New Delhi:
The Solicitor General, Gopal Subramanium, has said that the Supreme Court's criticism of the Prime Minister in the 2G spectrum scam is not an embarrassment. The Solicitor General is due in court on Thursday for the next hearing on the case.
(Watch)On Tuesday, the court asked the government to explain why the Prime Minister took 11 months to respond to a request that asked for former Telecom Minister A Raja to be prosecuted for breaking the rules and costing the government thousands of crores by deliberately undervaluing 2G spectrum in 2008.
(Read: 2G scam - Supreme Court criticises PM)"The alleged inaction and silence is worrying us," said the court.
The Supreme Court's remarks against the PM are a windfall for the Opposition, which has been insisting that because the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) does not function impartially, the government must agree to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) to examine the 2G scam. The government has steadfastly refused to this demand. "The PM must respond to the court's remarks," said senior BJP leader LK Advani on Wednesday.
(Read & Watch: PM must respond to court remarks, says Advani)
Raja has been formally indicted in a report by the government's auditor for costing the government nearly Rs. 1.76 lakh crore by refusing to auction 2G spectrum in January, 2008. That report - by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) - was tabled in Parliament on Tuesday, though it was leaked to the media last week. It also forced the resignation of Raja on Sunday night. (
CAG report on 2G allocation |
Highlights)
In November 2008, Subramaniam Swamy, former Law Minister and Janata Party leader, wrote to the PM asking for permission to prosecute Raja. Since Raja was a serving minister, the PM's sanction was needed for a case to be filed against Raja.
In March this year, the Department of Personnel (who the CBI reports to) wrote back to Swamy saying that since the CBI was investigating the case, it would not be appropriate to consider Swamy's request at this stage.
The Supreme Court is clear that Swamy's complaint against Raja was not vague. He categorically referred to undue benefits given to telecom companies like Swan and Anil Ambani's Reliance Telecom. The CAG report has underscored the same point, stating that Swan seemed to serve as little more than a front for Reliance Telecom, effectively allowing Ambani to collect more spectrum.
The Supreme Court wants the Solicitor General to find out what happened during the year between Swamy lodging his complaint in November 2008, and the filing of an FIR in the 2G case in October 2009.
The court also wants to know what transpired between then and March 2010 when Swamy finally received his reply.
"For good governance, there must be some time-limit for granting sanctions, if not three months. But 11 months is too long," said the court.