PREVIOUS PAGE

HK/1n/12.00

PAPERS LAID ON THE TABLE

SHRI MD. ALI ASHRAF FATMI: Sir, I lay on the Table

 I (1). A copy each (in English and Hindi) of the following papers, under sub-section (2) of section 30 and sub-section (4) of section 31 of the Mahatma Gandhi Antarrashtriya Hindi Vishwavidyalaya  Act, 1996:

 

(a)  Annual Report and Accounts of the Mahatma Gandhi Antarrashtriya Hindi Vishwavidyalaya, Wardha, for the year 2004-2005, together with the Auditor's Report on the Accounts.   

 

(b)  Review by Government on the working of the above University.

 (2). Statement (in English and Hindi) giving reasons for the delay in laying the papers mentioned at (1) above.

II.  A copy each (in English and Hindi) of the following papers

(i)

(a)

Annual Accounts of the Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, for the year 2004-2005, and the Audit Report thereon under sub-section (4) of section 23 of the Institutes of Technology Act, 1961.

 

(b)  

Statement giving reasons for the delay in laying papers mentioned at (a) above.

(ii)

(a)

Annual Accounts of the Visva-Bharati, Santiniketan,   for the year 2004-2005, and the Audit Report thereon, under sub-section (4) of section 36 of the Visva Bharati (Amendment) Act, 1984.

 

(b)

Statement giving reasons for the delay in laying the papers mentioned at (a) above.

(iii)

(a)

Annual Report and Accounts of the Board of Apprenticeship Training (BOAT), Northern Region, Kanpur, for the year 2004-2005, together with the Auditor's Report on the Accounts.   

 

(b)

Review by Government on the working of the above Board.

 

(c)

Statement giving reasons for the delay in laying the papers mentioned at (a) above.

(iv)

(a)

Annual Report and Accounts of the Malaviya National Institute of Technology, Jaipur, for the year 2003-2004, together with the Auditor's Report on the Accounts.   

 

(b)

Review by Government on the working of the above Institute.

 

(c)

Statement giving reasons for the delay in laying the papers mentioned at (a) above.

(v)

(a)

Annual Report of the Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, for the year 2004-2005.

 

(b)

Annual Accounts of the Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, for the year 2004-2005 and the Audit Report thereon, under sub-section (4) of section 23 of the Institutes of Technology Act, 1961.

 

(c)

Statement by Government accepting the above Report.

 

(d)

Statement giving reasons for the delay in laying the papers mentioned at (a) and (b) above.

(vi)

(a)

Annual Report of the Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan, New Delhi, for the year 2004-2005.

 

(b)

Annual Accounts of the Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan, New Delhi, for the year 2004-2005, and the Audit Report thereon.

 

(c)

Review by Government on the working of the above Sansthan.

 

(d)

Statement giving reasons for the delay in laying the papers mentioned at (a) and (b) above.

(vii)

(a)

Seventy-ninth Annual Report (Part I and II) of the University of Delhi, for the year 2001-2002.   

 

(b)

Review by Government on the working of the above University.

 

(c)

Statement giving reasons for the delay in laying the papers mentioned at (a) above.

SHRIMATI SUBBULAKSHMI JAGADEESAN: Sir, I lay on the Table a copy each (in English and Hindi) of the following papers:

(i) 

(a)   

Annual Report on the working of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, for the year 2004, under sub-section (4) of section 21 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 

 

(b) 

Statement giving reasons for the delay in laying the paper mentioned at (a) above.    

(ii) 

(a) 

Annual Report on the working of the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955, for the year 2004,  under sub-section (4) of section 15A of the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955. 

 

(b)

Statement giving reasons for the delay in laying the paper mentioned at (a) above.

SHRIMATI D. PURANDESWARI: Sir, I lay on the Table a copy each (in English and Hindi) of the following papers:

(i)

(a)

Annual Report and Accounts of the Andhra Pradesh Mahila Samatha Society, Hyderabad, for the year 2004-2005, together with the Auditor's Report on the Accounts.   

 

(b)

Statement by Government accepting the above Report.

 

(c)

Statement giving reasons for the delay in laying the papers mentioned at (a) above.

(ii)

(a)

Annual Report and Accounts of the Mahila Samakhya, Gujarat, for the year 2004-2005, together with the Auditor's Report on the Accounts.   

 

(b)

Statement by Government accepting the above Report.

 

(c)

Statement giving reasons for the delay in laying the papers mentioned at (a) above.

(iii)

(a)

Annual Report and Accounts of the Mahila Samakhya, Uttaranchal, for the year 2004-2005, together with the Auditor's Report on the Accounts.   

 

(b)  

Statement by Government accepting the above Report.

 

(c)

Statement giving reasons for the delay in laying the papers mentioned at (a) above.

(iv)

(a)

Annual Report and Accounts of the Mahila Samakhya, Thiruvananthapuram, for the year 2004-2005, together with the Auditor's Report on the Accounts.   

 

(b) 

Statement by Government accepting the above Report.

 

(c)

Statement giving reasons for the delay in laying the papers mentioned at (a) above.

(v)

(a)

Annual Report and Accounts of the Mahila Samakhya, Gujarat, for the year 2003-2004, together with the Auditor's Report on the Accounts.   

 

(b)

Statement by Government accepting the above Report.

 

(c)

Statement giving reasons for the delay in laying the papers mentioned at (a) above.

(vi)

(a)

Annual Report and Accounts of the Mahila Samakhya, Uttar Pradesh, for the year 2004-2005, together with the Auditor's Report on the Accounts.   

 

(b) 

Statement by Government accepting the above Report.

 

(c)

Statement giving reasons for the delay in laying the papers mentioned at (a) above.

(vii)

(a)

Annual Report and Accounts of the Jharkhand Education Project Council, Ranchi, for the year 2004-2005, together with the Auditor's Report on the Accounts.   

 

(b) 

Statement by Government accepting the above Report.

 

(c)

Statement giving reasons for the delay in laying the papers mentioned at (a) above.

