Quantcast
Channel: Bharatkalyan97
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 11039

Kaalaadhan list, some questions -- Noopur Tiwari. Time to honour kaalaadhan pledge: Ram Jethmalani asks NaMo not to allow dacoits the last laugh

$
0
0
SATURDAY | NOVEMBER 08, 2014
RAM JETHMALANI
ETHICS & POWER
Ram Jethmalani is a senior politician and eminent lawyer.
Time to honour black money pledge
The new government should avoid excuses made by its predecessor.
his piece is being written to help the SIT investigations into black money, and it is my right and duty as the petitioner who has obtained from the Hon'ble Supreme Court the historic judgment of July 2011 to neutralise all efforts, intentional or just the product of ignorance and inefficiency, calculated to make a mockery of the judgment and let dacoits have the last laugh. I normally do not quote other newspapers in my piece, but for the sake of convenience I am borrowing the following facts from a piece which appeared in the Hindustan Times of 29 October with the title: Black money list: 'Some unanswered Questions about the 627 names.'
One Herve Falciani, a whistleblower who worked for the HSBC Geneva branch, stole the names and information of nearly 25,000 potential fraudsters having accounts in the bank and supplied them to the Government of France. The French shared the information with other countries. France itself earned 168 million euros (3,000 names from the list), Spain 260 million euros (700 names), and UK 135 million Pounds(4000 names).
This unfortunate nation got 627 names, but not a farthing was recovered, nor a single name disclosed to the sovereign of this country "The People", making a joke of the Republic of India. Hindustan Times reports that 800 names were received. What happened to the missing 173? Perhaps the Finance Ministry knows. I join in asking the same question and some more too. When were these names received by India; what was the correspondence that took place before and after the receipt of the names and what steps were taken to use this information by the UPA government and after May 2014 by the new government? It is the conduct of some of our rulers that fully explains and justifies the people's passionate demand for disclosure, to enable them to decide which ruler is really a collaborator in crime or not.
Now we leave the French disclosure for the time being and get back to the Government of Germany. Our governments have been aware for long that the German government in February 2008 made a public statement in newspapers circulating throughout the world that it will provide to other countries, details of relevant clients from the DVD obtained by them from an ex-employee of the bank on payment of roughly US $475 million. The DVD contained names of 1,400 clients of the Liechtenstein Bank. The German Finance Ministry spokesman, Thorsten Albig said they will willingly share this information at no cost and condition to any requesting country.
Most educated citizens have known that the prestigious Swiss magazine called the Swiss Illustrierte had announced in 1991 the names, the photographs, the account numbers and the concealed loot in their accounts of 14 international crooks amongst whom the late, then recently killed, Prime Minister of India was one. Did this produce any response in India? I know of none.
In March 2014, in the midst of the hot election campaign I personally went to Germany and on my return recorded my discussions with the highest in the German ministry and the promise which I received from them about sharing this information with us. This letter was sent to BJP leaders and I am waiting to see what is being done to recover the loot.
An obviously anxious member of the Rajya Sabha, Sh. Shantaram Naik asked on 08.07.2014:
Will the Minister of Finance be pleased to state:
(a) whether Government has made any request regarding black money held by Indian nationals in Swiss bank;
(b) when the request was sent and what was the information sought;
(c) whether it is a fact that Parliament of Swiss Government has passed a law called, 'The Swiss tax Administrative Assistance Act';
(d) If so, when this Act was passed.
(e) whether the changes to be brought in under the law have to be approved through a referendum; and
(f) the details of response given by the Swiss Government in this regard, so far?"
The answer (a) is in the affirmative, a clear 'Yes, Sir'.
The answer to (b) is that after 7 October 2011, when the Double Taxation Avoidance Convention came into force, several requests have been made. This obviously refers to the old government now displaced. The Hon'ble member obviously wanted to know whether the new government brought into existence has taken any steps. One would expect a frank answer. The Parliamentary record of the answer contains the following sentence, "After the amendments to the Double Taxation Avoidance Convention (DTAC) with Switzerland came into force on 7th October, 2011, several requests seeking information in respect of Indian Nationals holding bank accounts in Swiss Banks in specific cases have been made. There has been a positive response to some requests, where information has been provided subject to the confidentiality clause in the said DTAC. In other cases, the Swiss Government has not been providing the information requested citing restrictions imposed by their domestic laws... A letter was accordingly written to Swiss Authorities on 23rd June, 2014 under the provisions of Article 26 of the DTAC between India and Switzerland, requesting them to provide the information in this regard that has been compiled by Switzerland. The Swiss authorities in their reply dated 4th July, 2014 have stated that there is no list of Indian Tax residents holding assets in Swiss financial institutions in their own names or through structures."
The SIT, the nation and the Hon'ble Supreme Court would like to see who invoked the amended DTAA and when they got the specific names from Germany. The new government had not yet come in and all this must be the handiwork of the previous one. The correspondence, if found genuine, will alone show that the DTAA was invoked not by the German but by the Indian government. Article 26, which is mentioned in the reply, does not deal with the right to information but to the information when supplied. It cannot be that any honest government would ask for the information under Article 26, unless it is determined unasked not to disclose it to anyone.
I must now draw attention to the second report of the task force of the BJP on "the steps to be taken by India" in the matter of "Indian Black Money Abroad in Secret Banks and Tax Havens", running into 95 pages. Particularly to Para XIII, "The Double Taxation Treaty with Switzerland," which at page 26 describes the Double Taxation Treaty as an impotent instrument. Of course when this report was written in January 2011, the ratification of United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) by India had not taken place, though many other countries had ratified it long before.
Fortunately, before the installation of the Narendra Modi government, India did ratify this when the Manmohan Singh government was still in power. We have only to use this Convention and nothing else. The DTAA was the favourite device of the previous government and our government blindly copied its corrupt actions.
Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee, our President now, had recommended the use of this useless document in his otherwise useless white paper on black money. Unfortunately, people do not know that his white paper was itself called a black paper. I want, what I lovingly consider our government, to take steps to fulfil its pledge to the people of India.
Wait for more information about the conduct of the collaborators of the culprits.
http://www.sunday-guardian.com/analysis/time-to-honour-black-money-pledge

