme of oil-dollar-gold axis . It is the dollar
dominance that gives America the strength to sustain its global hegemony.
Finance capital also turned into speculative capital with the arrival of
mathematical production of capital through securitization. India, being a
paramount Asian nation , could have been an entrepot for dollar movement in
Asia As soon as Manmohan Singh became Finance Minister in 1991, Montek
was asked to take over as the Finance
Secretary. Both had to brush aside the
investigation against collapse of notorious ISI-CIA operated Abedi ‘s
bank, BCCI which had collapsed with 16 billion dollar capital and which was the
first scandal to break out in the age of mobile finance capital funded covertly
by the US. While there were investigation all across the world, Indian
government avoided it even though the manager of the Bombay branch had openly
addressed the media that money was being paid to the finance Ministry officials
as well as top politicians in India. Her statement was later recorded by John
Kerry led Senate Sub-Committee on BCCI Affairs in the US. But, as finance Secretary,
Montek & his mentor buried the
matter for ever. The movement of
finance was necessary to serve the primacy of dollar. The duo had already
launched the deleterious policy of devaluation of rupee in the name of reducing
trade deficit , but which was effectively meant to strengthen dollar and to
export the cheapest good to the American consumer. It was a kind of global
tributary system with the US as the emperor in which Indian economy was reduced
through the lopsided LPG policy.
With the rupee losing the sheen, Indian market was forced to
seek foreign capital, particularly dollar through the stock market. Harshad
Mehta scam exposed the “system”, but in
fact softened the system for the movement of dollar. The Joint Parliamentary
Committee (JPC) under the chairmanship of Ram Niwas Mirdha probing the securities scam criticized the Secretary, Economic
Affairs,. Montek Singh Ahluwalia, and
the former RBI Governor, S. Venkitaramanan
and passed strictures against the
Union Finance Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh, for having failed to take effective
steps to prevent the scam. JPC report
established that the scandal in which bankers and brokers had colluded
to siphon away funds from state-owned companies and government securities to
invest in the Bombay Stock Exchange was taking place under the noose of Finance
Ministry under Montek –Manmohan.. But,
like the BCCI affairs, the Harshad Mehta scam’s government master-minds escaped
the action since Mehta alleged that P.V. Narasimha Rao himself took bribe of Rs.1
crore. On hindsight, it appears as a conspiracy against Rao so that the JPC
report was brushed aside by Rao and the guilty in his cabinet and Finance
Ministry escaped the punishment. This
whole episode smoothened the stock market for entry of foreign hot money and
the mobility of dollar.
Montek’s role in Enron scandal
Montek Ahluwalia
sought World Bank funding for the Enron power project, in Maharashtra, but the
World Bank rejected the support as it did not find it feasible. No one
liked the idea of using imported LNG
as fuel at that time as the least cost option for Maharashtra.
But, inspite of non-clearance from world bank, suddenly
American gas giant Enron started getting clearances at lightening pace. But, the
Central Electricity Authority (CEA), which had the statutory duty under
the Electricity Supply Act to evaluate the project from the technical and
financial angles withheld clearance. On
November 3, 1993, Montek as Finance secretary
called a meeting specifically to discuss the financial aspects of
Enron. Then, on November 5, 1993, Montek
called a meeting of the Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) and cleared
the project from finance angle. When on November 11, 1993, the day before the
CEA meeting, CEA received a letter from
the Ministry of Power quoting the above statement of Ahluwalia from the minutes
of the FIPB meeting and asking the CEA not to examine the project from the
financial angle. The CEA hurdle was thus removed . Finally, Enron project
backtracked. An Enron official later caused fury in India while claiming
before United States Congress that the
company had spent $20 million in "educating" Indians, everyone could
guess who these ‘Indians” were. Even after Enron scandal in India, Montek was
frequently seen with Enron chief
Kenneth Lay at the 1996 annual meeting
of the World Bank and IMF in Washington.
Montek and Bhopal Gas tragedy
In August,2010 , emails between Montek Singh Ahluwalia and
Mike Froman, the US Deputy National Security Advisor were leaked in media on the issue of resolving Bhopal issue by
engaging in a quid pro quo on Dow’s liability in Bhopal gas tragedy and other economic engagements.
Montek’s foreign
travels- the austerity of the affluent
P. Sainth wrote a scathing piece on Montek on May 21,2012 in the Hindu, under the caption “The austerity of
the affluent” .The piece highlighted how a
rural Indian spending Rs. 22.50 a day would not be considered poor by a Planning
Commission whose Deputy Chairman's foreign trips(Montek Singh Ahluwalia)
between May and October last year cost a daily average of Rs. 2.02 lakh.
The RTI replies revealed that Montek made 42 official
foreign trips and spent 274 days overseas during a seven-year tenure. That is
“one in every nine days” abroad. http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/columns/sainath/article3439624.ece
Interestingly, half of the trips were to the US, while the US does not have any
Planning Commission. Montek felt offended to reply
http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/article3449609.ece?homepage=true
But, the same was
substance less and Sainath charged him with direct fire with three pertinent
questions:
(i) Rs.2.02 lakh daily average expenditure for trips between
May and October 2011 (well after his “busy” G-20 period ending in 2010). No
“gross extravagance”?
(ii) 274 days abroad, or one in every nine. Factor in travel
days and it could be one in seven away from office.
(iii) 42 trips, half of them visits to the U.S. (several
trips not connected with his duties as Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission).
http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/article3449607.ece
Source:http://www.tehelka.com
(once upon a time, he was a desi boy!)
With Montek exposed in public glare, Indian masses felt
happy. This is the credibility of the
“intellectual”. What amuses citizens is
that Montek would twist his accent into pure Videshi style to
give an impression that his forefathers were born in the US. This is merely
to hide his own unremarkable childhood in Ambala. Immediately, one’s mind foray
into the story of a UP child who hogged
limelight in 2007 with his American accent and claimed that he was a
reincarnation. He was dubbed as “Bheja-fry” by Indian media. The Bheja-fry was
brandished from the public gaze. But, here is a bheja-fry adult, who continues
to hog limelight .
Now that he received Padma Vibhushan(2011) in a sudden token
of appreciation for doing ills to this nation’s poor, he needs rest and to do some serious academic work. His age is not on his side. He
will no longer be remembered as a genius
if he doesn’t write at least a single book.
Having not passed in a single competitive examination in India, he tried
to become architect of non-auction policy (another name for non-competition)for
sale of India’s natural resources. The gambit has failed.
Nowadays , he has
been aiming to become the Finance minister emulating his mentor, who after
being the FM got elevated as the PM. But, imitations of parody never succeed.
Indian masses can no longer be scared by American accent of an Ambala boy, nor
the pseudo- claims of being an
intellectual giant. With all the taints, some visible, others yet to emerge; his
soul can never rest in peace in this holy motherland .