(viii)

(a)

Annual Report and Accounts of the Paschim Banga Rajya Prarambhik Shiksha Unnyan Sanstha (PBRPSUS), Kolkata for Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) and District Primary Education Programme (DPEP), West Bengal, for the year 2004-2005, together with the Auditor's Report on the Accounts.   

 

(b)

Statement by Government accepting the above Report.

 

(c)

Statement giving reasons for the delay in laying the papers mentioned at (a) above.

(Ends)

MESSAGE FROM LOK SABHA

THE APPROPRIATION (NO.4) BILL, 2006.

SECRETARY-GENERAL: Sir, I have to report to the House the following message received from the Lok Sabha, signed by the Secretary-General of the Lok Sabha:

"In accordance with the provisions of rule 96 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha, I am directed to enclose the Appropriation (No.4) Bill, 2006, as passed by Lok Sabha at its sitting held on the 11th August, 2006.

The Speaker has certified that this Bill is a Money Bill within the meaning of Article 110 of the Constitution of India."

Sir, I lay a copy of the Bill on the Table.

(Ends)

 

 

PERSONAL EXPLANATION

SHRI K. NATWAR SINGH (RAJASTHAN): Mr. Chairman, Sir, when the situation of the people of Iraq became desperate, the Congress Party decided to send a fraternal delegation to Baghdad. The delegation was led by me. I visited Baghdad in January 2001. The Congress President gave me a letter of introduction to President of Saddam Hussain which letter I delivered to the Deputy Prime Minister of Iraq, Mr. Tariq Aziz, on my arrival in Baghdad.

I made a brief call on the Oil Minister of Iraq as a matter of courtesy because he had been in India and a number of other dignitaries.

During my entire stay in Baghdad, no discussion or talk took place with any Iraqi authority with regard to the Oil For Food Programme, oil contracts, vouchers, bank accounts, etc. The delegation was a political delegation. The administrative arrangements and the logistics were in the hands of Anil Mathrani, who was the Secretary of the Foreign Affairs department of the party of which I was Chairman. The delegation consisted of four members -- Shri Shiv Shankar, Shri A.R. Antulay, Shri Anil Mathrani and me. Shri Vohra has confirmed and so has the Pathak Authority. My son accompanied me and I paid for his fare. There is no document approved by me to add any names to the delegation. I had no authority to do so. I have made this clear on several occasions that no names were added. The Pathak Authority has also agreed that there were only four members of the delegation.

On my return I briefed the Congress President about our discussion in Baghdad and nothing was concealed or held back.

The Oil For Food Programme was started under the auspices of the United Nations. When complaints arose about the misuses of this programme, the Independent Inquiry Committee was appointed to look into these malpractices and abuses by the United Nations personnel in conducting this programme. (Contd. by 1o/KSK)

KSK/PSV/12.05/1O

SHRI K. NATWAR SINGH (CONTD): Mr. Paul Volcker submitted his final report at the end of October, 2005. The annexures to the report mentioned my name, and the name of the Congress Party, as non-contractual beneficiaries. No evidence was produced in the Volcker report as to how and why our names were added. I repeat, no evidence was produced in the Volcker report as to how and why our names were added. And, by whom? I shall not go into it here; I will do so later. In my affidavit, I have given details of Mr. Volcker's bias against those who disapproved of the U.S. actions in West Asia and elsewhere. My affidavit and statement to the Pathak Authority have been completely ignored by the Authority.

The Permanent Mission of India at United Nations in New York, through Shri Harsh Vardhan Shingla, Minister in our UN Mission, made the following points in a communication sent to the Ministry of External Affairs on 30th October, 2005, and I quote: "(1) The Independent Inquiry Committee is headed by Paul Volcker, former Chairman of the U.S. Federal Reserve whose inclination would be to discredit the opponents of U.S. Policy; (2) No evidence has been cited and no documentation given on most of the allegations made; (3) Due process was not observed because none of the non-contractual entities....

THE MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (SHRI SURESH PACHOURI): Sir, I have a point of order. ָ, ־ã Ͽ ֮֮ߵ ֤õ 241 ֮ personal explanation ֕֟ ֮־ָ, ָ Kaul and Shakdher 413 , ִ ï™ "If any portion thereof is considered objectionable or beyond the scope of personal explanation, the Member is asked to delete it from his statement." ָ, ׾ִ֮ ֣Ԯ , ֪ׯ debatable issue , ֮֮ߵ ֤õ ָ 241 , ֛ ï™ "A Member may, with the permission of the Chairman, make a personal explanation although there is no question before the Council, but in this case, no debatable matter -- I shall stress, 'no debatable matter' -- may be brought forward, and no debate shall arise. ֮־ָ, ֯ ׸ ֣Ԯ ֮֮ߵ ֤õ ֯ ֕֟ ֮ personal explanation , ִ ִֵ-ִֵ ָ ػ և , ػ 475, 480, ػ 477, 478, ײֻ ï™ ִ׮֟ ֟ , personal explanation ֯ ֕֟ , debatable issue , ָ ֋, ֟ ׮ִֵ ן օ ֯ ֣Ԯ ָ ֮ ִ׮֟ ֟ ״֟ , ֤ ָ օ

ֳ֯ן :

ָ֙ : ָ, ֵ֮ ...(־֮֬)...

ֳ֯ן : ֯ ֵ֮ ָ ׻֋ ...(־֮֬)...

ָ֙ : ֮֯ approve פ , օ ...(־֮֬)...

ֳ֯ן : ׻֋, ׻֋

SHRI K. NATWAR SINGH: (3) Due process was not observed because none of the non-contractual entities was asked, through Permanent Mission of India, to respond to the allegations."

It is not surprising, therefore, that no country in the world has taken any notice of the Volcker Report. Let me repeat, Sir. It is not surprising, therefore, that no country in the world has taken any notice of the Volcker Report.

