Despite the cacophony by its second rung spokespersons, the Congress’s response to the Lalit Modi controversy has been non-strategic, feeble and aimless.

Despite the cacophony by its second rung spokespersons, the Congress’s response to the Lalit Modi controversy has been non-strategic, feeble and aimless. Instead of raising critical questions and letting the public know what it knows about Modi’s alleged offences, all that the party has done is making loud noises without a clear message.

More over, despite being handed such a great opportunity to expose the BJP’s apparent double standards on transparency of governance and probity in public life, the party hasn’t fielded its best possible team to push the case.

It’s really strange that the Congress hasn't responded to the central point of the BJP-proxies and Modi-supporters, including some senior journalists, that the cases against the former IPL-commissioner pertained to only FEMA (Foreign Exchange Management Act) which didn't require his custodial interrogation. According to this line of defence, Modi’s supporters are perfectly right in arguing that he could have been questioned through video-conferencing. In fact, a former police commissioner of Mumbai, who testified in support of Modi in London, told NDTV that the case was related only to FEMA, which didn’t need custodial interrogation and the punishment, if at all found guilty, was only a fine. The Delhi High Court verdict, which incidentally the Union Government chose not to contest in the Supreme Court and the BJP spokesperson used to justify his party, also asked this question as to why the UPA government hadn’t pursued the video conferencing option.

By creating a defence entirely based on FEMA, Modi-supporters and BJP-proxies have been able to create a smokescreen that the Congress hasn’t been able to penetrate. This is their biggest failing. Could it be deliberate? Possibly yes, because the Congress camp is full of sharp lawyers, including former finance minister P Chidambaram, who by his own admission, had communicated about Modi's case with his counterpart in the UK. None of these smart men are coming forward. Chidambaram did make a brief appearance before the press in Chennai, but has refused interviews with journalists who had specific questions.

So the critical question is, is it only FEMA that the ED is pursuing against Lalit Modi?

According to various reports in the media, majority of the cases of course pertain to FEMA, but there are also cases related to money laundering under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). According to this India Today report, besides suspected FEMA violations, ED is also probing if $25 million of the $80 million that one IPL broadcast partner World Sports Group (WSG) paid another, Multi Screen Media (MSG), was routed to Modi’s illegal accounts, “his associates and political beneficiaries.” Is this a case of FEMA violation or money laundering? Clearly, looks like the latter. The ED, which means the Union government, must answer if there was such a case and if it was being pursued.

Probably, this is also related to the case that former BCCI chief N Srinivasan had filed against Modi in Chennai. According to this report, the case was filed with “Chennai police under Sections 409, 420, 468 and 477 of the Indian Penal Code dealing with forgery, fraud, criminal breach of trust and fraudulent cancellation of contracts.”



If there are indeed money laundering charges against Modi, the ED has the powers to arrest him for custodial interrogation, which means the argument by him and his supporters that he is willing to cooperate through video-conferencing, written submissions and lawyers is not tenable. A number of high profile men in India had been in ED custody, mostly for receiving kickbacks, on money laundering cases.

And what is money laundering? The answer is very simple according to Section 3 of the PMLA: “Whosoever directly or indirectly attempts to indulge or knowingly assists or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in any process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime and projecting it as untainted property shall be guilty of offence of money-laundering."

And the punishment? Rigorous imprisonment up to seven years and a hefty fine.

Moreover, if there are money laundering charges against Modi, according to Section 24 of the PMLA, the burden of proof is on him, which means, “when a person is accused of having committed the offence under section 3, the burden of proving that proceeds of crime are untainted property shall be on the accused.”

This is where the Congress has, knowingly or unknowingly failed, while the BJP government has chosen to be silent. The Congress, through Chidambaram, should certainly know if there are money laundering cases against Modi. If yes, why didn’t they make this argument when a coordinated defence had been erected by proxies that the charges are only under FEMA and hence Modi cannot be called a fugitive, let alone, an accused.

As Firstpost had argued earlier, it’s in the interest of the BJP to protect Lalit Modi because if charges are framed against him, it will make both Sushma Swaraj and Vasundhara Raje, and the Union government itself, vulnerable. Issues such as not appealing against the Delhi High Court verdict on his passport case and supporting his immigrant claims in the UK will then have a more serious context.

The smokescreen needs to be cleared. By not doing it, the Congress is evidently not honest and is only putting up a bogus show.