BJP benefactor of AugustaWestland, trying to hide behind ED: Congress

Image
IANS New Delhi
Last Updated : Dec 30 2018 | 4:50 PM IST

The Congress on Sunday alleged the Modi government was the benefactor and supporter of AugustaWestland, the helicopter manufacturing company involved in VVIP chopper deal, and said it was trying to suppress the truth by hiding behind the Enforcement Directorate.

"The BJP is trying to hide behind the ED which has now become an 'embarrassing disaster'. The Modi lead government is the benefactor, protector, abettor and supporter of AugustaWestland," said Congress spokesperson Randeep Singh Surjewala.

The Congress also raised questions over the Modi government removing AugustaWestland from the list of blacklisted companies and allowing it to bid for 100 Naval helicopters for the Indian Navy.

"The country wants to know why a blacklisted company like AugustaWestland was given the permission to bid for 100 Naval helicopters for the Indian Navy? Why did the BJP, after coming to power, removed AugustaWestland from blacklist? Why was the company permitted to manufacture AW119 military helicopetrs in India?" Surjewala asked.

In 2014, India scrapped the contract with Italian company Finmeccanica's British subsidiary AgustaWestland for supplying the choppers to the Indian Air Force over alleged breach of contractual obligations and charges of paying kickbacks for securing the deal after revelations made during a judicial trial against the company in Italy.

The ED on Saturday brought in the name of 'Mrs Gandhi' and 'big man R', an apparent reference to Sonia Gandhi and her son Rahul Gandhi, in a special court when it got a seven-day extension of custody of British national Christian Michel, the alleged middleman in the deal.

During arguments, ED counsel L.D. Singh also referred to Michel saying "big man 'R', son of an Italian lady who is going to be the next Prime Minister in a communication between Michel and AgustaWestland," an apparent reference to Congress President Rahul Gandhi.

"We have nothing to do in a conversation between a lawyer and a client. If there is any evidence, why are they (ED) hiding behind fake innuendoes? If they have evidence, why don't they place it in public domain?" Surjewala stated.

--IANS

som-bns/prs

Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Dec 30 2018 | 4:42 PM IST

Next Story