The Pathak Authority report has not attached my affidavit that was given to it. Why then were we asked to submit affidavits and asked to make statements before the Authority? It has not attached a copy of the statement that I made to the Pathak Authority exposing the flaws and loopholes in the Volcker Report. Although the report of the Pathak Authority is a flawed document, but it is categorical about what matters most to me. (Continued by 1p)

GSP/12.10/1P

SHRI K. NATWAR SINGH: The authority has in clear terms said that I and my son derived no financial gain from any source. We stand fully vindicated, and, that is all that matters to me.

I find that much has been made out of the three letters I wrote to the Oil Minister of Iraq. Normally, I would not have bothered to discuss these. However, since they seem to have been given such intense importance by Justice Pathak, and my party, *. Are we always aware what they are used for ...(Interruptions)...

MR. CHAIRMAN: Nobody writes letters. (Interruptions)

SHRI K. NATWAR SINGH: ...are we responsible for how they are used? However, in this case, I would like to point out that even if they were used for oil contracts, these were legitimate contracts under the United Nations Oil for Food programme. I am entitled to ask, Sir, what illegality was committed by me in India or internationally? Furthermore, if I were to have asked for a favour, I would have done so for myself or my son. At no stage did I ask for any favours for myself or my son. And, I could have asked Tariq Aziz verbally to give me whatever amount I wanted, I did not do so.

 

* Expunged as ordered by the Chair

The last nine months have been most unpleasant and disagreeable and a great strain on me and my family. Throughout this period, Sir, we have acted with candor, courage, dignity and restraint. The channel to my soul and conscience is immune to the chatter and clatter of those whose links with decency, ethics and morality are non-existent.

Paragraph 15.8 of the Pathak Authority report clearly states that on August 21, 2001, the Executive Director, SOMO wrote to the Iraqi Oil Minister seeking the approval of the allocation of one million barrels of crude oil "for the benefit of the Indian Congress Party". After the approval by the Iraqi Oil Minister, this contract was also sent for the approval of the United Nation Observer; Justice Pathak then says enigmatically, "How the name of the Indian Congress Party came to be mentioned in this letter is not known". But, Sir, this is precisely what he was required to find out. Instead of doing so, he surmises, as if he had entered the mind of the Iraqi authorities, that what appeared to be the reason to him was that I and my son so projected ourselves that the Iraqi authorities formed the impression that we were representatives of the Congress party, whose representative was I when I went there. This is mere conjecture on his part in order to implicate me and my son and does him no credit. (Contd. by sk-1q)

SK-AKA/1q/12.15

SHRI K. NATWAR SINGH (CONTD.): Sir, clearly, therefore, Justice Pathak's conclusions dealing with the contract in which I was mentioned as the non-contractual beneficiary and the contract in which the Congress party was mentioned as non-contractual beneficiary are at best questionable. He has not explained why I would ask for one contract in my name and another in the name of the Congress party. In neither case has he produced any evidence of my linkage except through surmises and assumptions. I would like to state with all the emphasis at my command that nowhere have I signed any contract, received any voucher, signed any receipt or made any transaction whatsoever with any party.

Justice Pathak also did not examine the circumstances under which the Volcker Committee in its 5th Report included my name as a non-contractual beneficiary, did not verify the documents on which such a conclusion was based and gives no explanation of how the name of many companies, mostly from the US, were removed, as this was said in this House when the House discussed the report some months ago.

Mr. Chairman, Sir, I joined the Indian Foreign Service in 1953. I have had a reasonably successful career in the diplomatic service of India. I voluntarily left the Foreign Service and joined the Congress party in 1984 with the approval of Shrimati Indira Gandhi and Shri Rajiv Gandhi in the hope that I would in a modest way be able to serve my people and my country better. I dare say that the record of my public life has been without blemish. I was awarded the Padma Bhushan in January 1984 by Shrimati Indira Gandhi. I have the good fortune to belong to a well-known and valiant family. God has been kind to me and given me enough. I have no reason, therefore, to indulge in acts of impropriety of this nature for petty financial gains. Sir, I have placed my views before this august House and before you from a moral and ethical point of view. I have not argued from a lawyer's brief.

Sir, I am in the evening of my life and I shall meet the Cosmic Master with my head high. Clean I came into the world and clean I shall depart. Thank you.

(Ends)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Kindly see page 4. You said in your statement *. There were objections from some hon. Members of the House to this line.

SHRI NATWAR SINGH: Please remove it, if there is any objection.

ָ ֤ : ֳ֯ן , ״ֻ ? ֯ י פ

ֳ֯ן : ָ ?

ָ ֤ : ֯ י , פ - ֻ , ָ 녠 ֤ ָ ײֻ , ־֕ ߴ ֤ ױ ֵ פ ָ ָ ָ֕ ......

ֳ֯ן : ֯ և, ߸ ָ

ָ ֤ : ָ ָ ָ֕ ױ ֋, ָ ֯ י פ

ֳ֯ן : ֯ և, ߸ ָ ߴ֟ 00 ԅ

MATTERS RAISED WITH THE PERMISSION OF CHAIR

DUMPING OF 35 FEMALE FOETUSES IN A WELL

SHRIMATI N.P. DURGA (ANDHRA PRADESH): Sir, I would like to draw the attention of the House regarding one incident which occurred last week. This shows how the doctors and nursing homes are discriminating against the girl child. This incident occurred in Patiala in Punjab which is fighting a losing battle with an adverse sex ratio. Two doctors were involved in this incident. Thirty-five female foetuses were found at the back of one nursing home and the police have arrested both the doctors. Sir, this is another example of how the PNDT Act is being hit for a six, giving least importance to the rapidly bundling down the female sex ratio in the country. (Contd. by ysr-1r)

 

*Expunged as ordered by the Chair.
-SK/YSR-MCM/12.20/1R

SHRIMATI N.P. DURGA (CONTD.): I appeal to the entire House to join me in condemning this dastardly act. I demand the cancellation of medical licences of both the doctors. With folded hands, I only plead with the Government to implement the PNDT Act in all its sincerity. Thank you, Sir. (Ends)

(MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN in the Chair)

ߴ֟ ׾֯־ (ֻ֓ Ϥ) : , - օ ֮ ߮ ָ פ ֕ ִֻ ֵ ָ, ֮֟ 10 ß י ֲָ ׮ וִ ֵ "Graveyard of unborn girls." ֕ ִֵ ֲ ־ ֤ ֟ ֵ֬߮ דֵ ֛ Ӥ ߴ ָ פ ֟ ֕ ָ פ ֟ ֮ ֮ ֕ ֮ ߴ ֮ ܟ ߴ ֋ ֕ ӕֲ ׸ ֻ ӟ ָ ָ ֯ ֛ 1991 875 ָ ָ 2001 793 ևՅ ָ ׸ 870 1991 2001 820 և ֕ ִ ֟ ֟ ׻֋ ֮ ִ , 33 ָ ׸־֮ ָ פ ֋ ִ֕ ֮־֟ ָ ֳ֯ן , ָ ֮ ܟ ߴ ֋ ֌ և ָߕ ֻ , וִ֮ ֈӛ ֿ߮ Ӿ-Ӿ ֟ ָ ִ ׻֋ ֲ֕ ֟ ֟ ָ ֜-׻ ֤ ֮ ֳ ִ׮֟ ֤õ ֕ ָ ֋ , ִֵ ֋ ֤õ פև ָ ֮ ׻֋ ֛և ֛ ֛ ִו ן ......(־֮֬)

(ִ֯).

ֳ֯ן : ֮֯ , ֯ ֲ ֋ ו֋.....(־֮֬)

ߴ֟ ִ þָ֕ (׸) : ָ ֮ ֯ ִ֨ ׯ֔ ֡ ׸Ù ֮ ß־ פ օ ָ ֟ ִֵ ִõ ָ ׾ßָ ֤ ֓ ߠ ԙ ֤ ֲֻ֟ ֮ ֛ ֓ ֮ ֤ ߠ ָ ִõ ֜ ׻֋ ִ֨

ߴ֟ Ӥ ָ (׿ִ ֻ) : ָ, ָָ ״׮Ù , ׯ֔ ֮ ֟֓ߟ ָ ״׮Ù ֮ פ ꅠ ֮ פ և ֣׸ߕ ߠ ֣ , ֻ ־ֻ , ָ֬ , ָ֬ ײֻ ״ֻ ֮ פ ֵ ו֮֟ ָևָ , ו֮֟ ׯϋ ֣׸ߕ ֮ ײֻ ׻֋, ׻֋, ִ 000 ֌, ִ ״׮Ù ֮ פ ֤ ֋օ ֕ ֵ ֵ ֟ ֻ ָևָ ؙ ߮ Ùӛ ևԅ ï™ ִֻ ֮ ӳ߸ ׻֋ ָ, ևӛ ֮ ֻ ֮ ׻֋ ָָ ָ֮ ו֋

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: This was already discussed. The hon. Minister for Health gave an assurance. They want to know what happened to that assurance.

ߴ֟ ֵ (֬ Ϥ) : ָ, יֻ Ӥ 20 ״ֻ ָ ֳ֟ ָ ִ֓ ֮ ֮ ֮ , ֤ ֓ԋ

(1s ָ ֿ:)

-YSR/VKK-GS/1s/12.25

ߴ֟ ֵ (֟) : ָ, ֤ ֓ԋ , ֤ ֻ֟ ..(־֮֬)..

ֳ֯ן : , ..(־֮֬).. ׾ֵ ֵօ ..(־֮֬)..

ָ ֤ : ָ, ָָ ָ ֲ־ ֵ ..(־֮֬)..

ֳ֯ן : ״׮Ù ָ פ ֵ , , ֵָ֮ ָָ ..(־֮֬).. ־֮Դ ֟ פ ..(־֮֬).. ϟ֯ ׻ֵ , ֯ , the Minister of State for Home Affairs has requested for a statement. He is going to make a statement. After that you can speak.

ָ ֤ : ..(־֮֬)..

ϟ֯ : ָ, ֮ ֟ ..(־֮֬)..

ֳ֯ן : ӡ Ù ֻ ..(־֮֬).. Ù ֻ ֵ Ù ꅠ ߟִָ ߅

 

RE: IMPOSITION OF SANCTIONS BY THE U.S.

ON TWO INDIAN COMPANIES FOR DEALINGS WITH IRAN

---

SHRI SITARAM YECHURY (WEST BENGAL): Sir, I am raising another issue. I am raising an issue which I want the entire House, through you, to please pay attention to it seriously. The Federal Register Notification of the United States of America...(Interruptions)... ֯ ׮֋ ֤ , ֯ ׻֋ ֺ The United States of America's Federal Register Notification has imposed sanctions on two Indian private companies Balaji Amines Limited and Prachi Poly Products Limited on the charge of passing on technology to Iran that could be useful for producing Weapons of Mass Destruction or missile systems. Now, one of these companies, Balaji Amines Limited, has issued a statement saying that they have been supplying only three products that are used in making life-saving antibiotics. In fact, in the statement, they say, "We have not supplied any product that fall under the Schedules 1, 2 or 3 of the Chemical Weapons Convention Act to Iran. We have supplied only three products that are used in making life-saving antibiotics." Now, despite this having been said, the Government of India, Sir, has not protested against the sanctions imposed on these companies. Sir, the Minister of State for External Affairs is here and I would like to draw his attention through you. Mr. Anand Sharma, we want you to just listen to this. On the other hand, the Ministry of External Affairs in December, 2005 verbally asked this company, Balaji Amines Limited, to stop exporting to Iran even before the sanctions were imposed. This is a clear case of India acting at the behest of the US instead of opposing sanctions which are unjustified. Sir, the Government of India should firmly defend the right of the Indian companies to have trade and business dealings with Iran and since the Minister is here, we want to know why the Government of India is coming under pressure. Why are you allowing these sanctions to be imposed on Indian companies when actually they are not supplying anything to Iran which goes into the weapons production? And why are we actually asking these companies to stop doing normal trade with Iran? I think, Sir, this is a clear expression of the extra nuclear deal pressures that are coming on the Government and this is actually reflecting in such decisions. And this is where, I think, the Government will have to answer to all of us that our apprehensions that they are not falling into the trap of pressures from the USA imposing such sanctions which we think are the actual apprehensions connected with the US nuclear deal. This will have to be clarified.

