Sharad Pawar spoke to NDTV about the opposition’s demand for a JPC into the Adani-Hindenburg row
New Delhi:
Veteran Maharashtra politician Sharad Pawar, one of the tallest opposition leaders, on Friday said he did not share the views of his ally Congress on the demand for a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) probe on accusations against the Adani Group by US-based short seller Hindenburg Research.
In an exclusive interview with NDTV, the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) chief came out strongly in support of the Adani Group and criticised the narrative around Hindenburg’s report on the conglomerate.
“Out of proportion importance was given to the issue. The issues that were kept, who kept them? We had never heard of these people (Hindenburg) who gave the statement, what is the background? When they raise issues that cause a ruckus across the country, the cost is borne by the country’s economy, we cannot disregard these things. It seems this was targeted,” Mr Pawar said.
“An individual industrial group of the country was targeted, that is what it seems. If they have done anything wrong, there should be an inquiry. A demand for a JPC probe was made in parliament. I had a different viewpoint on this,” he said.
“JPCs were appointed on many issues. I remember a JPC was appointed once on the issue of Coca-Cola, and I was the chairman. So, a JPC has never been formed earlier, that is not the case. A demand for a JPC is not wrong, but why was the demand made? The demand for a JPC was made to say that some industrial house must be inquired into,” Mr Pawar said.
He welcomed the Supreme Court’s move to appoint a committee with a retired judge, an expert, an administrator, and an economist to probe the controversy within a timeframe.
“On the other hand, the opposition wanted a parliamentary committee to be appointed. If a parliamentary committee is appointed, then monitoring is with the ruling party. The demand was against the ruling party, and if the committee appointed for an inquiry has a ruling party majority, then how will the truth come out is a valid concern,” Mr Pawar said.
“If the Supreme Court, who no one can influence if they were to conduct the inquiry, then there was a better chance of the truth coming to light. So, after the Supreme Court announced an inquiry, there was no significance of a JPC probe. It was not needed,” he said.
The remarks were a departure from the line taken up by the Congress – Mr Pawar’s ally in Maharashtra – which has been pushing for a JPC probe. Even after the near washout of the budget session of parliament, the Congress has been firm on its demand.
Asked what he believed was the Congress’s intent behind pushing for a JPC probe, he said, “I cannot say what the intent was but I know that a committee appointed by judges of the Supreme Court was very important, this is what I know. Maybe the reasoning could have been that once a JPC starts, its proceedings are reported in the media on a daily basis. Perhaps someone would have wanted the issue to fester for two to four months, but the truth would never have come out.”
Mr Pawar also made it clear he did not agree with Rahul Gandhi’s “Adani-Ambani” style of targeting big business houses. It was quite meaningless, he remarked, referring to the “Tata-Birla” narrative of the past.
“This has been happening in this country for many years. I remember many years ago that when we came into politics, if we had to speak against the government, we used to speak against Tata-Birla. Who was the target? Tata-Birla. When we understood the contribution of Tata, we used to wonder why we kept on saying Tata Birla. But one had to target someone so we used to target Tata-Birla. Today the name of Tata-Birla is not at the forefront, different Tata-Birla’s have come before the government. So these days if you have to attack the government, the name of Ambani and Adani is taken. The question is, that the people you are targeting, if they have done something wrong, misused their powers, then in a democracy you have a right to speak against them 100 percent, but to attack without anything meaningful, this I cannot understand,” he said.
Mr Pawar continued: “Today, Ambani has contributed in the petrochemical sector, does the country not need it? In the field of electricity, Adani has contributed. Does the country not need electricity? These are people who take up such responsibility and work for the name of the country. If they have done wrong, you attack, but they have created this infrastructure, to criticise them does not feel right to me.”
In an oblique reference to the Congress’s unrelenting campaign, Mr Pawar said, “There can be different viewpoints, criticism, one has the right to speak strongly about the policies of the government, but a discussion should take place. A discussion and dialogue is very important in any democracy, if you ignore discussion and dialogue the system will fall into danger, it will just perish.”
To ignore the issues of the common people regularly is not right, Mr Pawar said. “When this happens, we are following the wrong path. This is what we need to understand.”
But the veteran refused to blame only the Congress, pointing out that other opposition parties shared the demand. The effort to find a solution, however, was missing from both the opposition and the government, he observed.
(Disclaimer: New Delhi Television is a subsidiary of AMG Media Networks Limited, an Adani Group Company.)