( oohrs. 6.6.12)
Posted 6th June 2012 by Nation First"
http://ariseasia.blogspot.in/2012/06/know-your-superleadersi-montek.html
Reproduced below is an expose on Former Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh who has been Montek Singh Ahluwalia's partner in crime. This post has been reproduced from http://ariseasia.blogspot.in/2011/08/know-your-honest-prime-minister-ii.html
Manmohan Singh may feign ignorance about all the dirt, corruption, crony governance, but the patrimony in both civil services and armed services started in a brazen form from the very top. Many analysts are aghast at the way ‘Turban” became the most important agenda for governance after Singh became the PM. No one has raised the issue of the worst communal Prime minister any country in world ever can have. He is not a shadow PM to Sonia Gandhi as many believe. The way he gets Padama Vibhushana to Montek Singh Ahluwalia in a year when his own Cabinet Minister, Kamal Nath charges Ahluwalia and he has been caught off the guard lobbying for murderer of innocent lives in Bhopal Gas tragedy, Warren Anderson. Singh gets PadamShree to Sant Singh Chatwal inspite of two charge sheets against him on account of forgery and cheating pending against him. And when the CBI was asked for information by the CIC on an application by journalist Krishnananda Triphathi , the CBI itself was exempted from RTI Act in a single night so that the truth may not prevail and the role of the PMO does not come under the public view.. One can see the way one sycophant, corrupt babu B.S. Lalli, the CEO of Prasar Bharati was not acted against inspite of Court order because he was a sikh. Only when political leaders across party lines attacked the government, Lalli was suspended on December 21, 2010. One can also read how T.S. Darbari and M.S.Gill were being saved in CWG scam. In the gruesome Nithari case, the way Moninder Singh Pandher was given clean chit by the CBI in all chargesheets had raised eyebrows across the nation.The finger of suspicion was raised against the PMO as Pandher was a co-religionist of Dr. Singh. In Nalanda University the way Prime Minister got one Gopa Sabharwal as VC against the whole Ministry's noting is not surprising, since she happens to be co-religionist and the friend of his daughter, Upinder Singh who too has seen meteoric rise after Manmohan Singh became the Prime Minister. She was elevated to Reader and Professor of Delhi University within a year as soon as Dr. Singh became the PM and there are allegations that the then Vice Chancellor of Delhi University who too is an economist with same area of research as PM Singh, ,was obliged for this deed with various Directorship in PSUs like SBI,SAIL, Maruti Udyog Ltd. He got dozens of corrupt babus and leaders elevated as the Governors only due to the fact that they are his kinsman. One can count the name like S.S. Sidhu, Iqbal Singh, Buta Singh. Even when Buta Singh was removed from the post of governor after Supreme court verdict in President Rule in Bihar in 2005, he was given another constitutional post as the chairman of the Scheduled caste Commission. While his son was arrested by the CBI taking bribe and UPA Chairperson was not happy with Buta Singh due to his act of defiance against official congress candidate, Manmohan Singh continued to protect him till end. One can also see the way he got a sumptuous relief package for victims of 1984 anti-sikh riots in December,2005, while ignoring victims from every other religion.
And don’t forget how he has made the "issue of turbans of Sikhs" as the only foreign policy challenge for India. One can see the differential treatment meted by the government of India on two religious-cultural issues in the same month. When Jay Leno was joking about American Republican Party Presidential election contender ,Mitt Romney's wealth by pointing to a picture of the Golden temple and describing the Golden Temple as Mitt Romney's summer home, the whole Indian establishment went into a tizzy. Indian government lodged a formal protest with the US government mentioning that it has offended Sikhs sentiments. MEA, Overseas Indian Affair Ministry, Indian Ambassador in the US all went into a huddle as if it was a national emergency. But, in the case of erasure of Hindu-Buddhist past in the National Museum of Maldives on 11th February this year by Islamic radicals , what to say about the condemnation, the whole establishment is busy burying the incident under the Indian Ocean itself. One can also contrast the way the Rajya Sabha condemned the humiliation of Sikhs who were being forced to remove their turbans in the name of security at international airports, especially in Italy on 8th December, 2011. Italian Ambassador Giacomo Sanfelice di Monteforte was summoned in Delhi and protests lodged twice with the Italian government. Indian Foreign Minister called dishonor to Sikhs as “national insult”. One can also see the urgency on this very issue when Indian Prime Minister takes up the matter of Sikh turbans at important meeting of G-20 with the French President. It appears as if the whole establishment is so much engrossed in the issue of Sikh turbans that it is apt to call the administrative machinery as undergoing “turbanization”. But, when all Hindu and Buddhist statues were destroyed in Maldives museum after the recent power change , not a word of condemnation came from the government.
There is an increasing perception that the Prime Minister may project himself as ‘honest”, but the secular and rational fabric of the country’s institutions have been dismantled with the overt practice of kinship-politics and patrimony. This has roots in his own past.
Singh is not King!
Team Anna has clubbed Prime Minister Manmohan Singh along with 14 other Cabinet Ministers, as corrupt and has threatened to launch an indefinite fast from July 25, if an SIT is not constituted to investigate these corrupt ministers. Anna Hazare has referred to draft CAG report on Allocation of Coal Blocks and Augmentation of Coal Production by CIL(2011-12) to make charges against Singh when Coal Ministry was with him. The government deferred the tabling of the CAG Report on Coal scam in the Budget Session even though the same was submitted by the CAG on 11th May, fearing the political implications of Manmohan Singh getting embroiled in the charges of corruption. CAG had earlier estimated in draft Report that Rs 10.6 lakh crore loss has been incurred to the exchequer on account of allotment of coal blocks during 2004 to 2009 without auction. Of the 155 coal blocks given to the private sector, no work has begun in 124 of them. In the final Report , a loss of over Rs 1,80,000 crore to the exchequer in the allotment of coal blocks to private companies has been pointed.
Manmohan Singh always pits the blame over others in every loot and national crime. In 2G scam, the CAG estimated the presumptive loss to the exchequer is of the order of ` 1.76 lakh crore. Though, the PM has been privy to every decision in 2G spectrum allocation, the blame has been shifted to a junior Minister. It is the hallmark of Dr. Singh . The recent controversy on the Army Chief’s letter leak is sought to be put under the carpet when the inquiry points to his own office, though a huge media storming was done to sack the General on the allegation. In Nalanda University scam, the direct hand of the PM in appointing his daughter’s friend as Vice Chancellor at a fat salary has been reported in media. When the BCCI bank collapse issue was embroiling him personally in 1991, he sought to deflect attention by claiming systemic failure. Similarly, in 1992, when Harshad Mehta scam came to limelight, Manmohan Singh, then a Finance Minister said he would not lose sleep over what happened in the markets After the Joint Parliamentary Committee concluded that it was the handiwork of dubious activities of certain share brokers, Manmohan Singh’s claimed it as mere "a systemic failure".
The size of the Harshad Mehta scam estimated by the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) was Rs4,024 crore that would be Rs 23,000 crore today. Along with growth in economy, the size of scams have overgrown under his tutelage. Will a future SIT investigation bring out the truth about the man who has dressed himself under the cloak of “honesty” for too long?
Popularly known as “Mohana”, he was a simple boy born in Gah in present Pakistan on 26th September, 1932 to Sardar Gurumukh Singh, a salesman of dry fruits. It is another matter that he has been appointed to Rajya Sabha from the state of Assam four times in September,1991, June, 1995 and June, 2001, June,2007. Under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, a person has to be an elector in a parliamentary constituency in the state from where he seeks election to Rajya Sabha. This requirement has been done away by the Representation of the People(Amendment) Act, 2003, which amended section 3. But, before this amendment, it was necessary to be a resident of the state from which one contest elections of the Rajya Sabha. Manmohan Singh fudged his permanent address / home state as state of Assam. The fudged address is as follows:
House No. 3989, Nandan Nagar, ward No. 51, Sarumataria, Dispur, Guwahati, Kamrup, Assam-781006
And his name registered at Serial No.720 in Voter’s list of polling station No.155 in Dispur Assembly Constituency.
Thus, he is not as “honest” and simple as the lobbyists advertise about him.
Somnath Chatterjee, charged the present PM when he was the Finance Minister during debate on the collapse of notorious mafia bank,BCCI on 14.9.1991 as “Chor ka dadhi mein Tinaka”.