THE MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS (SHRI ANAND SHARMA): Mr. Deputy Chairman, Sir, we can give a statement, but, let me assure Mr. Sitaram Yechury that as far as we are concerned, we have our own non-proliferation regime. Our Parliament has enacted legislation to prevent proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction and any direction which is given is in conformity...(Interruptions)...

ָ ֤ : ֲ־ ? ..(־֮֬)..

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: They will come forth with a statement. (Interruptions)

SHRI ANAND SHARMA: Sir, as far as this impression that any direction has been given because of any extraneous pressure or influence, is not correct. I would like to dispel that. (Interruptions)

SHRIMATI BRINDA KARAT: But, have any directions been given?

SHRI ANAND SHARMA: Sir, I was answering to Yechuryji. Shrimati Brinda Karatji has said whether any directions have been given. I never said that. I said specifically that I will come back with a statement on the issue that you have raised. But, I have talked about the legislation which is in place, which has been enacted by our Parliament with regard to non-proliferation, to prevent export of any technology which deals with that. So, we will look into that aspect as to what were the circumstances for imposing sanctions against these two Indian companies. (Interruptions) (Contd. by RSS/1t)

RSS/SC/1t/12.30/

SHRI SITARAM YECHURY: Sir, we understand our legislation. We fully respect that. But, Mr. Minister, the point here is that sanctions are imposed by the United States of America on an unjustified premise. The Indian Government does not protest that. On the contrary, the Indian Government gives instructions to these companies not to trade with Iran. Now, that is exactly the point I want to make that you are succumbing to the pressure of the United States of America...(Interruptions)... So, we want an assurance from you that you will not succumb to such pressure...(Interruptions).. But, here is the case....(Interruptions)... We want this assurance from you that this will not happen...(Interruptions)...

SHRI ANAND SHARMA: I think, it is being very uncharitable and very unfair not only on the part of Yechuryji, but also others, to what they are implying. I would like to categorically state that the Government of India pursues an independent foreign policy which takes into consideration strictly India's supreme national interest. We are neither dictated to nor told what foreign policy to pursue, and to say that there is any surrender, is not correct...(Interruptions)...No, we cannot have a debate on this specific issue. As I said earlier, we will come with a statement...(Interruptions)....

SHRI SITARAM YECHURY: I just want to make one submission. All that I want the Minister to clarify is this. Did the External Affairs Ministry in December 2005 give any notification or issued orders asking these companies to stop trading with Iran?

SHRI ANAND SHARMA: Sir, as I have said earlier, I am going to check that and come back to this House.

ϟ֯ : ָ, ֟

ֳ֯ן : ֵօ

ϟ֯ : ָ, ָ ֟

ֳ֯ן : ֯ ֟

ϟ֯ : ָ, ֕ ֲ ؙ ֵ ֵ ָ֙ Ԯֻ ֌־ ֤ ֲ ֮ ֟ פ ֋, י ֲ , ֲ ׻֋ , ֵ ֵ֟ ֋

ֳ֯ן : ֯ ?

ߴ֟ ִ þָ֕ : ָ, ֮ ו֋

ֳ֯ן : ֮ ..(־֮֬).. ֋, ָ ֮֯ פ , ֲ ׻ֵ ֵ , Ԯֻ Ù ָ ߸ ָ ֮ , ׻ֵ ֋, ָ כև

 

DEMAND FOR AN INQUIRY INTO THE DEATH OF ONE SUBODH, EMPLOYED WITH AL HAMEED COMPANY OF TEHRAN IN MYSTERIOUS CIRCUMSTANCES AND HIS DEAD BODY BEING UNTRACEABLE AND IN PLACE OF SENDING HIS DEAD BODY TO HIS PARENTS, DEAD BODY OF SOME LADY WAS SENT AND ATTEMPT BY THE COMPANY TO CONCEAL THE TRUTH.

---

ָ֕ ״ (ָ Ϥ) : ָ, ֯ ׾ֵ ֤ ִ֬ ֮ ׸ ֤֮֯ ֟ Ӿ ׮־, ֯ ָ ן־ָ ֓쮙 خ ֮ ֿ֟ ֮ ֮ ߤ ֣ ִ ָ֬ ָ ִ ׻֋ ֵ օ 21 և ֣ ִ ֻ ָߵ Ӿ ֮ פݬ ָ ֵ ֣ ֮ ָָ ֱ ϵ ֤ 8 ß ן־ָ ־ ֵ, ֿ ֵ, ו ֲ ןִ ָ ׻֋ ֋ - ָ, ׸ וֻ ֛ , ָ ִ ã֮ ָ ֲ ןִ ָ ׻֋ ֋, ־ ֛ օ ִ ֵ֤ ׻ , ןִ օ ֯ ֮ ֟ פև ־ ֟ ָ֬ ָ ֟ , ֵօ ָ ן־ָ ֛ ־ ״ֻ , ֙ ָ ָ֮ ׿ֿ ݵ ָ ָָ ָ ֮ ֲ ꌙ׮ ֻ ִ֬ ֱ ϓ׸ ֕ ֯ ֛ ָ֮ ־ ӟ֮ , , ֵ֕ ֮ ָ ה֮ ׿ֿ , ֵ֟ (1 ָ ֿ:)


MP/MKS/1U/12.35

ָ֕ ״ (֟) : ߲ ָ ֻ֟ և ֮֮ ָ ָָ ӲӬ ֮ ִ ֻ ־ ָ ָ֮ 韵 ? פݬ ֻ֟ 韵 , ֵ֟ ֋, ָ ֟ ֵ encephalitis ָ 韵 , ֲ ß׾ 21 և , ו פ 韵 , פ ֮ ׯ֟ ֟ ԅ ֮- ה֮ ׿ֿ , ָ֮ , ֤ օ ֲ ־ פ־ֵ ֋ ...(־֮֬)...

