As #ModiLiesToSupremeCourt trends on Twitter, here's everything you need to know about the Rafale verdict
As #ModiLiesToSupremeCourt trends on Twitter, here's everything you need to know about the Rafale verdict
As the Rafale Verdict is now doing rounds on social media, a lot of people are tweeting saying, #ModiLiedToSupremeCourt which has started to trend on Twitter.
But, what actually happened in the Supreme Court’s judgement that so much of hue and cry are going on? Actually, the apex court gave a clean chit to PM Narendra Modi government on the alleged corruption charges in the purchasing of 36 Rafale fighter jets from the French company Dassault Aviation.
The Supreme Court had said that it can’t doubt the process and hence had dismissed all the plea in the matter, adding that no favoritism was done on the part of the government and that ‘perception is no basis for roving, fishing inquiry,’ signaling towards the allegations of Modi government favoring the Anil Ambani led Reliance Defence instead of Hindustan Aeronautics Limited.
But, on page 21 and para 25, the facts presented by the Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi are manufactured and misleading, which eventually becomes the center point of the verdict.
The Supreme Court in that para has said, “The material placed before us shows that the government has not disclosed pricing details, other than the basic price of the aircraft, even to Parliament, on the ground that sensitivity of pricing details could affect national security, apart from breaching the agreement between the two countries. The pricing details have, however, been shared with the Comptroller and Auditor General and the report of the CAG has been examined by the Public Accounts Committee. Only a redacted portion of the report was placed before Parliament, and is in public domain.”
The problem here is, neither the Rafale report is with the CAG and neither it ever passed it on to the PAC, which in turn was never tabled in the parliament and hence, it is not present in the public domain.
Now, the BJP government has filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court saying the court misinterpreted the about the report issue and they have requested the bench to correct the factual error.
Certainly, the question is now upon the Attorney General who brought the Supreme Court in a wrong direction and submitted before it that the report has been with the PAC, although PAC chairman Mallikarjun Kharge denies having it and said that the deputy CAG is also unaware about the report. A lot needs to be checked and amended in the judgement, which certainly is based on misleading facts.