Some myths have to be busted to unravel the man who has led India to the erosion of democracy and institutional consensus. Singh is known as a Congress man from the start. This is another myth. He has been wearing all caps .What he always craved for is some power and post, not to serve the nation but always to indulge in nepotism, favouritism and non-action against the wrong-doers. He was appointed as an Economic Adviser from 1971-72. The elections were held and with Indira’s victory and P N Haskar’s rising influence, he stepped up as Chief Economic Adviser in Ministry of Finance. Haskar left Indira after showdown with Sanjay Gandhi in 1974, but Singh gained one more opportunity to rivet new authorities. He became full-fledged Secretary in the Ministry of Finance in November, 1976 during the peak days of emergency. When the new Janta Party government came to power, but magically in spite of all purges, he remained seated in his position as Secretary, M/o Finance till April, 1980. So, he was with the Congress Party, then became close to Janta Party and back to Congress Party. The shift is always with those who held political power. He was also the adviser to firebrand socialist leader, George Fernandes in the Industries Ministry, but in later year became a mouthpiece of Washington consensus. Similarly, he became the Adviser to the Prime Minister of India on Economic Affairs in December 1990. Chandrashekhar, a staunch socialist was the PM. When Chandrashekhar was resigning from the post after the Congress Party withdrew support, Singh sought some other post from the outgoing PM in a bizarre behavior and later appointed as the UGC Chairman, a post which he was holding before getting appointed as the Finance Minister in June, 1991. He became finance Minister courtesy P.V.Narasimha Rao, the then Prime Minister only after I. G. Patel is believed to have refused the post .Rao supported him throughout his tenure and safeguarding him from the allegations in BCCI collapse, Harshad Mehta stock market scam. But, Singh dumped Rao and changed his loyalty to Nehru-Gandhi dynasty in 1996. There have been allegations that he indulged in backbiting to get Sitaram Kesari dumped out from the seat of Congress President. As a prime Minister for last 7 years, he didn't even bother to say a single word in praise of the statesmanship of Rao nor named symbolically even a single street in his name. one should not forget how he dumped Amar Singh after 2008 Cash for Vote scam that shamed India’s parliamentary system to let his way on Indo-US Nuclear deal. The same pattern can be seen in 2G case where the responsibility was fixed over a junior colleague and the way he feigned ignorance though being complicit in the sordid saga. With the coal mining scam now hanging over his own head, he is trying to obfuscate the issue by attacking the institution of the CAG.
But, the charges of wrong doings are not new. The worst attack came against him for association with the BCCI in the Parliament in the year 1991.In the month of September, 1982, he was appointed as the RBI Governor, though his specialization was in international trade and not in currency. It was during his tenure that the BCCI (Bank of Credit and Commerce International), the infamous Pakistani Bank which was being used by the ISI-CIA to funnel arms and money for Afghan mujahideens and in Iran’s contra Affairs, was allowed to open a branch in Bombay against the incriminating evidence and advise of India’s intelligence agencies. In this year, the branches of Bank was being closed in Latin America but being the RBI Governor, he overruled the objections. When the BCCI collapsed in the year 1991 with $16 billion, the Parliamentarians attacked the Government. With lot of pressure, the Government agreed for a debate on a motion moved by Jaswant Singh, but before that the Congress Paryty forced a commitment from Jaswant Singh to withdraw the motion after the discussion and this caused shock among the opposition leaders. MMS, as Finance Minister blamed that the permission to open the representative office (not a functional Branch) was given by the then Finance Ministry of the Janta Party government in 1979 earlier, but hid the fact that he himself was the Finance Secretary. He promised the Parliament that the RBI would conduct an enquiry into the collapse of BCCI, which was never done, even though the US Senate Subcommittee on BCCI Affairs led by Senator, John Kerry concluded that BCCI activities were dubious and its relationship with the Hinduja family remain to be explored further.
While replying to motion on Collapse of BCCI on 14.9.1991, a notorious ISI-CIA orchestrated Bank of Pakistan, this is what he pleaded and admitted at the Floor of the parliament:
“ An explicit refrence has been made to me that I have been attempting to cover up the BCCI because my daughter got a scholarship from a particular agency which in turn given some monetary help by the BCCI. I want to come clean on this count, because I do not want to hid anything from this House and I think I would not be worthy of being the Finance Minister of this country if there is a slightest suspicion about my conduct in this matter which allegedly involves the security of our country.”
Then ,he narrated about his connections with BCCI and the circumstances in which his eldest daughter, Upinder Singh got a scholarship for a degree abroad in Canada ,
“ I have daughter who has a very brilliant career. Ahe has throughout been a first-class student. She graduated with First Class Hons. From Delhi University .
I had left the Government of India to take up my position as a Secretary General of a South Commission. In the meanwhile she graduated from the Delhi University . In this country we hav an Oxford and Cambridge Societyu which is a society of the alumni of those two universities. Those people made contribution to a firm and for several years the Oxford and Cambridge Society has been giving scholarship of about Rs.50000 to intending students who want to peruse their studies in Oxford or Cambridge .
It is also true that in 1988, the BCCI made donations to the Oxford and Cambridge society in accordance with the approved Reserve Bank rules for donating money by the bank to various institutions. And it is certainly true that when my daughter applied, she was selected for the award of scholarship of Rs.50000. I was not in this country at that time. I did not know also whether she had applied. I am absolutely faithfully stating to this House that I can never impress anybody for the scholarship and I am quite willing to be judged by the hon. Leaders of the Opposition with regard to my conduct ,insinuation and the charge that has been made in the Indian Express today that because my daughter got a scholarship of Rs.50000 from the Oxford and Cambridge society and because it partly came from donation which was made by the BCCI, therefore I am trying to cover up the BCCI….”
Does this explanation prove his innocence. Look, he claimed that because he was not in India , he was not even aware about the application by his daughter. He claimed that he couldn’t impress anyone. This is the hallmark of the MMS. Indulge in all kinds of wrongdoing and pretend ignorance.
Let us reflect upon what he added about his further association with the BCCI:
“I can also mention the Third world foundation which was financed by the BCCI… When I became the Secretary –General of the South Commission, the theirs World Foundation had promised to give to the South Commission 4 lakh dollars. …… because South Commission was supported by the THIRD WORLD foundation and therefore the Chairman of the SOUTH Commission thereby became a toll of the CIA or of drug laundering and all these things..”
Now, read at the slip of tongue. No one imputed MMS as a CIA’s tool in the Parliament. Why should one overreach to score a self-goal? The fact is that he admitted that BCCI was a tool of the CIA and indulged in drug laundering and other bad things. The BCCI opened a representative office in 1977. Who was the Finance Secretary? It was MMS. In 1979, the Finance Ministry at the level of minister of State decided that the RBI should be asked to give BCCI branch in India, as per admission of MMS, which is half-baked fact, as he was the then Finance Secretary and with his “intellectual prowess” must be overwhelming the then finance Minister, Chaudhary Charan Singh, a humble peasant leader or his MoS.. In 1983, as the RBI Governor, he gave permission to the BCCI to open branch in Bombay . Not only that, it was seen that the nationalized Banks like SBI parked their surplus in the BCCI bank, which the FM, MMS defended on the floor of the House. If he facilitated the entry of the ISI-CIA operated BCCI bank into India , what was wrong if the BCCI gave donation to an organization at that very moment when the organization was extending scholarship to his daughter! One must remember that his daughter did not go to Oxford-Cambridge in Britain as per the custom of the scholarship extended by the Oxford-Cambridge Society but to McGill University (1988-1991) in Canada . Is it mere coincidence that he became Secretary General of an organization heavily funded by the same BCCI network? The pretentious mask of the man was off when by sheer goondaism, the Motion was forced to be withdrawn on the last day of the First Session in 1991 new Lok Sabha just as has been done with the Lokpal Bill in the Rajya Sabha at midnight. MMS promised to get an enquiry conducted by the RBI and the security agencies, but everything was put under the a carpet. The demand for JPC was refused. The Opposition was silenced and the murky affairs of the BCCI remain hidden from Indian public even after 20 years , though the inquiries in the US revealed that BCCI frequently bribed leaders and officials in India and were involved in the drug trade, terror funding, arms trade and even nuclear black marketing that helped Pakistan to build N-bomb. By committing a fraud against the Parliament to get the motion withdrawn amidst walkout by the opposition and scuttling the investigation, MMS put the activities of BCCI in India off the public radar for ever.
When Jaswant Singh in his book “A Call to Honor” claimed, that there was a mole in Narasimha Rao cabinet who gave prior information about nuclear test to be conducted in 1995, the PMO went on overdrive to counter –attack and suggesting different names like V.S.Arunachalam, who was not a Cabinet Minister, but Scientific Adviser. The nation has seen how the votes were bought at the floor of the House during the No-Confidence Motion in 2008 to save the government only to shield the Indo-US Civil Nuclear Deal which borders on surrendering India’s sovereignty over a strategic element of national interest. Similar pattern can be seen in the recent episode of leakage of letter of General V.K.Singh written to the PM.
