New Delhi:
With all guns blazing, A Raja took clear aim today in court at the Prime Minister, P Chidambaram, Ratan Tata, and Attorney General GE Vahanvati. Mr Raja was defending the charges against him in the telecom scam, which he is accused of spawning when he was Telecom Minister.
First, Mr Raja sought to make good by stating, "I did not seek to implicate the Prime Minister and the then Finance Minister in the 2G case." He also blamed the media for "putting words in my mouth" and declared, "I am not after anybody." Through the course of the day, he again placed the PM squarely in his line of defense, and said that Mr Chidambaram should be made a witness in the trial. (
Watch: Raja names PM, Chidambaram in court)
Mr Raja's position is clear: If he is guilty of violating the country's telecom policy, others who could have prevented him failed to do so. (
Watch: Raja's revenge trouble for PM?) Mr Raja was Telecom Minister till November when he resigned over charges of corruption and the 2G scam. He was arrested in February and has been in Tihar Jail since.
For example, he said that if the Prime Minister wanted, he could have set up a Group of Ministers (GoM) to supervise the manner in which Mr Raja sold licenses in 2008 for mobile networks and the airwaves they use. Mr Raja has been accused of selling those licenses at bizarrely low rates, to companies who were not eligible for them but benefited from Mr Raja's patronage. "The Prime Minister is superior to me and he could have constituted the GoM," Mr Raja said.
In late 2007, Mr Raja over-ruled the recommendations of the Law Ministry that a Group of Ministers be consulted on the pricing and distribution of spectrum. Mr Raja told the PM this was not necessary. Mr Chidambaram was Finance Minister at the time. (
Read: Raja names PM, Chidambaram, says 'I should be rewarded')
Explaining why he chose not to auction spectrum, Mr Raja said he was strictly following the policies introduced by his predecessors, including Telecom Ministers in the NDA regime which was voted out in 2004. The PM has said that it was not Mr Raja's first-come-first-serve policy that was faulty. The government says the problem lay in the twisted implementation that allowed companies conspiring with Mr Raja to jump to the head of the queue and get licenses out of turn.
The initial deadline announced for the filing of applications for licenses was October 1, 2007. There were hundreds of applications received. In January 2008, Mr Raja decided to issue licenses on a first-come-first-serve basis. On January 10, his department said it would treat September 25, 2007 as the cut-off date for filing of applications. Inexplicably, a week had been shaved off the application period. By this time, the companies allegedly preferred by Mr Raja had filed their paperwork. On the same day - January 10, 2008 - the Department of Telecom (DoT) said in a press release that those who were able to provide letters of intent by 3.30 pm that same day would be granted licenses. Some seemed to have been tipped off by Mr Raja and were able to provide the huge funds required even at such short notice.
Mr Raja said in court today that Attorney General GE Vahanvati had signed off on this decision. "I'm in jail for following his advice. Is this justice?" he asked. Mr Vahanvati today repudiated that claim, and rubbished Mr Raja's charges against him.
According to the CBI, among the companies who benefited from Mr Raja's manipulation of the rules are Swan Telecom and Unitech Wireless. Both bought telecom licenses for Rs 1600 crore each and were able to earn huge profits by selling equity to foreign partners. Both Swan and Unitech have been accused of cheating and conspiracy, and their top executives are in jail with Mr Raja. Roping in Mr Chidambaram like he did yesterday, Mr Raja said,"The then Finance Minister, an eminent lawyer himself, cleared the sale of equity by the two licensees. He's bound to come as a witness at some point," he said. This was a point made by Mr Raja yesterday as well, when he had dared, "Let the PM deny this."
Mr Chidambaram has explained that he did not clear the sale of equity by either company. He said his role was limited to asking Mr Raja to clarify whether Unitech and Swan sold equity not by divestment (selling a part of their own stake) but by issuing fresh shares for their foreign investors. He was assured that was the case. (
Read: Shares divested or diluted was the only issue discussed, says Chidambaram)
The legality of the deals struck by Unitech and Swan with their foreign partners has not been questioned by the CBI. But experts say that the huge value of the additional equity created by both partners on the strength of their 2G permits proves that Mr Raja grossly under-sold the valuable licenses.
Mr Raja also devoted considerable attention today to challenging the CBI for not including industrialist Ratan Tata. He alleged that while Swan and Unitech are being targeted for selling equity, Ratan Tata did the same but has not been faulted by investigators. Mr Raja contends that Tata Teleservices sold 27% equity to foreign partner DoCoMo for 14,000 crores. This, he said, is more than half of what the CBI has described as the entire cost of the alleged 2G scam.
Mr Tata has not commented on Mr Raja's statement today, but in December, he had said that NTT DoCoMo's investment was based on Tata Teleservices' performance and the potential growth of the company; and that Tata Teleservices has not been advantaged in any way by Mr Raja or any earlier minister.
Mr Raja also said today that his judicial custody amounts to illegal detention. His lawyer said that he should be released immediately.
RAJA SLAMS CAG REPORT AS "WORTHLESS DOCUMENT"Mr Raja also launched a fierce attack on the report prepared by the government's auditor that declared Mr Raja's faulty policies had cost the government 1.76 lakh crores. The report of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) was delivered in November, and forced Mr Raja to resign as Telecom Minister.
Mr Raja said the report is "worthless" and that the Comptroller and Auditor General is "a legal illiterate" and "just an accountant". Mr Raja argued that the CAG had based its calculations on the fact that spectrum was not auctioned. There was no obligation for him to do so, he said.