|
Online edition of India's National Newspaper Friday, September 28, 2001 |
|
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Entertainment |
Miscellaneous |
Features |
Classifieds |
Employment |
Index |
Home |
|
National
| Previous
| Next
Quattrocchi cites 'certificate of good conduct'
By Our Special Correspondent
NEW DELHI, SEPT. 27. The Italian businessman, Mr. Ottavio
Quattrocchi, chargesheeted in the Bofors payoff case and facing
extradition proceedings in the Malaysian High Court, has now
cited ``certificates of good conduct'' from the former Union Law
Minister, Mr. Ram Jethmalani, and Mr. Prem Shankar Jha, senior
journalist, in a bid to avoid getting extradited to India.
In an affidavit filed in the Malaysian High Court in June, Mr.
Quattrocchi said there was no allegation or statement in the
Bofors chargesheet which suggested that he had taken money on
behalf of a public servant.
Taking recourse to the May 9 letter of Mr. Jethmalani to the
Prime Minister, Mr. Quattrocchi claimed that it formed part of
``further evidence''. Though Mr. Quattrocchi has nothing new or
substantial to state, his attempts appear directed at portraying
the extradition proceedings as being political in nature. To
buttress his argument, he has got affidavits from Mr. Jha and a
former High Court judge.
Mr. Quattrocchi said the chargesheet against the three Hinduja
brothers was filed on October 9, 2000, a year after the
chargesheet naming him was filed in the court.
Mr. Jethmalani found that the chargesheet failed to disclose or
allege that ``these monies were received on behalf of any public
servant'' and had commented that ``some foolish charge of
cheating which even a law student will find legally absurd has
been levelled against them.'' In his opinion, no evidence had
been advanced that the payments made to the Hindujas were related
to Bofors gun contract.
Mr. Quattrocchi said there was ``no allegation or statement or
evidence in the chargesheet as to the relevant public servant on
whose behalf I am alleged to have taken the said monies.''
Legal circles are amazed at Mr. Quattrocchi's ``audacity'' in
wanting to use a letter written by the former Law Minister to the
Prime Minister in defence of the Hinduja brothers.
In his application for a judicial review of the case, he repeated
that he was in India till July 30, 1993, and thereafter he had at
all material times made it known to the CBI and the courts in
India of his willingness to be questioned either in Malaysia or
in Italy.
He claimed that during the time he was in India, the CBI did
nothing to question him even when the matter was within the
public domain.
In support of his application for a judicial review, he also
procured and submitted affidavits by Mr. Justice S.H.S. Abidi, a
former judge of the Patna High Court, and Mr. Jha.
Mr. Justice Abidi has said that there was no statutory
definition for an offence of a political character in the Indian
Extradition Act. But provision had been made to exclude offences
of a ``political character'' or to prevent requisitions that were
made for political reasons.
In his view, there was no reported decision on the meaning of a
``political character'' and where there was no decided case on
any issue, it was usual for the courts in India to refer and be
guided by the decisions of Commonwealth jurisdictions on similar
issues.
Most curious is the 19-page affidavit of Mr. Jha who is
identified as a political commentator and columnist to several
leading English dailies.
Mr. Jethmalani had in the past attacked the Hindujas and called
for their speedy trial and was party to the Government's decision
to initiate criminal proceedings against them.
Mr. Jha has opined that the proceedings against Mr. Quattrocchi
could be termed to be ``offences of a political character.''
``The purpose of focussing on Mr. Quattrocchi and bringing him
back to India to testify is to find evidence to link him with the
kickbacks that were allegedly received and to seek to establish
that he took kickbacks on behalf of the Gandhi family,'' Mr. Jha
said.
Reacting to the affidavits of Mr. Jha and Mr. Justice Abidi, the
CBI spokesman defended the extradition proceedings in Malaysia,
saying the CBI would contest all pleas which made little or no
sense to the case.
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail
|
|
Section : National Previous : Stock broker stopped from fleeing country Next : SC extends order on Hindujas | |
|
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Entertainment |
Miscellaneous |
Features |
Classifieds |
Employment |
Index |
Home | |
|
Copyright © 2001 The Hindu Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu |
|