When MMS became the PM, he got appointed an IAS officer of Assam cadre as Director in the PMO on 16th August 2004. In 1999, the Chief Secretary of Assam, V.S.Jafa reported to the then CVC, N.Vitthal about serious illegal association of this particular official with ULFA. The CVC alerted the Home Ministry about the ULFA man in the Assam government being protected by the Home Ministry officers. This particular officer, as per CVC report, was facilitating ULFA with the government vehicles for extortion. When an FIR was registered, the driver of the said vehicle was found dead. Again, the case took curious turn with the death of this witness’s death. The Chief Secretary of Assam sought Z+ protection for himself to survive against threat from a DC in Assam. Finally, he met with serious accident while traveling in Haryana in February,1999. A truck rammed into his car, he survived. The CVC and the Assam government alerted the Centre Government against this officer, but nothing was done. The Home Ministry sat on file.
Later, this official was posted in the PMO of the MMS and the other officer who protected ULFA’s IAS man was elevated as Home Secretary by the MMS. Mid-day reported about this mole of ULFA in the Central Government on 4th January, 2008 in a big scoop. But, the same officer got elevated as Joint Secretary and posted to the Finance Ministry while the intelligence agencies were certain about his role in the terror funding network through the stock market. Why was this particular officer given so much of liberty? Because he managed the fake certificates for permanent residence of MMS from the state of Assam in the district of Kamrup.
He has also allowed a myth created that he is a brilliant economist who helped India to stem the crisis in 1991. The myth is created to build a personality of honest Statesman of the country, who understands India better than the parliamentarians who are less qualified and mere the representatives of the rural or half-educated masses. But, no one knows what contribution Singh made in the field of economics or governance or philosophy or literature. He did his D.Phil from Nuffield College, University of Oxford. The topic was, ”India’s Export Trends and Prospects for self-Sustained Growth” (1951-60). This work was later published by a publisher in Oxford in 1964. The book runs into 369 pages and argues for the role of State Trading Corporations (STC). He was gung-ho for the socialist model of economy. This was a naïve and short study of mere 10 years of trade balance sheet of a new nation when neither trade was varied nor there were many international players with trade linkages as the trade relationship during colonial times gets skewed and over-dependent on the core-nation viz. Britain. Apart from this work which is mere reproduction of Doctorate thesis without any fresh idea or any insight, there is no original or any other work done by Singh in the field of knowledge. He started his career after a brief stint as lecturer in Punjab, in the UNCTAD as Economics Affairs officer from 1966-69. In 1971, he became a Professor at JNU courtesy, P.N.Haskar, a close aide to the then Prime Minister. One of his colleagues at Nuffield and a senior Congress leader in South India, V.Isvarmurti, who is the Chairman of the Vadamalai media group that publishes Agriculture and Industry Survey mentions about his insight into economics :
“He joined the Indira Gandhi establishment under P.N.Haskar and he, sorry to say, imbibed the authoritarian culture and from that time onwards he was in every political establishment. So, we have to be a bit more honest and also objective enough to see that Dr. Singh had never articulated his basic economic beliefs in any of the major areas. He just sticks to the standard jargon of percentage of economic growth, budget deficit and inflation.”
(Dr.Manmohan Singh as an economist, August 1, 2006; Agriculture and Industry Survey)
His understanding of economics has also come under firing line.Exchange rate value of rupee has plummeted below 56 rupee per dollar. Dr. Singh appears to be the brain behind weakening of rupee which in turns make imports dearer and to compensate the same, oil prices are being hiked. The calculations suggest that weakening of rupee by amount of 1 rupee entails increase in oil import cost of Rs. 4000 crores. When a policy of devaluation of rupee was launched under the New Economic Policy in 1991, the pretext was to improve India’s trade balance. The government browbeated the critics and shouted from all available platforms that it will make exports cheaper and import costlier, thereby making Indian products competitive and import would be discouraged. But, the value of Rupee has declined from 18 rupee a dollar in July 1991 to now 56 rupees a dollar, still the balance of trade has deteriorated massively from mere 2.7 billion dollar to now projected 200 billion dollar. Thus, nation owes an apology from Singh for misguiding and in the process compromising with India’s wealth accumulation by intentionally launching a deleterious devaluation policy of Rupee.
When during the 2008 economic crisis in the US, there was a fear of a run against dollar; the RBI pursued a policy of actively intervening in Forex market to checkmate the natural rise of rupee against dollar and help support a strong dollar policy which American policy makers were drum beating. Dr. Singh addressed press on 23rd November, 2009 en route to New York and defended strong dollar policy. This was surprising since he was coming from BRIC summit where it was decided to reduce dollar role in world economy after the American economy was on verge of bankruptcy. Devaluation of weak currencies make exchange highly unfavorable for the exporting countries. The US realizes the advantage of strong currency. This is the reason for postponement of ‘dollar devaluation.’ Instead, US is pressurizing China to revalue Yuan. The rich nations have created currency areas with their own strong currency at the centre to reap the benefits of distorted exchange rate system. CFA Franc Zone in Africa, an expanding Euro Zone towards Southern Mediterranean area and emergent process of dollarization reflects the urge by strong nations to earn undue advantages at the cost of poor nations. But, here is a PM who has guided rupee destiny from Rs.18 to now Rs. 56 per dollar and still claiming that the market should determine its value while not raising heckles against dollar whose strength is created artificially to maintain America’s global hegemony.
His rise to the seat of the Prime minister itself is neither based on merit nor on popular support. He can go to any extent to practice patrimony since his own rise is rooted through this way. Nether did he face any competitive examination to reach to the top in the bureaucracy nor did he even win even a municipal election to reach to the top of the political leadership. Thus, it is not a surprise that he has allowed crony governance based on nepotism, corruption, fraud to penetrate each sector of India. It will not be a surprise that some day the PM will appear with a Sikh Army chief, a Sikh deputy Chairman of planning Commission, a Sikh IB Chief, a Sikh Foreign Secretary and a Sikh Cabinet Secretary(either of two Khullars or Dhingra), dozen of Sikh governors, Sikh VCs of India's two International university, South Asian University & Nalanda.....Meritocracy will soon succumb to patrimony practiced by India's worst communal political CEO. But to infect the armed forces with the virus of crony selection is to dismantle the spine of national unity. General V.K. Singh may retire, but the armed forces will continue to suffer due to the misdeeds of those who practice corruption and kinship-based progression.
Source:
CRONY GOVERNANCE OF MANMOHAN SINGH
https://www.dropbox.com/s/v0skmwupskkpzc8/DI-June-Issue-2012-in-English.zip
Dialogue India, June, 2012"
Further expose of Manmohan Singh by http://ariseasia.blogspot.in/2011/08/know-your-honest-prime-minister-ii.html
Reproduced below is an expose on Former Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh who has been Montek Singh Ahluwalia's partner in crime. This post has been reproduced from http://ariseasia.blogspot.in/2011/08/know-your-honest-prime-minister-ii.html
Manmohan Singh may feign ignorance about all the dirt, corruption, crony governance, but the patrimony in both civil services and armed services started in a brazen form from the very top. Many analysts are aghast at the way ‘Turban” became the most important agenda for governance after Singh became the PM. No one has raised the issue of the worst communal Prime minister any country in world ever can have. He is not a shadow PM to Sonia Gandhi as many believe. The way he gets Padama Vibhushana to Montek Singh Ahluwalia in a year when his own Cabinet Minister, Kamal Nath charges Ahluwalia and he has been caught off the guard lobbying for murderer of innocent lives in Bhopal Gas tragedy, Warren Anderson. Singh gets PadamShree to Sant Singh Chatwal inspite of two charge sheets against him on account of forgery and cheating pending against him. And when the CBI was asked for information by the CIC on an application by journalist Krishnananda Triphathi , the CBI itself was exempted from RTI Act in a single night so that the truth may not prevail and the role of the PMO does not come under the public view.. One can see the way one sycophant, corrupt babu B.S. Lalli, the CEO of Prasar Bharati was not acted against inspite of Court order because he was a sikh. Only when political leaders across party lines attacked the government, Lalli was suspended on December 21, 2010. One can also read how T.S. Darbari and M.S.Gill were being saved in CWG scam. In the gruesome Nithari case, the way Moninder Singh Pandher was given clean chit by the CBI in all chargesheets had raised eyebrows across the nation.The finger of suspicion was raised against the PMO as Pandher was a co-religionist of Dr. Singh. In Nalanda University the way Prime Minister got one Gopa Sabharwal as VC against the whole Ministry's noting is not surprising, since she happens to be co-religionist and the friend of his daughter, Upinder Singh who too has seen meteoric rise after Manmohan Singh became the Prime Minister. She was elevated to Reader and Professor of Delhi University within a year as soon as Dr. Singh became the PM and there are allegations that the then Vice Chancellor of Delhi University who too is an economist with same area of research as PM Singh, ,was obliged for this deed with various Directorship in PSUs like SBI,SAIL, Maruti Udyog Ltd. He got dozens of corrupt babus and leaders elevated as the Governors only due to the fact that they are his kinsman. One can count the name like S.S. Sidhu, Iqbal Singh, Buta Singh. Even when Buta Singh was removed from the post of governor after Supreme court verdict in President Rule in Bihar in 2005, he was given another constitutional post as the chairman of the Scheduled caste Commission. While his son was arrested by the CBI taking bribe and UPA Chairperson was not happy with Buta Singh due to his act of defiance against official congress candidate, Manmohan Singh continued to protect him till end. One can also see the way he got a sumptuous relief package for victims of 1984 anti-sikh riots in December,2005, while ignoring victims from every other religion.
