New Delhi:
The Supreme Court is expected to deliver three big verdicts today in the 2G spectrum scam case. The most crucial, a likely verdict on whether the role of Home Minister P Chidambaram in the 2G scam should be investigated.
A two-judge bench of the court is also expected to give an order on whether 122 licences given by former Telecom Minister A Raja in 2008 should be cancelled; Mr Raja is currently in jail and is alleged to have masterminded the scam wherein valuable spectrum was sold at throwaway prices to companies that he allegedly favoured. And a third verdict is likely whether the investigation of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in the case should be monitored by a special investigation team (SIT).
All eyes are on the big one - verdict on a petition filed by Janata Party President Subramanian Swamy seeking an inquiry by the CBI against Mr Chidambaram. In the Supreme Court, Subramanian Swamy has contended that Mr Chidambaram deserves to be questioned by the CBI for failing to reign in Mr Raja. The basis of Mr Swamy's petition lies in a note from the Finance Ministry that finds that Mr Chidambaram, as Finance Minister in 2008 when the scam unfolded, did not act rigorously enough to ensure that the spectrum was sold at fair prices.
The CBI has, in the past, objected to this, stating that there is nothing to suggest that Mr Chidambaram could have acted differently, and that it is incorrect to single out a minister as culpable for Mr Raja's actions. The government's stand in court is that a lower court is already hearing a petition by Mr Swamy seeking to make Mr Chidambaram a co-accused in the case and therefore that court shoudl decide whether the Union Minister should be investigated or not.
The controversial note - sent in March to the Prime Minister's Office - had turned into a searing controversy, mainly because notings establish that it was "seen by" the present Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee - suggesting that he endorsed its content.
The excavation of that document by a Right to Information activist allowed the Opposition to demand with more surety the resignation of Mr Chidambaram. A week after the document was presented in the Supreme Court in September last year, Pranab Mukherjee clarified that it was prepared with inputs from different ministries, and that he did not agree with all of its inferences.
The government has so far backed Mr Chidambaram vociferously, with the Prime Minister stating that the Home Minister enjoys his "complete confidence." Mr Mukherjee has described Mr Chidambaram as "a pillar of strength" to the government in what's being seen as an attempt to assuage his upset colleague. Mr Chidambaram reportedly had told the PM that the note against him is the result of an orchestrated campaign within the government against him.
Mr Swamy had urged the Supreme Court to monitor the investigation into the 2G scam, which is being conducted by the CBI. Since November 2010, the inquiry has cost a couple of Union ministers their jobs, and lodged several executives at some of India's biggest telecom companies in prison.
The court is also expected to decide on whether 122 licenses issued during the tenure of A Raja as Telecom Minister should be cancelled. Petitioners have pleaded that there were multiple illegalities, corruption, favouritism in the grant of these licences, but the telecom firms that got these licences maintain that there were no irregularities.
The government's auditor Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) has suggested scrapping of the 2G licences in the past. Attorney General Goolam Essaji Vahanvati too recommended the cancellation of 72 licenses when the Department of Telecommunication (DoT) sought his legal opinion in August last year.
The third verdict expected today is on a petition by well-known lawyer and anti-corruption crusader Prashant Bhushan, who has sought that a Special Investigation Team be set up to oversee the 2G probe by the CBI; he has alleged that the CBI is under pressure from the government to protect Mr Chidambaram.