'Money trail does not lead to me'

NEW DELHI: Former external affairs minister K Natwar Singh has written to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh raising questions about the enforcement directorate’s (ED) functioning and its attempt to “implicate” his son Jagat Singh under the Money Laundering Act and FEMA.

Mr Singh asks under what Indian law has the investigative agency got UK’s Serious Fraud Office involved in the case. He also brought up the ED’s “leaking” of information regarding the case to the media. Mr Singh spoke to ET on the investigations and the Indo-US nuke deal. Excerpts:

How far have investigations undertaken by the Pathak authority progressed?

The Pathak commission’s mandate are the two contracts named in the Volcker report. One names Natwar Singh and the other the Congress party. Does the money trail lead to either Natwar Singh or the Congress? The answer is no.

If the ED has not found anything in eight months (regarding him), they are not going to find anything in eight years. Andaleeb Sehgal and Adiyta Khanna have filed affidavits saying they received the money. I have full faith in the Pathak Commission.

But not in the ED?

The ED has made innumerable trips abroad to places like London and New York, and has apparently spent over Rs 20 crore. Earlier, the kickback sum was being pegged at about $4m but has been scaled down to $50,000.

So you’re saying more money is being spent on the investigations?

I have been told by those in the ED that they cannot, at their level, continue with such a sustained campaign against, whom they described, as someone of my ‘stature and seniority’ unless they have been told to do so.

Is ED getting instructions from the higher ups?

The ED is leaking information about me to the press. Moreover, Andaleeb Sehgal has been called to the ED 130 times and has been questioned for over 600 hours. There are 129 Indian firms mentioned in the Volcker report, which have not been investigated. The ED’s investigation has become farcical.

You wrote letters to the PM about sections of the government working against you?

Yes. He has said he would look into the matter. The PM has been holding the Foreign Affairs portfolio for months now.

What impact has it had?

You can see for yourself.

How do you assess the progress made on the Indo-US civilian nuclear energy agreement?

All was going well till April 5, ’06 when US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice appeared before the US’s senate committee on foreign relations. While ‘reciprocity’ is the bedrock of the agreement, she didn’t mention that word in her testimony. She took a more unilateral line.

What can we do if the Americans bring amendments to the agreement?

We’ll either have to accept them or turn them down as the PM has gone on record about the principle of reciprocity.

Are you saying there is a likelihood that the deal might fall through?

The Americans are delaying the process. The delay is not because of us. An impression has gone around that it (the deal) is a make or break legislation as far as Indo-US relations go. That impression is wrong. Our relations are broad-based and multi-dimentional. We should be prepared for a negative response and have a contingency scenario in place.

From now on, we should have a statement ready. After mature consideration, a balanced one which assures the American and the Indian public opinion that this one negative outcome will not have an impact on Indo-US relations in an adverse manner.

How do you assess Shashi Tharoor’s chances of making it to the UN top job?

It is going to be a tough fight. It will require the PM and the foreign ministers to campaign. Mr Tharoor should talk less (in the run up to the elections). He is outstanding on merit.

Would he be at the top of the heap among those contesting for the UN secretary general’s post?

Most surely. He is a brilliant writer, very telegenic and very articulate and speaks fluent French. The selection to the UN secretary general is a complex process, a power game. It’s not done on merit.