YOGESH SAXENA
Ms.SoniaGandhi may well turn out to be India’s Fujimori, the Peruvian Leader ofJapanese descent. It is now known that Fujimori has been secretly maintainingand hiding his Japanese citizenship while claiming to be a natural bornPeruvian national. The wrath of the people of Peru came to visit upon Fujimoriwhen his corrupt activities came to be unraveled, so he bolted back to Japanwith his loot intact and then revealed that he had been all along a born Japanese citizen, and thusimmune from extradition to Peru. Ms. Sonia Gandhi has like Fujimori in Peru along history of committing fraud on the public. Ms. Sonia Gandhi sharesFujimori’s mendacity as well. For, example, in the Lok Sabha Who’s Who, on page290-91, Ms.Gandhi has claimed to have been educated in the Cambridge University.This is utterly and completely false. Ms. Gandhi had instead gone to the townof Cambridge to learn English in a unrecognized teaching shop. Such falsehoodis thus reflective of the duplicitous mentality of Ms. Sonia Gandhi. Time isnow near for her to be exposed as India’s Fujimori.2. Ms. Sonia Gandhi’s track record,hitherto unscrutinized, reveals an incredible venality and culpability undercriminal laws of the country. She is therefore extremely vunerable to anyhostile government, and thus would seriously jeopardize the prospects of anopposition coalition that included the Congress Party in an election campaignagainst the incumbent in office. The track record of Ms.Sonia Gandhi as ahabitual law breaker are illustrated below.A. In 1972, Ms.Sonia Gandhi tookemployment as an insurance agent of Oriental Fire Insurance, a public sectorfirm. As a foreigner as she was then, she committed a criminal offence bytaking such employment. Furthermore, she showed her business address as theofficial residence of the then Prime Minister and her mother-in-law, Mrs.Indira Gandhi, at 1, Safdarjung Road, New Delhi, which is an offence. Besidesthese, she collected commissions on insurance policy sold to Maruti and toindividuals in the Prime Minister’s Office, which is also an offence. Thesefacts came to light in a Rajya Sabha Question Hour in November 1974. The then Prime MinisterMrs.Indira Gandhi,and mother-in-law later announced in the House that Mrs.SoniaGandhi had resigned her insurance agency, a clear admission of culpabilityunder law. The three offences listed above are not subject to the statute oflimitation, and thus the failure to prosecute Ms.Sonia Gandhi then, is no barto launching prosecution now.B. On January 25, 1973, Ms.Sonia Gandhiwas appointed the Managing Director of Maruti Technical Services PrivateLtd.[MTSPL] in an “extraordinary” meeting of two share holders who togetherheld all the shares, 20 shares each of Rs.10 per share. The two shareholders atthe meeting were Ms.Sonia Gandhi and Mr.Sanjay Gandhi. The MTSPL wasincorporated on November 16, 1970. On September 28, 1974, Ms.Sonia Gandhi wasmade the MD of the Maruti Heavy Vehicles Private Ltd.[MHVPL], which wasincorporated on February 22, 1974 with 13 shareholders in which the Gandhis hadcontrolling interest. The Maruti car company and the heavy vehicles firmentered into a consultancy contact for expert advice with MTSPL for whichsusstantial fees were paid. In 1978,the Commission of Inquiry headed by Supreme Court Judge Mr.A.C.Gupta, appointedby the Janata Party government, submitted its Report on the affairs of theMaruti companies. The Commission recorded the depositions of S.Kumar, Registrarof companies, and A.Banerjee, Income tax officer, Mr.Kumar held that “theallotment of shares of the MTSPL and MHVPL to Ms.Sonia Gandhi was in contravention of Section 28(1) of FERA1973 which prohibited foreigners from owning shares in Indian companies, andhence was ab initio void in law. By Section 56, Ms.Sonia Gandhi thuscommitted a criminal offence that limitation on this offence even if FERAstands replaced by FEMA in 2000. Thus Ms.Sonia Gandhi can be prosecuted eventoday. Furthermore, the Gupta Commission recorded that Income Tax Officer, A.Banerjee had disallowed the remuneration paid by MTSPL to Ms.Sonia Gandhi“because she had no qualifications to be able to render any technical serviceto the company.” Considering that Ms. Sonia Gandhi holds an unrecognized“diploma” from a English Language teaching shop for unemployed European girlsin the city of Cambridge, England, that is quite obvious. Hence a fraud wascommitted, for which Ms. Gandhi can be prosecuted under Income Tax law as well.C. The electoral rolls of the New DelhiConstituency were revised in 1980 with January of that year as the qualifyingdate. When the voter list was published, Ms. Sonia Gandhi, then an Italiancitizen, illegally became a voter at serial number 388 of polling stationnumber 145 of that constituency. Ms. Gandhi applied to become an Indian citizenonly on April 7, 1983, and was granted citizenship with lightening speed on thesame day. But during the three years till the beginning of 1983, Ms. SoniaGandhi remained on the voter roll committing offences punishable under Section31 of the Representation of Peoples Act 1950, of a maximum sentence of one yearand fine. Ms. Sonia Gandhi cannot say