ָ ֤ : ֳ֬ , ָָ

ֳ֯ן : ־ֲ ....(־֮֬)....

ָ ֤ : ӳ߸ ִֻ ...(־֮֬)... ֮ ֤ ֵ , ָ ֯ ֮ ־֮֬ ָ? ֯ , ֟և

ֳ֯ן : ....ָ ֤ , ״׮Ù

THE MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS SHRI E. AHAMMED: Mr. Chairman, Sir, I would like to share the information available with the Government on this serious matter.

Sir, I am just giving the facts which I have collected. On July 21, an Indian national, Shri Subodh Kumar Tiwari, son of Mr. Narsingh Tiwari, was killed in an accident on a ship at Kharkland Port in Iran. The ship belonged to Ali Hamid Siddiqui Shipping Company, Khor Dubai. The Indian Embassy in Tehran contacted the Shipping Company and asked it to arrange to send the body to India. The Shipping Company arranged for the embalming of the body after which it was sent to India in a coffin. The body was flown back on 8th August to Delhi from where it was taken by the members of Shri S.K. Tiwari's family to Varanasi. However, in Varanasi, the family discovered that the body was that of a woman.

Our Embassy in Tehran took up the matter very strongly with the Shipping Company whose handling agent's error led to this mix-up. The Embassy asked the Shipping Company to arrange for the return of the woman's body to Iran and to also send the body of Shri S.K. Tiwari to India. The body of Shri S.K. Tiwari is being sent today, and it should reach India tomorrow, the 15th. The body of the woman has been sent back to Iran. Our Embassy has also taken up the matter seriously with the Company. Whatever the hon. Member has now suggested will also be told to the Company and whatever compensation is required or whatever possible help is to be given, the Embassy will take up the matter with them. ...(Interruptions)...

ָ ֤ : ֳ֯ן , ֟ ׮־ ...(־֮֬)...

SHRI E. AHAMMED: Sir, one more thing I want to mention here.is.....(Interruptions)...

ֳ֯ן : ״׮Ù ֟

SHRI E. AHAMMED: Sir, I would just like to inform the hon. Member that Kharkland Port in Iran is 500 kms. away from Tehran. In spite of all these difficulties, our Embassy has acted upon swiftly, and they have made efforts to see whatever best can be done. This mix-up, I am told, has also happened in the hospital.

(Ends)

ָ ֤ : ֳ֯ן , ։ ִ֬ ׾֮֟ ֙ ևԅ ֯ ִ֬ ӡ Ӥ ־ã֟ ן ֮֮ ֲ ֤ ֓ ָ ֟ , ׻֋ ן ֮֮ ֲ ߕ ֲָ ֋, .. ֋, ֲ Ù ׌ ָ ֯ , ׻֋ well thought ׻ ֮֮ NRIs ִ ֋ , פ ָ ֙ ֟ , , ָ ? ׻֋ ïֻ ֮֮ , ֮ ֣ ֟֓ߟ , embassy ֱ ֋ ֙ ִ֮ և, ָ , ֮֟ , ָָ ־ã֟ ן ֮֮ ִ , ו ָ פ ֮ ֻ ִֵ ?

ָ֕ ״ : ֮־ָ, Ù ָ ־ ֵ ֟ , ָ ֠ ׸ ֤֮֯ ָ ã֮ ָ ӟ™ ׻֋ ֵ ֵ ֲ ־ ֵ, ֲ ֟ ־ , ׻֋ ֮ ֮

ֳ֯ן : ֟ The next one. ...(Interruptions)...

ָ ֤ : ֳ֯ן .......(־֮֬)...

ֳ֯ן : ֮֯ ־ פ ...(־֮֬)...

ָ ֤ : ָ, ֮֮ ִ ....(־֮֬)... ֮ 冻 ߕ ? (1 / ָ )

-MKS-TMV-ASC/1W/12.40

SHRI E. AHAMMED: Sir, I would like to say that there is a standing instruction or direction to all our embassies on how they should act, when such things happen, to bring back the mortal remains of our nationals. It is being done. Of course, only when such a thing happens the public attention has been drawn to it. The Government has already done all possible things in this matter. That is why the body is going to reach here tomorrow.

(Ends)

RE. EXPULSION OF INDIAN DIPLOMAT BY PAKISTAN

SHRI YASHWANT SINHA (JHARKHAND): Mr. Deputy Chairman, Sir, I wish to draw the attention of the Government, through you, to an incident which took place some days ago; but as the House, unfortunately, could not function during Zero Hour, I am compelled to raise it somewhat belatedly today.

Sir, as you are all aware, an Indian diplomat in Islamabad, Mr. Deepak Kaul, was not only expelled by the Pakistani authorities on the alleged charges of spying but also hand-cuffed, blind-folded, taken to an unknown destination and questioned there for five hours. Ultimately, the Government of Pakistan decided to declare him persona non grata and expelled him, and told him to leave Pakistan within 48 hours. The Government of India responded by expelling a Pakistani diplomat who was posted in Delhi.

Sir, Pakistan's action is in complete violation of all the international norms of the Vienna Convention and there is no explanation, so far, as to why the Pakistani authorities behaved in the fashion in which they did.

Sir, after the recent Mumbai bomb blasts, the Government of India called off the Foreign Secretary-level talks which were scheduled to be held a few days after that. The Government of Pakistan demanded that we should produce evidence of Pakistani hand in the Mumbai blasts. The US authorities also demanded that the Government of India, before they levelled any charges, should produce evidence of Pakistani involvement. The Government of India, I am sure, must be having some evidence; otherwise, they would not have called off the very important Foreign Secretary-level talks.