And don’t forget how he has made the "issue of turbans of Sikhs" as the only foreign policy challenge for India. One can see the differential treatment meted by the government of India on two religious-cultural issues in the same month. When Jay Leno was joking about American Republican Party Presidential election contender ,Mitt Romney's wealth by pointing to a picture of the Golden temple and describing the Golden Temple as Mitt Romney's summer home, the whole Indian establishment went into a tizzy. Indian government lodged a formal protest with the US government mentioning that it has offended Sikhs sentiments. MEA, Overseas Indian Affair Ministry, Indian Ambassador in the US all went into a huddle as if it was a national emergency. But, in the case of erasure of Hindu-Buddhist past in the National Museum of Maldives on 11th February this year by Islamic radicals , what to say about the condemnation, the whole establishment is busy burying the incident under the Indian Ocean itself. One can also contrast the way the Rajya Sabha condemned the humiliation of Sikhs who were being forced to remove their turbans in the name of security at international airports, especially in Italy on 8th December, 2011. Italian Ambassador Giacomo Sanfelice di Monteforte was summoned in Delhi and protests lodged twice with the Italian government. Indian Foreign Minister called dishonor to Sikhs as “national insult”. One can also see the urgency on this very issue when Indian Prime Minister takes up the matter of Sikh turbans at important meeting of G-20 with the French President. It appears as if the whole establishment is so much engrossed in the issue of Sikh turbans that it is apt to call the administrative machinery as undergoing “turbanization”. But, when all Hindu and Buddhist statues were destroyed in Maldives museum after the recent power change , not a word of condemnation came from the government.
There is an increasing perception that the Prime Minister may project himself as ‘honest”, but the secular and rational fabric of the country’s institutions have been dismantled with the overt practice of kinship-politics and patrimony. This has roots in his own past.
Singh is not King!
Team Anna has clubbed Prime Minister Manmohan Singh along with 14 other Cabinet Ministers, as corrupt and has threatened to launch an indefinite fast from July 25, if an SIT is not constituted to investigate these corrupt ministers. Anna Hazare has referred to draft CAG report on Allocation of Coal Blocks and Augmentation of Coal Production by CIL(2011-12) to make charges against Singh when Coal Ministry was with him. The government deferred the tabling of the CAG Report on Coal scam in the Budget Session even though the same was submitted by the CAG on 11th May, fearing the political implications of Manmohan Singh getting embroiled in the charges of corruption. CAG had earlier estimated in draft Report that Rs 10.6 lakh crore loss has been incurred to the exchequer on account of allotment of coal blocks during 2004 to 2009 without auction. Of the 155 coal blocks given to the private sector, no work has begun in 124 of them. In the final Report , a loss of over Rs 1,80,000 crore to the exchequer in the allotment of coal blocks to private companies has been pointed.
Manmohan Singh always pits the blame over others in every loot and national crime. In 2G scam, the CAG estimated the presumptive loss to the exchequer is of the order of ` 1.76 lakh crore. Though, the PM has been privy to every decision in 2G spectrum allocation, the blame has been shifted to a junior Minister. It is the hallmark of Dr. Singh . The recent controversy on the Army Chief’s letter leak is sought to be put under the carpet when the inquiry points to his own office, though a huge media storming was done to sack the General on the allegation. In Nalanda University scam, the direct hand of the PM in appointing his daughter’s friend as Vice Chancellor at a fat salary has been reported in media. When the BCCI bank collapse issue was embroiling him personally in 1991, he sought to deflect attention by claiming systemic failure. Similarly, in 1992, when Harshad Mehta scam came to limelight, Manmohan Singh, then a Finance Minister said he would not lose sleep over what happened in the markets After the Joint Parliamentary Committee concluded that it was the handiwork of dubious activities of certain share brokers, Manmohan Singh’s claimed it as mere "a systemic failure".
The size of the Harshad Mehta scam estimated by the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) was Rs4,024 crore that would be Rs 23,000 crore today. Along with growth in economy, the size of scams have overgrown under his tutelage. Will a future SIT investigation bring out the truth about the man who has dressed himself under the cloak of “honesty” for too long?
Popularly known as “Mohana”, he was a simple boy born in Gah in present Pakistan on 26th September, 1932 to Sardar Gurumukh Singh, a salesman of dry fruits. It is another matter that he has been appointed to Rajya Sabha from the state of Assam four times in September,1991, June, 1995 and June, 2001, June,2007. Under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, a person has to be an elector in a parliamentary constituency in the state from where he seeks election to Rajya Sabha. This requirement has been done away by the Representation of the People(Amendment) Act, 2003, which amended section 3. But, before this amendment, it was necessary to be a resident of the state from which one contest elections of the Rajya Sabha. Manmohan Singh fudged his permanent address / home state as state of Assam. The fudged address is as follows:
House No. 3989, Nandan Nagar, ward No. 51, Sarumataria, Dispur, Guwahati, Kamrup, Assam-781006
And his name registered at Serial No.720 in Voter’s list of polling station No.155 in Dispur Assembly Constituency.
Thus, he is not as “honest” and simple as the lobbyists advertise about him.
Somnath Chatterjee, charged the present PM when he was the Finance Minister during debate on the collapse of notorious mafia bank,BCCI on 14.9.1991 as “Chor ka dadhi mein Tinaka”.
Some myths have to be busted to unravel the man who has led India to the erosion of democracy and institutional consensus. Singh is known as a Congress man from the start. This is another myth. He has been wearing all caps .What he always craved for is some power and post, not to serve the nation but always to indulge in nepotism, favouritism and non-action against the wrong-doers. He was appointed as an Economic Adviser from 1971-72. The elections were held and with Indira’s victory and P N Haskar’s rising influence, he stepped up as Chief Economic Adviser in Ministry of Finance. Haskar left Indira after showdown with Sanjay Gandhi in 1974, but Singh gained one more opportunity to rivet new authorities. He became full-fledged Secretary in the Ministry of Finance in November, 1976 during the peak days of emergency. When the new Janta Party government came to power, but magically in spite of all purges, he remained seated in his position as Secretary, M/o Finance till April, 1980. So, he was with the Congress Party, then became close to Janta Party and back to Congress Party. The shift is always with those who held political power. He was also the adviser to firebrand socialist leader, George Fernandes in the Industries Ministry, but in later year became a mouthpiece of Washington consensus. Similarly, he became the Adviser to the Prime Minister of India on Economic Affairs in December 1990. Chandrashekhar, a staunch socialist was the PM. When Chandrashekhar was resigning from the post after the Congress Party withdrew support, Singh sought some other post from the outgoing PM in a bizarre behavior and later appointed as the UGC Chairman, a post which he was holding before getting appointed as the Finance Minister in June, 1991. He became finance Minister courtesy P.V.Narasimha Rao, the then Prime Minister only after I. G. Patel is believed to have refused the post .Rao supported him throughout his tenure and safeguarding him from the allegations in BCCI collapse, Harshad Mehta stock market scam. But, Singh dumped Rao and changed his loyalty to Nehru-Gandhi dynasty in 1996. There have been allegations that he indulged in backbiting to get Sitaram Kesari dumped out from the seat of Congress President. As a prime Minister for last 7 years, he didn't even bother to say a single word in praise of the statesmanship of Rao nor named symbolically even a single street in his name. one should not forget how he dumped Amar Singh after 2008 Cash for Vote scam that shamed India’s parliamentary system to let his way on Indo-US Nuclear deal. The same pattern can be seen in 2G case where the responsibility was fixed over a junior colleague and the way he feigned ignorance though being complicit in the sordid saga. With the coal mining scam now hanging over his own head, he is trying to obfuscate the issue by attacking the institution of the CAG.
