views
New Delhi: External Affairs Minister Natwar Singh, named in the Iraq Oil-for-Food scam, is under severe pressure as reports of his son's visit to Jordan in 2001 was revealed.
The Volcker report, which indicts Natwar Singh and the Congress Party as "non-contractual beneficiaries" in the scam, says that Jagat Singh made his visit weeks after his friend Andleeb Sehgal deposited illegal surcharge payments in a Jordan National bank.
Sehgal?s firm, Hamdan Export, deposited a total of Rs 3.22 crore which reached the Saddam Hussein regime.
Volker report states the payments were made by Sehgal on behalf of a Swiss firm, Masefield.
But Jagat Singh says he had no knowledge of Sehgal's involvement and his Jordan trips were part of a Congress delegation.
"I have many friends. That does not mean I am involved in each of their transactions. I am not involved in this deal at all," Jagat says.
Jagat Singh was in the news in 2002, when his photographer wife Natasha was found dead under mysterious circumstances.
BJP says drop Natwar
Stepping up its offensive, BJP on Thursday shot off a letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh
asking him to drop Natwar Singh from his ministry.
In the letter, the BJP said that the continuation of a person indicted as a "lobbyist" by a United Nations body as the country's External Affairs Minister was untenable, party sources said.
There's a Cabinet reshuffle in the offing and questions are being raised on whether this issue will necessitate some changes.
Natwar to fight back
There are also media reports which say Panthers's party chief Bhim Singh had seen a document that had listed Natwar Singh's name among several others who were part of the oil deal.
Natwar Singh has said he will make a statement in Parliament and not through the media as on the allegations.
Natwar has rubbished the UN report by former US Federal reserve chairman Paul Volcker as "baseless and untrue".
Singh drew attention to the fact that Russia, whose some top-level functionaries also figure in the report, had also stated that many of the documents were dubious or falsified.
Comments
0 comment