that she was not willfully committingthis grievous offence because to become a voter, one has to fill and sign Form6 prepared under the Electors Rules 1960 in which affirmation of citizenship ofIndia is essential. Hence Ms. Gandhi by this false affirmation also committedoffences under the Indian Penal Code, particularly Sections 192 and 199, whichcarry a three year punishment.D. During the 1980s, Ms.Sonia Gandhi’smother Mrs.Paola Maino, and sister Anushka Vinci had developed businessconnections with Snam Progetti’s resident in India, Mr.Ottavio Quattrocchi. TheInfluence wielded by Rajiv Gandhi’s Italian in-laws enabled Quattrocchi to cornergovernment contracts such Thal Vaishet fertilizer project, as well as to brokerdeals such as the Bofors 155mm gun sale to the Indian Army. Affidavits filed ina Malaysian court and documents with the CBI establish that Sonia’s sisterAnushka and her husband (now ex) Walter Vinci were beneficiaries from thereceipts of Quattrocchi from Bofors company. Quattrocchi has also declared thathe is a close friend of Ms.Sonia Gandhi, a claim not denied by her. HenceMs.Sonia Gandhi, her sister and mother are candidates for inclusion in theBofors bribery case FIR under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C., to be thus investigated and prosecuted.E. Revelations contained in the archives of the KGB became public,and some of which were published in Pravda and Izvestia in 1992 following theliquidation of the Soviet Union. Most of these Archives are now kept in alibrary at Harvard University, USA. One letter in the archives documents theregular payment of commission to Ms.Sonia Gandhi and the Maino family in Italy,arranged by the KGB. One letter [published in a Russian news daily Izvestiaon June 27, 1992 in an article by Ms.Yevgenia Albats of Moscow News] waswritten by the then KGB chief, Viktor Chebrikov to the Central Committee of theCommunist Party of the Soviet Union [CPSU]. The KGB chief reporting thesepayments to the CPSU for ractification, stated that members of the Rajiv Gandhifamily had expressed profound gratitude for the help being received by themthrough commercial deals of an organizations. In a confidential message to theKGB, stated Chebrikov to the CPSU, “they [the Mainos] informed that a majorpart of these resources was used to support the party of Mr.Rajiv Gandhi”. OnlyJuly 3, 1992 Ms.Tatiana Samolis, the spokesperson of the KGB’s successororganization, the Federal Intelligence service [FIS], in a press briefing inMoscow [which was reported in the Hindu 4.7.92] confirmed that indeedsuch a connection between the KGB and Mainos had existed “in view of theideological confrontation that prevailed in the world at that time” In the 1989elections for example the Mainos spent Rs.10 crores on select candidates of theCongress Party in the General Elections, obviously to create cheerleaders forMs.Sonia Gandhi for a future contingency, Mr.Arjun Singh was one such recipientfrom the Mainos. Ms.Sonia Gandhi, her mother and sister are thus guilty ofoffences under IPC Sections 120B read with 171-C and 171-H, as well as FERA andFCRA.F. The Mainos have systematically plundered and exported theancient treasures of India, especially temple sculptures of Tamil Nadu, Andhra,Orissa and Madhya Pradesh, Mughal paintings and precious gems in IndianMuseums, all protected and banned from export under the Antiquities and ArtTreasures Act, 1972. The CBI had in 1993 registered cases on such illegalexports from a Chennai Suburb to an identified person in Italy (see encloseddocument). Alitalia and Air India flights were used to send unchecked cratesafter after crates misusing the SPG cover first to Italy for display in shops ownedby her family e.g.Etnica in Rivolta or Ganpati in Orbassano [seeenclosed photo and calling card], and after creating an ownership on paper,getting the contraband auctioned by Sotheebys and Christies, the Londonauctioneers. Fred Watson’s Sothebys-AnInside Story [Random House, 1998] gives some clues on such a racket. Thereis in the records of the Ministry of Human Resources enough materials in Noteson file of Directors Generals of Archeological Survey of India to suggestprecious ancient paintings of the Mughal period were removed and declared“stolen” or missing, but ended up in a house in Golf Links, New Delhi whichMs.Sonia Gandhi had frequented. Even the Festival of India was used as a ployto smuggle out such treasures. Inarranging these delicate operations the Mainos took the help Mr.Arjun Singh[when he was Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister and later Union Human ResourcesDevelopment Minister], art expert Martand Singh, a Pakistani couple Muneer andFarida Attaullah, London based Pakistani fixer Salman Thassir a prince ofKuwait, and even the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) which has beenconvicted by courts in India for the assassination of Mr.Rajiv Gandhi Thus,Ms.Sonia Gandhi and her Italian relatives are culpable for various offencesunder the Antiquities and Art Treasures Act as well as under Sections 295, 378and 410 of the IPC.G. When Rajiv Gandhi married Sonia Gandhi on February 25, 1968, shewas