Sir, I am raising this issue because this diplomatic incident between Indian and Pakistan has created a completely new situation, as far as the peace process is concerned. We are not at all sure of what the Government's policy is today. When our Foreign Secretary went for the SAARC Foreign Ministers' meeting in Dhaka, he had a bilateral meeting with the Foreign Secretary of Pakistan. We read in the newspapers today that the Sir Creek talks are going to be resumed. Therefore, I am demanding clarifications from the Government on two or three points which I listed out.

The first point is: Where are we in terms of peace process with Pakistan? Are we going to continue the peace process? Are we going to call off the peace process? What is the Government's policy? Somebody should clarify them.

The second point is: With respect to this diplomatic incident which has taken place, have we protested strongly to Pakistan against the ill-treatment which has been meted out to our diplomat?

The third point is the question of the core issue, as Pakistan has said, namely, Jammu and Kashmir. I would like to raise this issue in all seriousness here. There was a media report here that the Government had given a "Non-Paper" to Pakistan where they had stated that we were prepared to go back....

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: I think during Zero Hour you should confine to expulsion only.

SHRI YASHWANT SINHA: Sir, I have mentioned all these things in the notice which I have given. I am not raising any issue which is outside of it.

Sir, the Government of India appear to have given to the Government of Pakistan a "Non-P`aper" on Jammu and Kashmir in which they have said that they are prepared to consider going back to the pre-1953 status. (Contd. by VK/1X)

VK/1X/12.45

SHRI YASHWANT SINHA (CONTD): Now all this creates confusion. I would, therefore, demand from the Government that they come out with a very clear statement with regard to where we stand with Pakistan; what is their policy with regard to the peace process and what is their policy with regard to Jammu and Kashmir. These are all serious issues. The Parliament has not been taken into confidence. I will, therefore, make an appeal to the Government; let the Government take the Parliament into confidence on these issues.

SHRI E. AHAMMED: Mr. Deputy Chairman, Sir, I just would like to share some more information on this matter which has been raised by Shri Yashwant Sinha. He has mentioned about Indo-Pakistan relationship. I would not like to touch upon all the issues he has referred to here. As and when necessary, we will come out with a statement about these matters, but not now. So far as the issue relating to the expulsion of our Envoy is concerned, I would like to give some information on this matter.

On Saturday, 5th August 2006 at around 7.30 a.m. (Pakistan time), Visa Counsellor in the High C0ommission of India, Islamabad, Shri Deepak Kaul, who was on his way to Amritsar to take his family back to Islamabad from Amritsar, was detained by Pakistani agency operatives about 90 kms. from Islamabad. As required by Pakistan Ministry of Foreign Affairs, he had taken written approval from it for his travel. He was blindfolded, handcuffed and taken to an unidentified location where he was interrogated intermittently for about 5 hours.

Our Deputy High Commissioner in Islamabad, was summoned to the Pakistan Foreign Office at around 12 noon and handed over a Note Verbale declaring Shri Deepak Kaul a persona non grata and giving him 48 hours to leave the country. Shri Kaul was accused of receiving sensitive documents. He was formally handed over to our Deputy High Commissioner at around 1.00 p.m.

The Government of India categorically rejected the allegations about Shri Kaul. The Ministry of External Affairs summoned the Deputy High Commissioner of Pakistan in New Delhi in the afternoon of the same day and lodged a strong protest at the outrageous treatment meted out to a senior diplomat of the Indian Mission in Islamabad. The Ministry of External Affairs conveyed to Pakistan Deputy High Commissioner that the actions of the Government of Pakistan were -- as hon. Member has also mentioned -- in violation of the Vienna Convention and also the Code of Conduct for Treatment of Diplomatic/Consular Personnel in India and Pakistan, as agreed between the two countries in 1992.

The Ministry also informed the Pakistan Deputy High Commissioner that Syed Muhammad Rafique Ahmed, Counsellor in the High Commission of Pakistan in New Delhi had been involved in activities incompatible with his diplomatic status and that the Government of India was declaring him a persona non grata and that he should leave India by 7th August 2006.

The Ministry of External Affairs also issued a Press Release rejecting the allegations against a senior diplomat of the Indian High Commission. Shri Kaul was not in possession of any sensitive documents alleged to have been handed over to him by a so-called contact. These must have obviously been planted on him in order to falsely implicate him. The Press Release further stated that such actions could not but undermine the bilateral relations between the two countries.

Shri Deepak Kaul, who had joined the High Commission of India, Islamabad in September 2003, returned to India on 7th August 2006.

Hon. Yashwant Sinhaji has now referred to what is our attitude; whether we have called off the bilateral discussions. I just would like to say that we have not called it off. We will definitely hold discussions at an appropriate time. He also talked about some other matters including Pakistan's demand for evidence and other things. India has conveyed to Pakistan that the dialogue process between the two countries can be sustained and carried forward only if Pakistan takes effective action to dismantle the infrastructure of terrorism, including training camps, launch pads and communication links between terrorist groups on the Indian side and their handlers on the Pakistan side. The Foreign Secretary- level talks will take place at an appropriate time. No dates have been fixed yet for these talks. So far as other matters, as mentioned by Yashwantji, are concerned, as and when necessary, we will come before the House. (Ends)

(Followed by 1Y)

AKG-VK/1Y/12.50

SHRI YASHWANT SINHA: Sir, my only request is this. These are all very serious matters. I am grateful to the hon. Minister for having given a detailed response. I would suggest, Sir, that let the Minister come out with a statement on India-Pakistan relationship including our stand on Jammu and Kashmir and cross-border terrorism. Let the House debate it before this Session is over.

ֳ֯ן : ϟ֯ , ״׮Ù ָ Ù ֻ , ֯ Ù ֤ ?

