Press
Briefing Friday, 4th June 2010
Shri
Abhishek Sinhghvi addressed the media today.
On the question of Shri Sharad Pawar’s statement on his
involvement in IPL issue, Shri Singhvi said that Mr.
Sharad Pawar is the head of a valuable ally. This is a
question which you have to put to him in all fairness.
You are also aware that general enquiries into such
affairs are already on but the question has to be put to
him. This is merely a report which has appeared in the
newspaper. You have to ask the person concerned. We have
nothing further to add or comment on this.
On another question of the BJP and the Left parties
demanding the resignation of Mr. Pawar and asking for
CBI and JPC investigation, Shri Singhvi said that do you
expect opposition to demand anything else. We are not
surprised by their demands.
On the question of Mr. Moro, Shri Singhvi said that a
legal notice was sent to Mr. Moro more than 5-6 months
ago. A detailed clarification has been published in a
leading newspaper two days ago on page 2. I only want to
put it before you and leave it for your consideration.
He is a person I have never met and never talked to. A
legal notice is sent to him in black and white months
ago. If he considers a legal notice to be a threat, he
needs to have his understanding of law and English
grammar reconsidered. In our legal notice earlier and in
the detailed report published two days ago, we have
given more than 20 examples from the book and challenged
him to substantiate even one. His silence is deafening
and eloquent. If he cannot substantiate 100s of pages,
1000s of lines which are in inverted commas in first
person of which he has no personal knowledge, no
documents and it impairs reputation of any person, then
it is a clear defamation. On the contrary, Mr. Moro
admits defamation by calling it a fictional biography.
For a living person if anything impairs the reputation
of a living person, it has to be either factual or
written with that person’s consent. Mr. Moro does not
realise that he is admitting defamation. In our
respectful view, a person like Mr. Moro exploiting for
personal commercial gains somebody’s privacy purely for
money and then talking of principles like censorship and
freedom of speech and expression is worse than the devil
quoting scriptures. Mr. Moro should realize that as in
his country and so also in our country, everybody is
subject to rule of law and the rule of law includes the
rule of defamation. It is a simple legal notice sent to
him which is within the rights of the person defamed. He
is the perpetrator who is pretending to be the victim.
We are amused at the BJP jumping into the individual
matter where the person defamed has sent a legal notice
and preaching to this country and to us about the
freedom of speech and expression. Firstly they seem to
have forgotten the constitution. Even the right to free
speech is expressly subject to the law of defamation.
But more interestingly who is preaching the freedom of
speech, those who actually expelled member of their own
party for writing a book who had not perhaps even
committed an act of defamation and those who went to the
streets on a issue related to MF Hussain and those who
tried indirectly to curb the screening of the film
Fardaniya in Gujarat. The crux of the matter is that
100s of pages and lines pointed out in the public
domain, if the author can substantiate even one, he has
a right to be indicted. Otherwise he should exercise his
right to be silent.
Shri Singhvi further added that five months ago Mr. Moro
had agreed to a disclaimer at his request in each book.
The terms of the disclaimer were worked out. But perhaps
not his need but his greed for commercial benefit, at
the last minute, he backed out because he did not want
any limitation on exploitation of this work in other
media forms namely by film, by interview other than book
form. While he was prepared to put a disclaimer for the
book, he wanted to be left free to deal with it in any
other way which is not acceptable. These are the facts
which he is conveniently suppressing.
On the question of Afzal Guru, Mr. Singhvi said that
obviously the process of sending the recommendations is
to expedite and bring to conclusion the entire process
of taking a final decision on the Afzal Guru matter.
Naturally that process is intended to culminate in
conclusion.
On the question of the reaction of the Congress Party on
the statement of Haryana CM on Khap Panchayat, Shri
Singhvi said that CM has already explained that this is
his personal view. Secondly he is talking entirely in a
social context on a personal view. Thirdly it does not
in any manner means directly or indirectly that he is
supporting, endorsing or encouraging any violation of
any law in any manner.
On the question of the statement of Mr. Sharad Pawar on
the Ranganath Mishra Commission report, Shri Singhvi
said that both Mr. Pawar and Mr. Tripathi, Spokesperson
of NCP have categorically clarified that they never
referred to the Congress.
Tom Vadakkan
Secretary, AICC