poor. Her Father Stefano Maino had lost everything after his party leader,Benito Mussolini, the II Duce of Fascist Italy, was overthrown and killed.After World War II, Stefano became a brick layer, and Sonia’s mother, PaolaPredebon, a share cropper. Like many poor Italian families, Sonia wasdispatched to learn English in a teaching shop in Cambridge town and thus landa job as an hostess or in similar employment, a modest goal indeed. Hermarriage to Rajiv Gandhi on 25.2.68 however changed all that. And because ofthe aforesaid illegal activities, the Maino family became in just 25 years therichest family of Italy with net worth of US $ 2.0 billion. The respected Swissmagazine, Schweizer Illusttrierte, in its November 1991 issue, reportedthat the Mainos had in 1991 about $2.7 billion. But over the 1990s decade, theMainos appear to have lost some of the money due to reckless investments,collapse of the Barings Bank, and ostentatious spending. They are still worthabout US $2.0 billion today.H. Ms.Sonia Gandhi has also fully utilized the martyrdom of herhusband Rajiv Gandhi to advance her political career as well as to take controlof the Nehru family’s monetary inheritance. The Rajiv Gandhi Foundation was setup under her chairmanship and Rs.200 crores collected during NarasimhaRao’s tenure as PM, for use ineducation and public affairs. Yet an analysis of the accounts of the Foundationshow that only 3% of the income is being used for the stated objectives while97% is deployed for other goalsincluding for private travel of Ms.Gandhi and her chosen ones. This is a violationof the Trust Act and thus Ms.Gandhi and other trustees can be proceeded under Section 92 of theCPC. There is already a PIL in the Delhi High Court in this matter.3. Circumstantial evidence is also fast accumulating that makes itnow imperative for the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to probe whetherthe mother (Ms.Paola Maino) and sister (Ms.Anushka Vinci) of Ms.Sonia Gandhi,have had a long term continuing association since 1984 with the terroristorganization, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), The Supreme Courthad delivered on May 12, 1999 a stinging judgement that held the LTTEresponsible for the assassination of India’s former Prime Minister Mr.RajivGandhi. The Government had set up a Multi Disciplinary Monitoring Agency (MDMA)in August 1998, led by the CBI, to probe leads such as that have now surfacedregarding the Maino-LTTE links.4. The Circumstantial evidence of these links include SoniaGandhi’s plea for commuting the death penalty for her husband’s killers; in providingone acre of land near the Indira Gandhi International Airport, Delhi, forhousing the Periyar Centre for the pro-LTTE and secessionist Dravida Kazhagam(DK) which had been indicted in Rajiv Gandhi’s assassination by the JainCommission (Part III, Vol.IV, Chapter VII, Pages 161-73, of the Final Report)and whose seven key members have been sentenced along with nineteen others ofthe LTTE by the Supreme Court, for participating in the assassinationconspiracy. There are several other examples of Ms.Sonia Gandhi goinginexplicably soft onthe LTTE, including remaining silent on the failure of the government toextradite the LTTE Supremo Prabhakaran.5. The CBI-led Multi Disciplinary Monitoring Agency (MDMA) set upafter the Jain Commission Final Report, should therefore send interrogatoriesto the Maino family in Italy about all this, and investigate the extent oftheir connections with LTTE.6. Ms.Sonia Gandhi’s family in Italy constitutes a major nationalsecurity risk for India, but paradoxically they enjoy the cover of the Indianstate for their nefarious activities. The RAW, India’s foreign intelligenceagency has reports of this national security risk. While in service (duringRajiv Gandhi’s tenure as PM), the Additional Director of RAW, B.Raman had in areport stated: “Ms.SoniaGandhi’s umbilical cord is strongly tied to Italy. Her close relatives areItalian citizens living in Italy. India has important national securityinterest in Italy because of its arms, nuclear and technology supplyrelationships with Pakistan and China.”Ramanconcluded that no source in Italy or in EU would cooperate with IndianIntelligence on this issue since they would fear that one day perhaps thesesources may fall into Italian hands. After retirement from RAW, Raman evenpublished these views in Statesman (May 16, 1999) in an article underhis own name.Italy,incidentally, is flouting US sanctions and providing avionics to theSino-Pakistan Joint project to manufacture the F-1 Chinese design plane update,which is to be a successor to the US F-16 super fighter jets. IndianIntelligence is busy trying to build sources in Italy to track details of thiscollaboration. 7. For all theseinformation I have written to Ms.Vasundara Raje, Minister in charge ofPersonnel (i.e.,CBI) to initiate a CBI inquiry. On all the above, if on noaction is initiated, I will have no other option but to move the courts myselfto set the law into motion. We,The People Of India Appeal to the Nationalists Straight forward Citizen Strive to Protect The Dignity of our Nation
No comments:
Post a Comment