2g : PM is very much culpable for Lying to Nation

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_part-iii-the-pm-the-cbi-and-the-2g-scam_1591556

The CBI’s 124-page charge sheet in the Rs1.76 lakh crore 2G spectrum allotment scam reads like a clean chit to the prime minister (PM) for his role in this murky episode.
But, strangely, it ignores the role played by the group of ministers (GoM) set up by Singh to examine all issues related to the vacating of scarce spectrum and putting it up for sale in January 2008.
Now, documents released from the prime minister’s office (PMO) under the Right To Information Act to advocate Vivek Garg show that had the CBI looked at the GoM a little more closely, it would have been forced to question the PM, even if only as a witness.
These documents, shared by Garg with DNA, raise a series of disturbing questions about the PM’s role as he handled competing claims from various ministers and departments even as the path to the enormous scam was being laid.
On January 10, 2006, the PMO received two letters from two different departments making competing claims on Manmohan Singh. One, addressed to Singh’s principal secretary TK Nair, came from the planning commission; the other, from the telecom ministry, was addressed to Jawed Usmani, joint secretary in the PMO.
Acting on the “in-principle” approval of the PM to constitute a GoM on spectrum, both departments had pushed in their “terms of reference.”
The commission wanted 11 issues to be examined under four broad subheads. Key to this was to “suggest a spectrum pricing policy” and the possibility of creation of a “Spectrum Relocation Fund”.
The telecom ministry wanted more diluted terms of reference with just four issues that took a cursory glance at the existing policies and would allow the ministry to continue doing exactly what it felt like doing.
Several letters and internal documents in DNA’s possession clearly establish that this would be the PM’s call. He would be the final arbitrator of the competing claims. For instance a letter dated January 11, 2006, from then telecom minister Dayanidhi Maran to the PM clearly records that Singh had “approved the GoM for looking into the entire gamut of issues relating to spectrum availability”. Both the letters from the Planning Commission and the telecom ministry sent to the PMO a day earlier also establish beyond doubt that it would be Singh’s decision.
It is a fact that the final ToR that emerged on December 7, kept spectrum pricing out and was the watered down version that Maran successfully lobbied for. Now a bunch of internal file noting made by Pulok Chatterji, considered close to UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi and the then additional secretary in the PMO, confirm that price for 2G spectrum would be kept low. “Although spectrum is scarce and therefore must be assigned a value, its pricing must not be so inflated as to make it financially unsustainable for the operators and subscribers.” He argued on January 6, 2008, just days before the allocation of spectrum.
These actions, in light of the CBI’s charge sheet against former telecom minister A Raja and his aides, who are all in jail, raise an even more disturbing question: Why was the PM, his principal secretary TK Nair and Chatterji not questioned as material witnesses during the investigations?
Former IPS officer and constitutional expert, Dr Ashok Dhamija, who is currently practising in the Supreme Court, told DNA, “It appears that the subsequent allotment of spectrum by Raja may not be directly linked to the aforesaid action of the PM. However, allowing the telecom ministry to single-handedly deal with the pricing of the spectrum instead of it being decided by the GoM, as initially contemplated, facilitated the subsequent wrongful actions of the telecom ministry.”
According to him any decision that contravenes the Transaction of Business rules is patently illegal. He also pointed out that the apex court has already directed the CBI to “conduct the investigation without being influenced by any functionary, agency or instrumentality of the state and irrespective of the position, rank or status of the person to be investigated/probed”. Therefore, according to him, “in any case it is necessary to examine the prime minister at least as a witness”.
Incidentally, this has been the consistent demand of opposition parties such as the BJP and those from the Left, that the PM must be questioned by the investigating agency. Prakash Jawadekar of the BJP told DNA that the PM’s role is “no longer one of whether he didn’t know or failed to act or show leadership. Now, it is a case of complicity and he must be investigated. A failure to do so will prevent the truth from coming out.” That might yet be.