 "Why the Antrix-Devas dispute is still stranded in orbit")
Depending on whom you ask, former Indian Space Research Organisation Chairman G Madhavan Nair is either a victim of political vendetta or someone who is simply being made to answer for his crime.
Last month, Nair and several other senior Devas Multimedia executives were named in a chargesheet filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation in the Isro-Devas case in which the investigating agency has accused the former chairman of causing a wrongful gain of Rs 578 crore to Devas.
Isro officials privately admit that the investigative agency’s decision is aimed at putting pressure on Nair and Devas, which is currently embroiled in a litigation with the government. Bengaluru-based Devas has accused the government of unfairly terminating a contract awarded to it by Antrix, Isro’s commercial arm, when Nair was its chairman.
The government has lost the case twice at international tribunals. Law experts are baffled at how the government could go so wrong.
“It is surprising how Isro could lose in the tribunal. It is scientific in its approach and arguments,” says Sarosh Zaiwalla, founder and senior partner of London-based law firm Zaiwalla & Co. “If you think there is a possible shortcoming, you settle and not go for an award.”
Zaiwalla represented Isro and won a case in an international tribunal against US satellite firm McDonnell Douglas in 1993 after a dispute over INSAT-1b, India’s first generation communication satellite launched on a US rocket. McDonnell Douglas has since been merged with Boeing Corp.
In August, the Permanent Case of Arbitration at Hague ruled that India did not accord fair and equitable treatment to foreign investors of Devas by cancelling the deal. Earlier, in September 2015, the International Court of Arbitration had asked Antrix to pay $ 672 million (Rs 4,400 crore) to Devas over the deal cancellation. Devas has now filed a case in the Delhi High Court based on the verdict against Antrix for not paying the damages.
The government cited national security concerns to cancel a deal in 2012 to lease satellites that transmit high-speed internet to mobile devices on the so called S band, which it said is reserved for strategic purposes. The deal came under scrutiny following the political fallout after the 2G scam.
Nair is confident that there is no evidence of criminal conspiracy against him. He says two panels, one led by eminent aerospace scientist Roddam Narasimha, that looked into the award of the contract had only found procedural lapses in the process.
Veena Rao, who was an additional secretary at the department of space between December 2004 and 2005 and who has also been named in the chargesheet filed by the CBI, says there is not a shred of evidence against her.
“I’m quite surprised that the CBI has found me culpable of an imaginary conspiracy. When the CBI came to record my statement with documents proving my involvement in a conspiracy, I categorically pointed out to them that the photocopied papers they were showing me were not genuine. Surely the CBI knows that if original documents have been concealed or destroyed, it is an offence punishable under Section 201 IPC,” Rao wrote in a post on her Facebook page. “What’s going on? Filing chargesheets without original documents and a shred of evidence? Does nobody apply their minds anymore?” she added.
While Rao has taken to social media to put forth her side of the case, Nair and others are looking at legal options. Devas has called the chargesheet a witch-hunt against the company.
As the case drags on, legal experts believe arbitration may be the only way forward to settle the dispute. Devas has has said it is open to talks with the government.
“With the change in the government, the prospects of engagement is the one we are looking forward do. The arbitration award—in September and this one, will set a platform for collaborative dialogue,” Ramachandran Viswanathan, president and chief executive officer of Devas, said in a telephonic interview earlier.
However, Zaiwalla says that Devas, armed with the two tribunal verdicts, is better placed for negotiations than Antrix, if the government accepts it. Otherwise, it will be up to the courts to bring the curtains down on this long drawn-out affair.
Last month, Nair and several other senior Devas Multimedia executives were named in a chargesheet filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation in the Isro-Devas case in which the investigating agency has accused the former chairman of causing a wrongful gain of Rs 578 crore to Devas.
Isro officials privately admit that the investigative agency’s decision is aimed at putting pressure on Nair and Devas, which is currently embroiled in a litigation with the government. Bengaluru-based Devas has accused the government of unfairly terminating a contract awarded to it by Antrix, Isro’s commercial arm, when Nair was its chairman.
The government has lost the case twice at international tribunals. Law experts are baffled at how the government could go so wrong.
“It is surprising how Isro could lose in the tribunal. It is scientific in its approach and arguments,” says Sarosh Zaiwalla, founder and senior partner of London-based law firm Zaiwalla & Co. “If you think there is a possible shortcoming, you settle and not go for an award.”
Zaiwalla represented Isro and won a case in an international tribunal against US satellite firm McDonnell Douglas in 1993 after a dispute over INSAT-1b, India’s first generation communication satellite launched on a US rocket. McDonnell Douglas has since been merged with Boeing Corp.
In August, the Permanent Case of Arbitration at Hague ruled that India did not accord fair and equitable treatment to foreign investors of Devas by cancelling the deal. Earlier, in September 2015, the International Court of Arbitration had asked Antrix to pay $ 672 million (Rs 4,400 crore) to Devas over the deal cancellation. Devas has now filed a case in the Delhi High Court based on the verdict against Antrix for not paying the damages.
The government cited national security concerns to cancel a deal in 2012 to lease satellites that transmit high-speed internet to mobile devices on the so called S band, which it said is reserved for strategic purposes. The deal came under scrutiny following the political fallout after the 2G scam.
Nair is confident that there is no evidence of criminal conspiracy against him. He says two panels, one led by eminent aerospace scientist Roddam Narasimha, that looked into the award of the contract had only found procedural lapses in the process.
Veena Rao, who was an additional secretary at the department of space between December 2004 and 2005 and who has also been named in the chargesheet filed by the CBI, says there is not a shred of evidence against her.
“I’m quite surprised that the CBI has found me culpable of an imaginary conspiracy. When the CBI came to record my statement with documents proving my involvement in a conspiracy, I categorically pointed out to them that the photocopied papers they were showing me were not genuine. Surely the CBI knows that if original documents have been concealed or destroyed, it is an offence punishable under Section 201 IPC,” Rao wrote in a post on her Facebook page. “What’s going on? Filing chargesheets without original documents and a shred of evidence? Does nobody apply their minds anymore?” she added.
While Rao has taken to social media to put forth her side of the case, Nair and others are looking at legal options. Devas has called the chargesheet a witch-hunt against the company.
As the case drags on, legal experts believe arbitration may be the only way forward to settle the dispute. Devas has has said it is open to talks with the government.
“With the change in the government, the prospects of engagement is the one we are looking forward do. The arbitration award—in September and this one, will set a platform for collaborative dialogue,” Ramachandran Viswanathan, president and chief executive officer of Devas, said in a telephonic interview earlier.
However, Zaiwalla says that Devas, armed with the two tribunal verdicts, is better placed for negotiations than Antrix, if the government accepts it. Otherwise, it will be up to the courts to bring the curtains down on this long drawn-out affair.