There will be plenty to discuss at former Telecom Minister A Raja’s book release in New Delhi on 19 January. The leaked manuscript of the book, ‘The 2G Saga Unfolds’, which was ready by December 2016, offers a no holds barred account of A Raja’s side of the story on the 2G scam. The DMK leader addresses, head-on questions related to the auction itself– why the cut-off date for the 2G auction was advanced, why 2001 and not 2008 rates were applied and to the politics that shifted the case from resting on facts to perception. Here are some excerpts:
1. Raja on Why he Wrote the Book
I have compiled in this book the happenings around the 2G spectrum allocation: portraying both the challenges that I faced as well as my defiant resolve to crusade for national progress. The incidents and individuals presented here are evident even now, hence there is nothing for me to veil or misrepresent. However, this is neither an autobiography nor a ploy to make quibbling excuses. All the dramatis personae (including me) shall eventually fade from this world and may not even remain in public memory in a few years. However, in order that future administrators, politicians and citizens become cognisant of what not to do in similar situations, I think this endeavour to document history is essential. This book is an attempt to elucidate in the backdrop of the 2G case, how when relevant constitutional and statutory bodies lose their equitability and objectivity in the discharge of their duties – either due to self-interest or prejudicial external pressures – flagrant injustice, political failing and an overall repression of national interest ensues. There is no tangible loss to the nation associated with the loss of a sole individual; conversely, should the whole nation’s good be sacrificed at the altar of an individual’s self-interest?
2. On How the Rule of Law Was Not Followed
The Supreme Court is monitoring this case. I have not asked for any clemency from the courts in the criminal case filed against me, but I am disturbed by the manner of implementation of the Rule of Law. Benches and galleries may vary but the Law must remain steadfast. Gandhi and Tilak embarked on agitations for the same Cause but their manner of facing the Law differed. When a case of sedition was slapped against Tilak he argued in court that he was not guilty; what he had written and spoken was not seditious – per the prevailing Rule of Law. Although he was convicted by the court of men, it is certain to the nation – the general populace – that his actions were justified and that he was innocent in the court of Man. Gandhi’s defence was different. He accepted that he had knowingly violated the Rule of Law because it was wrongful and unjust. His actions were however morally right and justified according to Natural Law. In the 2G case, neither the Rule of Law nor Natural Law prevailed – except for the provision of an actual court trial. The media hype deluded the masses about the moral delinquency while the ‘arbitrating institutions’ diluted legal diligence and objective, civilized jurisprudence by voicing capricious personal opinions.
3. On Vinod Rai’s CAG Report
Upon receiving CAG’s Draft Report, a response report was sent on 27th July 2010 by the Department of Telecommunication (DoT). This elaborate 108-page response was compiled by many of the officers of DoT who were also included as witnesses in the 2G case. On page 100 it has been emphatically stated, “Therefore, the conclusion of the Audit regarding issuance of licenses in 2008 at 2001 prices, issuance of licenses on FCFS policy to the applicants who applied till 25th Sep 2007, implementation of dual technology and allotment of spectrum thereof is misconstrued and based on little knowledge of the policies of the Government and without going into detail and understanding the various recommendations of TRAI and the entire Telecom scenario in the country.” Even so the CAG deliberately ignored these clarifications. Mr. Rai’s report is essentially a mixture of inappropriate legal interpretations, incongruous comparisons and flippant allegations, ignoring the Government’s standpoint and the concomitant laws. The few who comprehended this reality and maintained their constancy can unfortunately be counted on one’s fingertips. Everybody – shockingly including even the Supreme Court bench – became so enthralled by the notion of a hypothesized presumptive loss figure as indicative of an actual ‘scam’ of huge proportion that emotion trumped over logic and – what is more significant – legal due process.
4. On Vinod Rai
Mr. Vinod Rai also had the temerity to dub himself the ‘Nation’s Conscience Keeper’ on the cover of his book titled ‘Not just an Accountant’ in which he dedicated a few chapters on the 2G Spectrum allocation. He in his role as CAG was the ‘sutradhaar’ who created the devious apparition which the media and political opposition followed. It is unfortunate that even the highest court of the country became a prey to this. I will show that Mr. Rai’s words and actions are: Malicious vigilantism that makes a mockery of his constitutional responsibilities; Disgraceful purchase of self-promotion at the cost of Truth and Integrity; Wanton sacrifice of national progress to further perverted political goals; Corrupt commercialism couched in moral rhetoric and veiled altruism. I am certain that reports of auditors like Shriman Vinod Rai which I will show to be mere trash shall be unanimously deemed fit for the dustbin: When Parliamentary Democracy moves beyond cheap pandering to vote-banks; When the nation’s leaders only favour ethical means to win political mandates; When constitutional bodies can be trusted to never overstep their defined boundaries; When the Fourth Pillar regains its objectivity and autonomy to document the truth; When the Judiciary’s prudence will not be swayed by emotion and sensationalism;
5. On Supreme Court Justices Singhvi and Ganguly
Nonetheless the Supreme Court bench comprising Justices Mr. Singhvi and Mr. Ganguly thought it had no reason to doubt the credibility of CAG and proceeded without taking into consideration all the relevant facts, policies and official documentation. That bench uttered vitriolic comments of a personal nature in open court which shamefully discredits that august body. Former Chief Justice of India Mr. A. S. Anand has quoted, “The role of judge is that of a referee. I can blow my judicial whistle when the ball goes out of play; but when the game restarts, I must neither take part in it nor tell the players how to play... judicial whistle needs to be blown for a purpose and with caution.” The inapt conclusions pronounced at those proceedings were subsequently set right to some extent, vide the larger Constitutional Bench.
