Modi govt tells Supreme Court to figure out if it’s competent to review Rafale caseWhat is evident in all such instances is that it is not the administrative process that is being questioned, but the exercise of administrative discretion, which can be tantamount to creative interpretation. The DPM is a dynamic document and is constantly evolving to factor in the changing requirements of security needs and procurement processes. Based on a PIL filed by two lawyers, on 10 October, the Supreme Court directed the Narendra Modi government to provide the details of the steps taken in the decision-making process without the pricing and technical information in a sealed envelope.Also read: Supreme Court merely sniffing secret envelopes to see if there’s a scam in Rafale deal.
The Defence Procurement Procedure has proved its efficacy since it first came into place in 2002, with almost Rs 8 lakh crores worth of procurements over time and many more in the pipeline.The issue of procurement cuts across all departments, ministries and service delivery agencies of the government. He goes on to mention that it is imperative that “the stakeholders of DPP 2016 do not lose sight of these aspects while implementing the DPP 2016, and at the same time ensure that best-in-class weapons and equipment are made available to our armed forces at the most competitive prices. The court plays a role when there is a perceived violation of laid down processes.
In the past, the top court has discussed different contractual issues such as the allocation of telecom bandwidth, patents and so on, which are technical in nature. Her views here are personal.In the ultimate analysis, what is important are the two key aspects of probity and trust as stated by previous defence minister Manohar Parrikar in his foreword to the DPP 2016.Also read: French NGO files corruption complaint against Rafale dealSome of the issues doing the rounds in public include the fact that China PPR Fittings Suppliers France has no procedure for Inter-Governmental Guarantee with India unlike the US or Russia, although the new procurement order followed this route.
The process followed in the acquisition of the 36 aircraft conforms to due process. Please subscribehere.The current government had taken a decision to scrap the previous deal for 126 jets with 18 in a fly-away condition to 36 aircraft in a fly-away condition. I sincerely hope that the DPP 2016 acts as a catalyst for change, an the outcomes that have been envisaged”. There are several layers of due diligence, right from the ‘Assessment of Need’ to the final approval by the Cabinet Committee on Security. The question is counter-intuitive as technical experts are co-opted into issues where expert interpretation or advice is required, and the judiciary is no exception. To paraphrase its decision, the court’s interference is not warranted unless there is a mala fide intent or misuse of statutory powers. Is that the real issue or is it factors that go beyond well-laid-out processes that necessitate judicial intervention?In this case, the Supreme Court is seeking to look at the decision-making process rather than technical issues.