But, the charges of wrong doings are not new. The worst attack came against him for association with the BCCI in the Parliament in the year 1991.In the month of September, 1982, he was appointed as the RBI Governor, though his specialization was in international trade and not in currency. It was during his tenure that the BCCI (Bank of Credit and Commerce International), the infamous Pakistani Bank which was being used by the ISI-CIA to funnel arms and money for Afghan mujahideens and in Iran’s contra Affairs, was allowed to open a branch in Bombay against the incriminating evidence and advise of India’s intelligence agencies. In this year, the branches of Bank was being closed in Latin America but being the RBI Governor, he overruled the objections. When the BCCI collapsed in the year 1991 with $16 billion, the Parliamentarians attacked the Government. With lot of pressure, the Government agreed for a debate on a motion moved by Jaswant Singh, but before that the Congress Paryty forced a commitment from Jaswant Singh to withdraw the motion after the discussion and this caused shock among the opposition leaders. MMS, as Finance Minister blamed that the permission to open the representative office (not a functional Branch) was given by the then Finance Ministry of the Janta Party government in 1979 earlier, but hid the fact that he himself was the Finance Secretary. He promised the Parliament that the RBI would conduct an enquiry into the collapse of BCCI, which was never done, even though the US Senate Subcommittee on BCCI Affairs led by Senator, John Kerry concluded that BCCI activities were dubious and its relationship with the Hinduja family remain to be explored further.
While replying to motion on Collapse of BCCI on 14.9.1991, a notorious ISI-CIA orchestrated Bank of Pakistan, this is what he pleaded and admitted at the Floor of the parliament:
“ An explicit refrence has been made to me that I have been attempting to cover up the BCCI because my daughter got a scholarship from a particular agency which in turn given some monetary help by the BCCI. I want to come clean on this count, because I do not want to hid anything from this House and I think I would not be worthy of being the Finance Minister of this country if there is a slightest suspicion about my conduct in this matter which allegedly involves the security of our country.”
Then ,he narrated about his connections with BCCI and the circumstances in which his eldest daughter, Upinder Singh got a scholarship for a degree abroad in Canada ,
“ I have daughter who has a very brilliant career. Ahe has throughout been a first-class student. She graduated with First Class Hons. From Delhi University .
I had left the Government of India to take up my position as a Secretary General of a South Commission. In the meanwhile she graduated from the Delhi University . In this country we hav an Oxford and Cambridge Societyu which is a society of the alumni of those two universities. Those people made contribution to a firm and for several years the Oxford and Cambridge Society has been giving scholarship of about Rs.50000 to intending students who want to peruse their studies in Oxford or Cambridge .
It is also true that in 1988, the BCCI made donations to the Oxford and Cambridge society in accordance with the approved Reserve Bank rules for donating money by the bank to various institutions. And it is certainly true that when my daughter applied, she was selected for the award of scholarship of Rs.50000. I was not in this country at that time. I did not know also whether she had applied. I am absolutely faithfully stating to this House that I can never impress anybody for the scholarship and I am quite willing to be judged by the hon. Leaders of the Opposition with regard to my conduct ,insinuation and the charge that has been made in the Indian Express today that because my daughter got a scholarship of Rs.50000 from the Oxford and Cambridge society and because it partly came from donation which was made by the BCCI, therefore I am trying to cover up the BCCI….”
Does this explanation prove his innocence. Look, he claimed that because he was not in India , he was not even aware about the application by his daughter. He claimed that he couldn’t impress anyone. This is the hallmark of the MMS. Indulge in all kinds of wrongdoing and pretend ignorance.
Let us reflect upon what he added about his further association with the BCCI:
“I can also mention the Third world foundation which was financed by the BCCI… When I became the Secretary –General of the South Commission, the theirs World Foundation had promised to give to the South Commission 4 lakh dollars. …… because South Commission was supported by the THIRD WORLD foundation and therefore the Chairman of the SOUTH Commission thereby became a toll of the CIA or of drug laundering and all these things..”
Now, read at the slip of tongue. No one imputed MMS as a CIA’s tool in the Parliament. Why should one overreach to score a self-goal? The fact is that he admitted that BCCI was a tool of the CIA and indulged in drug laundering and other bad things. The BCCI opened a representative office in 1977. Who was the Finance Secretary? It was MMS. In 1979, the Finance Ministry at the level of minister of State decided that the RBI should be asked to give BCCI branch in India, as per admission of MMS, which is half-baked fact, as he was the then Finance Secretary and with his “intellectual prowess” must be overwhelming the then finance Minister, Chaudhary Charan Singh, a humble peasant leader or his MoS.. In 1983, as the RBI Governor, he gave permission to the BCCI to open branch in Bombay . Not only that, it was seen that the nationalized Banks like SBI parked their surplus in the BCCI bank, which the FM, MMS defended on the floor of the House. If he facilitated the entry of the ISI-CIA operated BCCI bank into India , what was wrong if the BCCI gave donation to an organization at that very moment when the organization was extending scholarship to his daughter! One must remember that his daughter did not go to Oxford-Cambridge in Britain as per the custom of the scholarship extended by the Oxford-Cambridge Society but to McGill University (1988-1991) in Canada . Is it mere coincidence that he became Secretary General of an organization heavily funded by the same BCCI network? The pretentious mask of the man was off when by sheer goondaism, the Motion was forced to be withdrawn on the last day of the First Session in 1991 new Lok Sabha just as has been done with the Lokpal Bill in the Rajya Sabha at midnight. MMS promised to get an enquiry conducted by the RBI and the security agencies, but everything was put under the a carpet. The demand for JPC was refused. The Opposition was silenced and the murky affairs of the BCCI remain hidden from Indian public even after 20 years , though the inquiries in the US revealed that BCCI frequently bribed leaders and officials in India and were involved in the drug trade, terror funding, arms trade and even nuclear black marketing that helped Pakistan to build N-bomb. By committing a fraud against the Parliament to get the motion withdrawn amidst walkout by the opposition and scuttling the investigation, MMS put the activities of BCCI in India off the public radar for ever.
When Jaswant Singh in his book “A Call to Honor” claimed, that there was a mole in Narasimha Rao cabinet who gave prior information about nuclear test to be conducted in 1995, the PMO went on overdrive to counter –attack and suggesting different names like V.S.Arunachalam, who was not a Cabinet Minister, but Scientific Adviser. The nation has seen how the votes were bought at the floor of the House during the No-Confidence Motion in 2008 to save the government only to shield the Indo-US Civil Nuclear Deal which borders on surrendering India’s sovereignty over a strategic element of national interest. Similar pattern can be seen in the recent episode of leakage of letter of General V.K.Singh written to the PM.