Noopur Tiwari, Hindustan Times
October 29, 2014
The black money storm raging in India is centered on names in the so called HSBC list that the country had received from France in 2011. The story though starts in December 2008, when a systems engineer who worked at the HSBC's Geneva branch fled to France with data on nearly 25,000 bank accounts.

Hervé Falciani, a whistleblower now known as the 'Edward Snowden of Swiss banking', handed over the encrypted information he had been hoarding to French authorities. Based on his exposure a list of more than 125,000 potential fraudsters from around the world emerged.

French authorities shared the names with other countries including India. What did the others do with the names from the same "stolen" list? They certainly didn't make them public. France claims it recovered €186 million (3,000 names from the list), Spain €260 million (700 names) and UK £135 million (4,000 names).
These countries claim they are continuing to work towards recovering more money from entities on the list. But what does India have to show? No clear picture has emerged yet. The government has promised big revelations, but will it announce how much money it has recovered or is confident of being able to recover?

Many other questions remained unanswered in India. France said it didn't need more information from Switzerland because Falciani's data had everything they needed. So how is it that India still needs info from Switzerland even though it has names from the same list? Does it mean France did not share all the data? It's not clear exactly how many names were there on the original list. If there were 800 names in the original list as reported and 627 names have been submitted to the Supreme Court, what has happened to the rest? Were those names cleared?
None of the other countries that had a share of the HSBC list saw such a passionate public demand to name and shame. The focus there was firmly set on the investigation and judicial processes, but in India there is a clamour see names come out into the open. This seems to be driven by the desire to expose the nexus between politicians, officials and big business.

The Supreme Court ruled that only the special investigation team (SIT) chairperson and vice chairperson can open the sealed envelope containing names of account holders. India maybe under legal obligation to not make the names public but at the same time the government's allegiance to the judicial system obliges it to create the right conditions to bring offenders to book. Lack of progress in investigation raises suspicions and justifies public demand for increased transparency.
The sensationalism around black money eclipses the more important need for a greater understanding of the mechanics of tax evasion and money laundering. Public opinion can only press the government for effective and long-term action if there's more sombre analysis rather than heated headlines followed by long spells of public amnesia.

There are three simple and obvious things to remember. The burden of proof is on India so if India's own investigation is rock solid, tax havens and banking secrecy jurisdictions will be under tremendous pressure, if not obligation, to cooperate. Forging strong bilateral and multilateral treaties are the only way to open up channels of information and to escape traps set by such jurisdictions. And the most important: time lost is money lost.
Public frustration with the idea of vast sums draining to offshore accounts should lead to more than just an appetite for a spectacle. The dragging of offenders into the public eye can only bring short lived and misplaced gratification.
It is not clear what important revelations the government plans to make over the next few days. But it could start by announcing what steps are being taken to implement the new global automatic information exchange system that India, as part of G-20 nations, had committed to in 2013.
(The writer is a Paris-based independent journalist. The views expressed are personal.)
http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/Print/1280228.aspx


Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 11039

Trending Articles