֮ ֻ ӛ : , 段 ֻ ׻֋ י פ օ

ֳ֯ן : , ֵ ָ ״֙ , ׻ֵ ֋օ ... (־֮֬) ...

֮ ֻ ӛ : ָ, ײָ ֛ ãן

ֳ֯ן : ָ ֤ ֟

֮ ֻ ӛ : ָ, ײָ ֛ ãן , ֻ ָ և

. ִ ӛָ : ָ, ֮ ָ ôָ ֵ օ

ֳ֯ן : ֋, 17-18 ߸ ָ ֟ , ׻֋ ꅠ ״֙ ,

. ִ ӛָ : ָ, ָ י פ ֵ ֕ ֮ ָ ׻֋ ôָ ֵ օ

ֳ֯ן : ӛָ ߅

. ִ ӛָ : ָ ֵ ֻ פ ׻ֵ ֋օ

ֳ֯ן : ״֙ ... (־֮֬) ...

֮ ֻ ӛ : ָ, ײָ ִֻ

ֳ֯ן : ֯ ָ ָ ֟ ו֋

 

RE. AN ALLEGED TELEPHONE CONVERSATION BETWEEN ONE MINISTER OF STATE FOR HOME AFFAIRS AND ONE MAFIA AS REPORTED BY A T.V. CHANNEL

 

ϟ֯ (ָ Ϥ) : ֮֮ߵ ֳ֯ן , ֯ ֳָ ֟ ׌ ָ ֱֻ ֧ ̸֕ ־ֻ פ ֮֕ן ָ֬ њ-њ ָ ד׮֟ օ כ ֙ י , , ו ד֮ ևԅ ֻ֟ -֌ , ֮ ָ֬ ױ ֮ ָ ֮ ׻֋ ־ã , ו ן׾׬ֵ ֮ ָ և օ , ֺ օ ָ֮ և, , ֱ ֣ ,

"֮ ֵ ֯,

և ֕ פ"

, , ָ ֻ֟ , ָ ֻ֟ , ױ ײ֟ , ߕ ָ և , ױ ֟֓ߟ , ֛ וִָ ָ ֣ , ֤

ֳ֯ן : ָ

ϟ֯ : , ֺ ֱ ׮־ ֟ ָ և, և ִ , ֕ ...

ֳ֯ן : Ù օ

ϟ֯ : ָ֟ ֕ ֯ ֮ ׸ָ ׻֋ ֵ֕֕ ִ߮ ָ , ֤ ֯ ֮ ֮ ֤ ܟ ֤ , ֮

ֳ֯ן : ֋, ֲ Ù , ו֋ ֛ ֋? ֯ ו֋ ӡ , ֯ Ù ו֋

ϟ֯ : , ײֻ ѓ և ֋

(ִ֯)

ֳ֯ן : ӡ , ֯ Ù ו֋

(1 ָ ָ)

1Z/HMS-RG/12.55

RE. PERSONAL EXPLANATION BY HON. MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS ON AN ALLEGED TELEPHONE CONVERSATION AS REPORTED BY A T.V. CHANNEL

֕ ӡ ( ־ ׾֟) : ִ֮֮ߵ ֳ֯ן , ׾ֵ ֮ ׌֟ ï™ ֯ ֳ ֮֟ ֤ߵ Ӥָ ִֵ ֜ כ ָ פ 9 ß, 2006 ֤ߵ ָ ֣ פ 13 ß, 2006 פ օ ß֟ ָ ֮ ֣ ײֵ֟ ߅ ִ 00 ֻ ִ֬ ֟ ֻ וֻ Ӥ ָ Ϥ 㮤 ֙ ִ ױ ׻ֱ ָ ֟ ߅ ֮ ִ֤ ִ߮ ָߤ-ܟ ֲ֟ ֟ ֣ ָ ֲ֤ ֮ ܵ ӡ, ָ Ϥ ֟ ֮ , ״֟, ׸ ֣ ևԙ ֲ ßֻ ֯ ֤ ׯ֔ ֳ ֵԾ ӓ ָ ϵ ?

֯ ֳ ֮֮ߵ ֤õ ֮֟ , ׯ֔ ֚ ֳֆ ׮ָָ ֣ ָ֚ ֱ ֻ ֯ ֳ ֮֮ߵ ֤õ ׯ֔ Ӳ ִֵ ֣ ֯ ׾֮֕ ִ֬ և օ Ӳָ ֵ , ִ ֲ ֟ ӓ ֵ ? ֵ֤ ֲ ֮ ֤ ֯ þֵ ׮Ե

֮ ߾֮ -֮ ֵ וֻ Ӥ ֲ֟ ֮֟ ֮ ߾֮ ֙ ִ ױ ״ֻ , ִ ־֕ פ ֲ ־֕ ׻ֱ ֟ ? ן׸ ֮֮ Ӳ׬֟ 00 ֻ ֲ ֟ פ֮ -- ֟ ™ ? ֮֮ ™ ָ Ϥ ܵ ӡ ߅ ָ ֙ ßָ פ ָ ָ߳ ָ ֕ ׻֋ ָ ֣ ָ ӓ ׻֋ ָ ֳ ֵ֤ ִֻ ָ߳ ֋ ֮ ָ ֮ ֮֕ן ߾֮ ֮ օ

ӟ , ֯ ײ֮ ֲ ִ֤ ֻ ֻ ׾ֹ ָև ֮ ֻ ײ֮ ֲ ׾ֹ ϓָ ֱ, Դָ֤֮ ֣ ֻ ֮ ׾ ״ֻ : ֣ ֛ ו ֟ ֓և ֻ ֮ ßָ ָ פ֮ 10 ״֮֙ ִ֣ , ױ ֮ ֲ ? ֳ ӓ ֮ ָ ӓ ֻ--ֻ ֣ ׬־֮ ֋ ӓ ָָ ֤ߵ ִ օ (ִ֯)

(2/ߋ־ ָ ֿ:)

 

PREVIOUS PAGE