When MMS became the PM, he got appointed an IAS officer of Assam cadre as Director in the PMO on 16th August 2004. In 1999, the Chief Secretary of Assam, V.S.Jafa reported to the then CVC, N.Vitthal about serious illegal association of this particular official with ULFA. The CVC alerted the Home Ministry about the ULFA man in the Assam government being protected by the Home Ministry officers. This particular officer, as per CVC report, was facilitating ULFA with the government vehicles for extortion. When an FIR was registered, the driver of the said vehicle was found dead. Again, the case took curious turn with the death of this witness’s death. The Chief Secretary of Assam sought Z+ protection for himself to survive against threat from a DC in Assam. Finally, he met with serious accident while traveling in Haryana in February,1999. A truck rammed into his car, he survived. The CVC and the Assam government alerted the Centre Government against this officer, but nothing was done. The Home Ministry sat on file.
Later, this official was posted in the PMO of the MMS and the other officer who protected ULFA’s IAS man was elevated as Home Secretary by the MMS. Mid-day reported about this mole of ULFA in the Central Government on 4th January, 2008 in a big scoop. But, the same officer got elevated as Joint Secretary and posted to the Finance Ministry while the intelligence agencies were certain about his role in the terror funding network through the stock market. Why was this particular officer given so much of liberty? Because he managed the fake certificates for permanent residence of MMS from the state of Assam in the district of Kamrup.
He has also allowed a myth created that he is a brilliant economist who helped India to stem the crisis in 1991. The myth is created to build a personality of honest Statesman of the country, who understands India better than the parliamentarians who are less qualified and mere the representatives of the rural or half-educated masses. But, no one knows what contribution Singh made in the field of economics or governance or philosophy or literature. He did his D.Phil from Nuffield College, University of Oxford. The topic was, ”India’s Export Trends and Prospects for self-Sustained Growth” (1951-60). This work was later published by a publisher in Oxford in 1964. The book runs into 369 pages and argues for the role of State Trading Corporations (STC). He was gung-ho for the socialist model of economy. This was a naïve and short study of mere 10 years of trade balance sheet of a new nation when neither trade was varied nor there were many international players with trade linkages as the trade relationship during colonial times gets skewed and over-dependent on the core-nation viz. Britain. Apart from this work which is mere reproduction of Doctorate thesis without any fresh idea or any insight, there is no original or any other work done by Singh in the field of knowledge. He started his career after a brief stint as lecturer in Punjab, in the UNCTAD as Economics Affairs officer from 1966-69. In 1971, he became a Professor at JNU courtesy, P.N.Haskar, a close aide to the then Prime Minister. One of his colleagues at Nuffield and a senior Congress leader in South India, V.Isvarmurti, who is the Chairman of the Vadamalai media group that publishes Agriculture and Industry Survey mentions about his insight into economics :
“He joined the Indira Gandhi establishment under P.N.Haskar and he, sorry to say, imbibed the authoritarian culture and from that time onwards he was in every political establishment. So, we have to be a bit more honest and also objective enough to see that Dr. Singh had never articulated his basic economic beliefs in any of the major areas. He just sticks to the standard jargon of percentage of economic growth, budget deficit and inflation.”
(Dr.Manmohan Singh as an economist, August 1, 2006; Agriculture and Industry Survey)
His understanding of economics has also come under firing line.Exchange rate value of rupee has plummeted below 56 rupee per dollar. Dr. Singh appears to be the brain behind weakening of rupee which in turns make imports dearer and to compensate the same, oil prices are being hiked. The calculations suggest that weakening of rupee by amount of 1 rupee entails increase in oil import cost of Rs. 4000 crores. When a policy of devaluation of rupee was launched under the New Economic Policy in 1991, the pretext was to improve India’s trade balance. The government browbeated the critics and shouted from all available platforms that it will make exports cheaper and import costlier, thereby making Indian products competitive and import would be discouraged. But, the value of Rupee has declined from 18 rupee a dollar in July 1991 to now 56 rupees a dollar, still the balance of trade has deteriorated massively from mere 2.7 billion dollar to now projected 200 billion dollar. Thus, nation owes an apology from Singh for misguiding and in the process compromising with India’s wealth accumulation by intentionally launching a deleterious devaluation policy of Rupee.
When during the 2008 economic crisis in the US, there was a fear of a run against dollar; the RBI pursued a policy of actively intervening in Forex market to checkmate the natural rise of rupee against dollar and help support a strong dollar policy which American policy makers were drum beating. Dr. Singh addressed press on 23rd November, 2009 en route to New York and defended strong dollar policy. This was surprising since he was coming from BRIC summit where it was decided to reduce dollar role in world economy after the American economy was on verge of bankruptcy. Devaluation of weak currencies make exchange highly unfavorable for the exporting countries. The US realizes the advantage of strong currency. This is the reason for postponement of ‘dollar devaluation.’ Instead, US is pressurizing China to revalue Yuan. The rich nations have created currency areas with their own strong currency at the centre to reap the benefits of distorted exchange rate system. CFA Franc Zone in Africa, an expanding Euro Zone towards Southern Mediterranean area and emergent process of dollarization reflects the urge by strong nations to earn undue advantages at the cost of poor nations. But, here is a PM who has guided rupee destiny from Rs.18 to now Rs. 56 per dollar and still claiming that the market should determine its value while not raising heckles against dollar whose strength is created artificially to maintain America’s global hegemony.
His rise to the seat of the Prime minister itself is neither based on merit nor on popular support. He can go to any extent to practice patrimony since his own rise is rooted through this way. Nether did he face any competitive examination to reach to the top in the bureaucracy nor did he even win even a municipal election to reach to the top of the political leadership. Thus, it is not a surprise that he has allowed crony governance based on nepotism, corruption, fraud to penetrate each sector of India. It will not be a surprise that some day the PM will appear with a Sikh Army chief, a Sikh deputy Chairman of planning Commission, a Sikh IB Chief, a Sikh Foreign Secretary and a Sikh Cabinet Secretary(either of two Khullars or Dhingra), dozen of Sikh governors, Sikh VCs of India's two International university, South Asian University & Nalanda.....Meritocracy will soon succumb to patrimony practiced by India's worst communal political CEO. But to infect the armed forces with the virus of crony selection is to dismantle the spine of national unity. General V.K. Singh may retire, but the armed forces will continue to suffer due to the misdeeds of those who practice corruption and kinship-based progression.
Source:
CRONY GOVERNANCE OF MANMOHAN SINGH
https://www.dropbox.com/s/v0skmwupskkpzc8/DI-June-Issue-2012-in-English.zip
Dialogue India, June, 2012"
Further expose of Manmohan Singh by http://ariseasia.blogspot.in/2011/08/know-your-honest-prime-minister-ii.html
“AUG
27
Know your 'Honest' Prime Minister (II)
5. MMS respects merit
There is a baseless
fixation with merit-based approach of the MMS. Its all humbug. Neither MMS ever
took the merit route to reach the top nor did he allow his family and
colleagues to compete transparently and in open manner to grab the
opportunities to serve the nation. Those who grab power covertly can not
discharge duty in the national interest.
Take the case of MMS
first, in his own admission.
While replying to motion on Collapse of BCCI, a notorious ISI-CIA orchestrated Bank of
Pakistan, this is what he pleaded and
admitted on the Floor of the parliament:
“ An explicit reference has been made to me that I have been
attempting to cover up the BCCI because my daughter got a scholarship from a
particular agency which in turn given some monetary help by the BCCI. I want to
come clean on this count, because I do not want to hide anything from this
House and I think I would not be worthy of being the Finance Minister of this
country if there is a slightest suspicion about my conduct in this matter which
allegedly involves the security of our country.”
Then ,he narrated about his connections with BCCI and the
circumstances in which his eldest daughter, Upinder Singh got a scholarship for
a degree abroad in Canada ,
“ I have daughter who
has a very brilliant career. She has throughout been a first-class student. She
graduated with First Class Hons. from Delhi University .
I had left the Government of India to take up my position as
a Secretary General of a South Commission. In the meanwhile she graduated from
the Delhi University . In this country we have an Oxford and Cambridge Society
which is a society of the alumni of those two universities. Those people made
contribution to a firm and for several years the OXFORD AND Cambridge Society
has been giving scholarship of about Rs.50000 to intending students who want to
pursue their studies in Oxford or Cambridge .