6. On the Media
Mr. Vinod Mehta the editor of ‘Outlook’ magazine has commented, “The increasing corporate ownership of the media landscape in India could undermine its plurality and independent functioning”. It is indeed a matter of concern that the Fourth Estate is evolving into corporate commercial media houses where Truth becomes a casualty for the images that they (aim to) create and project. If the media succumbs to easy sensationalism by projecting (without proof) an individual or institution as corrupt, anti-social, criminal or terrorist, then the objectivity of journalism is diminished. I have attempted to record in the ensuing chapters the reasons for the (fleeting) success of the media in portraying me as a selfish burglar.
7. On Former Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh
When the Prime Minister’s role in the 2G case was questioned in the Supreme Court by Justices Singhvi and Ganguly, the opposition parties had cleverly furthered the illusion that the Prime Minister was also tainted since the Government had crouched back instead of advancing compelling arguments in his defence. The contents of my letters and the way in which the Prime Minister conducted himself in this matter in no way constituted any administrative lapses or criminal acts. In fact, the PM was disturbed when I explained to him the exploitation by the cartel in the telecom sector. He wanted the hidden spectrum to be made available for public use. The patronage shown by him to me in relation to2G licensing and spectrum allocation was totally justified and correct as per policy and law. My anguish is that the Government headed by him did not back him up. His concern for national interest to be foremost is proved beyond doubt by the support and mentorship he had provided for every step I took. I have had the privilege of hearing from the PM about his humble beginnings and have also witnessed the colossal intellectual and moral stature he has achieved. I do not know why he could not muster the resolve even though Truth was on his side, to stand against the verbal abuses of the opposition, unwarranted criticism of the 2G Bench and the staged outbursts of the biased media. That one action – or rather inaction – has caused so much damage to his reputation. As Lord Jeffery so aptly states, “A good name, like good will, is got by many actions and lost by one.”
8. On the ‘Rs 1.76 Lakh Crore Presumptive Loss’
CAG arrived at Rs 1.76 lakh crores based primarily on the auction price for 3G. CBI in its charge-sheet then ignored this and computed its own figure of Rs 30,000 crores which could have been earned by the Government for spectrum utilization as a percentage of the Adjusted Gross Revenue (AGR). However, CBI had erroneously applied that calculation to the ‘bundled’ 4.4 MHz spectrum that companies had to be given with their new licenses. Even after my arrest on 25th March 2011 an Office Memorandum prepared by the Department of Economic Affairs in the Finance Ministry, was sent to the PMO. In paragraph 16 it has been stated, “It is therefore, clear that there were consultations between MoF and DoT in the first half of 2008, on the formula of changing 2G spectrum based on indexation to the PLR of the SBI which related only to the allocations beyond 6.2 MHz. In the matter presently under consideration (i.e. allotment of 2G licenses in 2007-08) spectrum allocation were not made beyond 6.2 MHz, on pricing which DoT and MoF were in agreement. On the other hand, the new licenses have only got 4.4 MHz of spectrum each.” CBI’s credibility becomes questionable in the face of this faux pas. On the subject of revenue loss, CBI took one stand in its FIR and an entirely different stand in its charge-sheet. CBI further stated, “The number of licenses issued in 4-5 years during 2003-2007 were minuscule as compared to the number of licenses proposed to be issued in 2008.” It is ridiculous that CBI refers as miniscule the count of 51 licenses issued prior to my tenure.
9. On the BJP, the Principal Opposition at the Time
The BJP which was now in the Opposition maintained a ‘holier than thou’ attitude and did not miss any opportunity to fan the flames of public ire. However, their memory was failing, or their judgment was very impaired – really an ironic case of spitting into the oncoming wind. The CAG report given on 28th October 1999 had pointed out a loss (real not presumptive) of Rs 1,153 crores to the exchequer when the Basic and Cellular Telephone Service Providers were migrated on 22nd July 1999 (during BJP’s reign) to NTP- 99’s revenue regime. BJP, these very ‘guardians of the nation’ who deterred this CAG report of 1999 from being submitted to the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) for follow- up, then in 2010 stalled the Parliament for months insisting on a Joint Parliamentary Committee investigation into the hyped-up ‘2G scam’. The policy decision (used from 2003-2007) to continue with entry fee from 2001 was also made during BJP’s regime. BJP was in power at the Centre when Mr. Arun Shourie in 2003 first formalized the procedure of issuing Licenses and Spectrum on FCFS basis for new licenses. Why was Mr. Arun Shourie not condemned for having violated and changed the rules then? Why only the 122 licenses issued under my ministership and not the 51 before me? Why only in 2010 is A. Raja being blamed for huge losses to the exchequer while all his actions are based on administrative decisions taken up to 2007 and have clear precedents? CPI (M), CPI which ought to have discerned this, let themselves get suckered into joining BJP’s ruckus.
(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)