The allegation levelled against Pinarayi Vijayan by the media and political opponents in the case is that he earned a commission from SNC Lavalin, Canada and invested the money in a Singapore-based benami company. Further, it was alleged that the expenses for the study of Pinarayi's son in Bangalore and Birmingham were funded with graft money.
What very few people know is that, acting upon a complaint in this regard, the Directorate General of Income Tax (Investigation) investigated this matter in great detail and had submitted an affidavit in the Kerala High Court dated 24-07-2008. This affidavit is now available and I am attaching a copy of the same below. What this affidavit does is to completely reject the abovesaid allegations.
Eternal doubters will still be there, but the vacuity of allegations against the CPM in this case needs to be exposed fully. The Lavalin case is clearly one of the most important right-wing conspiracies against the CPM in the recent times. It needs to be defeated at any cost.
See the affidavit below; my comments below. Throughout, Respondent Number 4 is Pinarayi Vijayan. The petitioner is T. P. Nandakumar, the editor of an atrocious tabloid called CRIME.
Click on each page to enlarge.
The gist of allegations are listed here as 4 points. See Point number 10.
How was the education of Pinarayi's children financed? The department discusses in great detail.
Did Pinarayi build a palatial mansion with the money? Communists are not supposed to even paint their houses, if we go by the media...
Other allegations are also incorrect.
Now, read the revelations in this affidavit along with the following news reports on another report filed by the CBI in the court.
Lavalin: No evidence of any financial transactions, says CBI
Kochi: The CBI has informed the special court that there are no evidences on any financial transactions between CPM state secretary Pinarayi Vijayan and the middlemen in the SNC Lavlin case. The CBI filed a statement as per the direction of the court on a petition filed by Crime magazine editor T P Nandakumar.
The CBI also questioned Nasar who acted as a middleman in the Lavlin deal. They also sought the help of Interpol to question Dileep Rahulan. The investigation so far had not revealed any evidence on financial transaction, CBI said.
The statement also states that the investigation against former electricity minister G Karthikeyan is in the final stage. Earlier, CBI in its report, said that the deal was signed without fulfilling all the norms. The report also states that the deal imposed a big loss to the government exchequer.
from TIMES OF INDIA
CBI unlikely to conduct further investigation against Pinarayi
PTI, Apr 17, 2010, 09.13pm IST
KOCHI: The CBI on Saturday told a special court that it might be "improper" to conduct further probe against CPM state secretary and former minister Pinarayi Vijayan in a graft case.
Vijayan is listed as the seventh accused in the case relating to award of contracts to renovate three hydel projects to Canadian firm SNC-Lavalin in 1998 when he was the power minister.
The investigating agency had filed a chargesheet against Vijayan in the case.
The CPM leader had filed a petition before the Supreme Court challenging even the authority and competence of the Kerala Governor in granting sanction under Section 197 CrPC to prosecute him and it was pending before the Apex Court, the CBI said.
"It is therefore submitted that it may also be improper on the part of the prosecution to conduct further investigation against Vijayan at this stage which may cause an apprehension regarding the impartial and unbiased investigation carried out in this case by CBI," the probe agency said in a counter affidavit filed on a petition by 'Crime' editor T P Nandakumar.
The allegations pertain to "showing undue favour" to Lavalin in the awarding of renovation and modernisation contracts of Pallivasal, Sengulum and Panniar hydel projects.
On further investigation against former Congress leader and UDF minister G Karthikeyan, CBI said it was in the final stages and the report would be submitted to the court.
The petitioner's contention that vital aspects in the case were omitted during investigation by CBI was far from truth, the agency said.