It is also true that in 1988, the BCCI made donations to the
Oxford and Cambridge society in accordance with the approved Reserve Bank rules
for donating money by the bank to various institutions. And it is certainly
true that when my daughter applied, she was selected for the award of
scholarship of Rs.50000. I was not in this country at that time. I did not know
also whether she had applied. I am absolutely faithfully stating to this House
that I can never impress anybody for the scholarship and I am quite willing to
be judged by the hon. Leaders of the Opposition with regard to my conduct
,insinuation and the charge that has been made in the Indian Express today that
because my daughter got a scholarship of Rs.50000 from the Oxford and Cambridge
society and because it partly came from donation which was made by the BCCI,
therefore I am trying to cover up the BCCI….”
Does this
explanation prove his innocence and exonerate from the charge of nudging his
family member to get benefit from anti-national organization? Look, he claimed that because he was not in
India , he was not even aware about the application by his daughter. He claimed
that he couldn’t impress anyone. This is the hallmark of the MMS. Indulge in
all kinds of wrongdoing and pretend ignorance.
Let us reflect upon what he added about his further
association with the BCCI:
“I can also mention the Third world foundation which was
financed by the BCCI… When I became the Secretary –General of the South
Commission, the Third World Foundation had promised to give to the South
Commission 4 lakh dollars. …… because South Commission was supported by the
Third World Foundation and therefore the Chairman of the South Commission
thereby became a tool of the CIA or of drug laundering and all these things..”
Now, read at the slip of tongue in Lacanian way. No one
imputed MMS as a CIA ‘s tool in the Parliament. Why should one overreach to
score a self-goal? The fact is that he admitted that BCCI was a tool of the CIA
and indulged in drug laundering and
other bad things. The BCCI opened a representative office in 1977. Who was the
Finance Secretary? It was MMS. In 1979, the Finance Ministry at the level of
minister of State decided that the RBI
should be asked to give BCCI branch in India, as per admission of MMS, which is
half-baked fact, as he was the then Finance Secretary and with his “intellectual
prowess” must be overwhelming the then finance Minister, Chaudhary Charan
Singh, a humble peasant leader or his MoS.. In 1983, as the RBI Governor, he
gave permission to the BCCI to open branch in Bombay . Not only that, it was
seen that the nationalized Banks like SBI parked their surplus in the BCCI
bank, which the FM, MMS defended on the
floor of the House. If he facilitated the entry of the ISI-CIA operated BCCI
bank into India , what was wrong if the BCCI gave donation to an organization at
that very moment when the organization was extending scholarship to his daughter ? One must remember that his
daughter did not go to Oxford-Cambridge in Britain as per the custom of the
scholarship extended by the
Oxford-Cambridge Society but to
McGill University (1988-1991) in Canada . Is it mere coincidence that he
became Secretary General of an organization heavily funded by the same BCCI
network? The pretentious mask of the man
was off when by sheer trickery , the Motion was forced to be withdrawn on the
last day of the First Session in 1991 new Lok Sabha. MMS promised to get an
enquiry conducted by the RBI and the security agencies, but everything was put
under the carpet. The demand for JPC was
refused.. The Opposition was silenced
and the murky affairs of the BCCI remain hidden from Indian public even after
20 years , though the inquiries in the US revealed that BCCI frequently bribed
leaders and officials in India and were involved in the drug trade, terror
funding, arms trade and even nuclear black marketing that helped Pakistan to
build N-bomb.
We again see how
when Nalanda Mentor group was constituted, all the Prime Minister’s Men filled
the vacancy. In the very first meeting, the NMG led by Amartya Sen, a close
friend of MMS from British days, nominated an Advisory Council with two Indians
on board, Upinder Singh and her friend as well as co-author, Nayanjot Lahiri,
both from the field of archaeology with marginal work on history of Delhi ,and
not connected with Nalanda at all. One can see the non-impression by the MMS
when in 2009, the Infosys prize in
Social Sciences conferred to his daughter, Upinder. The whole world was wide awake in disbelief and trying to
figure out the contribution(original or duplicate) made by this legend-in
–making.
The second daughter, Daman Singh is married to an IPS officer from Gujarat
cadre who is on central deputation from 1988 .Her latent talent as novelist bloomed only when father became PM
just as her elder sister. The youngest daughter Amrit Singh is an American
citizen and married to an American Professor, Barton Beebe.
It is not only family which he has promoted shamelessly and
telling to the nation his incapacity to “impress anyone”. One can see how
tainted persons belonging to his community like Buta Singh, SS Sidhu were
appointed governor as soon as he became the “nominated’ PM. One must see how
shamelessly he got the closure of criminal cases against a New York hotelier,
Sant Singh Chatwal so that he cold be conferred Padma Award. One can sense the “impressions” in awarding of his closest
confidante, Montek Singh Ahluwalia with a Padama Vibhushan in a year when his
name was getting tainted by allegations in trying to cover up Dow chemical
in Bhopal gas tragedy by lobbying for Americans. The can of worms
against him has been opened by the Cabinet Ministers of his own government and
the PM awards him with the highest Padma award.
6. MMS managed Indian economy during crisis
There is a popular belief that MMS provided the much needed
breakthrough for the economic reform. The New Economic Policy focused on
export-driven growth which could generate employment in the country, improve
the balance of payment position and reduce inflation. The Government wanted to
attract FDI to bring capital as well as technology. The government wanted to
speed up export to reduce trade deficit and to control current account deficit
to better the Balance of payment situation which had caused embarrassment to
the nation. With this focus, the three-pronged strategy of liberalization,
privatization ad globalization was implemented. The rupee was being devalued
just to reduce trade deficit.
Remember with this
purpose, rupee was devalued by 16% and then again 6% at the beginning of
reform. But, the devaluation which MMS effected has caused immense loss of
wealth from the nation and has neither
educed trade deficit nor inflation nor the current account deficit. So, to
imbue MMS with success for the New economic Policy is misguided belief. I will
just put up small chart to explain the devaluation of rupee and its effect :
Year
Rupee per dollar
1952
5
1970
7.576
1975
8.409
1980
7.887
1985
12.369
1990
17.5404
1995
32.427
2000
45
2011
45.1172
Now, can any
economist explain how when the economy of INDIA has grown manifold, the value
of rupee has gone down. When the US economy is in recession, how is it that the
dollar maintains strength and Indian rupee in spite of growing economic prowess
is still going down? When MMS joined as the Finance Minister, the value of
rupee was Rs. 17 per dollar. But, when he left the Ministry in 1996, this
figure had deteriorated to 37 rupees per dollar. Devaluation made Indian imports costly,
increased demand pull inflation and the exports refuse to engage in improving
technological efficiency as they always depend on devaluation as a tool to
improve export figures. It is widely accepted that devaluation of currency cause reverse transfer of wealth
if a nation with highly devalued currency trades with a nation with strong
currency. The formula for reverse transfer of wealth hs been given by J.W.Smith
in his bestselling work, Economic Democracy.
But, let us see what happened to the trade deficit with so
much devaluation of rupee. The trade deficit has widened from $1.5 billion in 1991-92 to $110 billion in
the year 2010-11 and showing no sign of dwindling. But, the devaluation has
also decreased the purchasing power parity and in one way keeping Indian
economy down. If devaluation is such a great strategy, why is it that the US in
spite of so much CAD and trade deficit, still hankering after strong dollar
policy.
And who is the votary of strong dollar in spite of global
clamor for stripping the international reserve and transaction status of
dollar-It is MMS! MMS attended BRIC meeting and joined the chorus of bringing
down dollar on November 12, 2009. But, once he was in New York , he declared
his support for “strong dollar” policy. He changed dressing within a fortnight
and forecasted that the US economy is in mere “temporary setback”, exposing his
acumen for economic foresight.
(To be continued)
( To follow:-Chatwal affair, Buta affair, 2G affair, Harshad
Mehta Scam, Quattrochi affair, Oil for food scam and the UN’s Volcker Report, appointment of CVC PJ
Thomas and tainted Naveen Chawla as Election Commissioner, Scorpene Cover
Up)
Posted 27th August 2011 by Nation First”
No comments:
Post a Comment