http://arunshourie.voiceofdharma.com/articles/19990913.htm>http://arunshourie.voiceofdharma.com/articles/19990913.htm
Annexation Through Technicalities
*Arun Shourie*
The day I entered Indiraji’s household I became an Indian, the rest is just
technical — that is Sonia Gandhi’s latest explanation for not having
acquired Indian citizenship till fourteen years after her marriage to Rajiv Gandhi.
First the facts. Surya Prakash, the Consulting Editor of The Pioneer, has
documented these in detail. Sonia married Rajiv on 25 February, 1968.
Under section 5(c) of the Indian Citizenship Act she became eligible to register
herself as a citizen of India on 25 February, 1973. She chose to continue as a
citizen of Italy. She applied for Indian citizenship only ten years later, on 7 April, 1983.
A foreigner seeking Indian citizenship has to state on oath that he or she
has relinquished his or her citizenship of the original country. This
requirement was all the more necessary in the case of an Italian citizen:
under Italian law, an Italian taking citizenship of another country
continues to retain his or her Italian citizenship. Sonia Gandhi’s
application did not have the requisite statement, nor did it have any
official document from the appropriate authorities in Italy. The omission
was made up in a curious way: the Ambassador of Italy stepped in, and wrote
to the Government saying that Sonia Gandhi had indeed given up her
citizenship of Italy. He did so on 27 April, 1983. Sonia got her citizenship
forthwith — on 30 April, 1983.
Another nugget Surya Prakash has unearthed is that while Sonia became
a citizen on 30 April, 1983, her name made its way to the electoral rolls as
of 1 January, 1980! In response to an objection, it had to be deleted in
late 1982. But sure enough, it was put back on the electoral roll as
of 1 January, 1983. She hadn’t even applied for citizenship till then.
All technicalities! If any ordinary person were to proceed in the same way,
he would be up for stern prosecution.
Maruti was one of the most odious scandals connected with Mrs Indira Gandhi
and her family. The Commission of Inquiry headed by Justice A C Gupta
recorded that, though she was at the time a foreigner, Sonia Gandhi secured
shares in two of their family concerns: Maruti Technical Services Pvt. Ltd.
(in 1970 and again in 1974), and Maruti Heavy Vehicles (in 1974). The
acquisition of these shares was in contravention of the very Act that Mrs
Gandhi used to such diabolic effect in persecuting her political opponents,
the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973. Just another technicality!
But the Mother of Technicalities, so to say, is to be found in the way Sonia
Gandhi, without having any known sources of income, has become the
controller of one of the largest empires of property and patronage in Delhi.
The Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Library and Museum is one of the principal
institutions for research on contemporary Indian history. It is situated in
and controls real estate which, because of its historical importance, cannot
even be valued. The institution runs entirely on grants from the Government
of India. Sonia Gandhi has absolutely no qualification that could by any
stretch of imagination entitle her to head the institution: has she secured
even an elementary university degree, to say nothing of having done anything
that would even suggest some specialization in subjects which the
institution has been set up to study. But by mysterious technicalities she
is today the head of this institution. So much so that she even decides
which scholar may have access to papers — even official papers — of Pandit Nehru
and others of that family, including, if I may stretch the term, Lady Mountbatten.
Real estate, only slightly less valuable, has been acquired on Raisina Road.
The land was meant to house offices of the Congress. A large, ultra-modern
building was built — the finance being provided by another bunch of
technical devices which remain a mystery. The building had but to get
completed, and Sonia appropriated it for the other Foundation she completely
controls — the Rajiv Gandhi Foundation. The Congress(I) did not just oblige
by keeping silent about the takeover of its building, in the very first budget
its Government presented upon returning to power, it provided Rs 100
crores to this Foundation. The furore that give-away caused was so great
that the largesse had to be canceled. No problem. Business house after
business house, even public sector enterprises incurring huge losses, coughed
up crores.
The Foundation has performed two principal functions. The projection of
Sonia Gandhi. And enticing an array of leaders, intellectuals, journalists
etc. into nets of patronage and pelf.
But the audacity with which the land and building were usurped and funds
raised for this Foundation falls into the second order of smalls when they are set
alongside what has been done in regard to the Indira Gandhi National Centre for Arts.
This Centre was set up as a trust in 1987 by a resolution of the Cabinet.
The Government of India gave Rs. 50 crores out of the Consolidated Fund of
India as a corpus fund to this Centre. It transferred 23 acres of land along
what is surely one of the costliest sites in the world — Central Vista, the
stretch that runs between Rashtrapati Bhavan and India Gate — to this
Trust. Furthermore, it granted another Rs. 84 crores for the Trust to
construct its building.
The land was government land. The funds were government funds. Accordingly,
care was taken to ensure that the Trust would remain under the overall control
of the Government of India. Therefore, the Deed of the Trust provided, inter alia,
– Every ten years two-thirds of the trustees would retire. One half of the
vacancies caused would be filled by the Government. One half would be
filled by nominations made by the retiring trustees.
– The Member Secretary of the Trust would be nominated by the Government
on such terms and conditions as the Government may decide.
– The President of India would appoint a committee from time to time to
review the working of the Trust, and the recommendations of the committee
would be binding on the Trust.
– No changes would be made in the deed of the Trust except by prior written
sanction of the Government, and even then the changes may be adopted
only by three-quarters of the Trustees agreeing to them at a meeting
specially convened for the purpose.
Now, just see what technical wonders were performed one fine afternoon.
A meeting like any other meeting of the trustees was convened on 18 May,
1995. The minutes of this meeting which I have before me list all the
subjects which were discussed — the minutes were circulated officially by
Dr Kapila Vatsyayan in her capacity as the Director of the Centre with the
observation, “The Minutes of this meeting have been approved by Smt Sonia
Gandhi, President of the IGNCA Trust.”
What did the assembled personages discuss and approve? Even if the topics
seem mundane, do read them carefully — for they contain a vital clue, the
Sherlock Holmes clue so to say, about what did not happen.
The minutes report that the following subjects were discussed:
1: Indira Gandhi Memorial Fellowship Scheme and the Research Grant Scheme.
2: Commemoration volume in the memory of Stella Kramrisch.
3: Sale of publications of the IGNCA.
4: Manuscripts on music and dance belonging to the former ruling house of Raigarh in M P
5: Report on the 10th and 11th meetings of the Executive Committee.
6: Approval and adoption of the Annual Report and Annual Accounts, 1993-94.
7: Bilateral and multilateral programmes of IGNCA, and aid from U N
agencies, Ford Foundation, Japan Foundation, etc.
8: Brief report on implementation of programmes from April 1994 to March 1995.
9: Brief of initiatives taken by IGNCA to strengthen dialogue between Indian
and Vietnam, Thailand, Indonesia, China.
10: Documentation of cultural heritage of Indo-Christian, Indo-Islamic and
Indo-Zoroastrian communities.
11: Gita Govinda project.
12: IGNCA newsletter.
13: Annual Action Plan, 1995-96.
14: Calendar of events. 15: Publications of IGNCA.
15: Matters relating to building project.
16: Allocations/release of funds for the IGNCA building project.
There is not one word in the minutes that the deed of the Trust was even
mentioned.
This meeting took place on 18 May, 1995. On 30 May, 1995 Sonia Gandhi
performed one of technical miracles. She wrote a letter to the Minister of
Human Resources informing him of what she said were alterations in the Trust
Deed which the trustees had unanimously approved. Pronto, the Minister wrote
back, on 2 June, 1995: “I have great pleasure in communicating to you the
Government of India’s approval to the alterations.”
The Minister? The ever-helpful, Madhav Rao Scindia. And wonder of wonders,
in his other capacity he had attended the meeting on 18 May as a trustee of
the IGNCA, the meeting which had not, according to the minutes approved by
Sonia Gandhi, even discussed, far less “unanimously approved” changes in the
Trust Deed.
And what were the changes that Sonia Gandhi managed to get through by this
collusive exchange of two letters?
– She became President for life.
– The other trustees — two-thirds of whom were to retire every ten years
— became trustees for life. The power of the Government to fill half the vacancies
was snuffed out.
– The power of the Government to appoint the Member Secretary of the Trust
was snuffed out; henceforth the Trust would appoint its own Member Secretary.
– The power of the President of India to appoint a committee to periodically
review the functioning of the Trust was snuffed out; neither he nor Government
would have any power to inquire into the working of the Trust.
A Government Trust, a Trust which had received over Rs. 134 crores of the
tax-payers’ money, a Trust which had received twenty three acres of invaluable
land was, by a simple collusive exchange of a letter each between Sonia Gandhi
and one of her gilded attendants became property within her total control.
The usurpation was an absolute fraud. The Trust Deed itself provided that no
amendment to it could come into force — on any reasonable reading could not
even be initiated and adopted — without prior written permission of the
Government. Far from any permission being taken, even information to the
effect that changes were being contemplated was not sent to Government. An
ex post “approval” was obtained from an obliging trustee.
That “approval” was in itself wholly without warrant. Such sanctions are
governed by Rule 4 of the Government of India (Transaction of Business)
Rules, 1961. This Rule prescribes that when a subject concerns more than one
department, “no order be issued until all such departments have concurred,
or failing such concurrence, a decision thereon has been taken by or under
the authority of the Cabinet.” Other departments were manifestly concerned,
concurrence from them was not even sought. The Cabinet was never apprised.
The rule proceeds to provide, “Unless the case is fully covered by powers to
sanction expenditure or to appropriate or re-appropriate funds, conferred by
any general or special orders made by the Ministry of Finance, no department
shall, without the previous concurrence of the Ministry of Finance, issue any
orders which may… (b) involve any grant of land or assignment of revenue
or concession, grant… (d) otherwise have a financial bearing whether
involving expenditure or not…”
And yet, just as concurrence of other departments had been dispensed with,
no approval was taken from the Finance Ministry.
The Indian Express and other papers published details about the fraud by
which what was a Government Trust had been converted into a private fief.
Two members of Parliament — Justice Ghuman Mal Lodha and Mr. E. Balanandan
— began seeking details, and raising objections.
For a full two and a half years, governments — of the Congress(I), and the
two that were kept alive by the Congress(I), those of Mr. Deve Gowda and of
Mr. I. K. Gujral — made sure that full facts would not be disclosed to the
MPs, and that the concerned file would keep shuttling between the Ministry
of Human Resource Development and the Ministry of Law.
As a result, Sonia Gandhi continues to have complete control over
governmental assets of incalculable value — through technicalities
collusively arranged.
A latter-day Dalhousie — annexation of Indian principalities through technicalities!
