Embroiled in the Iraqi oil-for-food scam, Union Minister Natwar Singh's son Jagat Singh Monday made the plea that people should wait for the Justice Pathak Commission of Inquiry to finish its probe before pointing fingers at him and his father even as he said they were ready for a Central Bureau of Investigation investigation in the matter.
"Everybody is saying a lot of things and creating confusion, not allowing Justice Pathak to do his work. If you are not satisfied with Pathak, then its a pity. He is such a senior and credible person," Jagat told reporters in New Delhi.
"My father was the first one to say that let an inquiry be held by the CBI," he said.
Jagat said the Singhs were interested in only one thing at present -- "Clearing our good name. At the end of the day, politics is not everything. Good name and honour are paramount to anybody."
"Let the findings of the Justice Pathak inquiry be tabled sooner than later so that the entire allegation on Natwar Singh and Congress be put to rest," he said.
He, however, refused to a query on whether he felt that Congress had deserted his father at this juncture, saying, "I am not answerable for what the party does."
"We are talking for ourselves. We have been dedicated workers of the Congress party. We have fought elections, lost elections, we have struggled for the party. Now, what stand the party takes, neither me nor my father can influence. It is up to the party," he said.
With the focus being on whether he was a member of the Congress delegation led by his father to Iraq in 2001, Jagat said, "The focus today should not be on whether Jagat Singh went to Iraq as a youth Congress member or not. This is not even an issue here. The issue is whether Volcker's allegations are correct or not."
On whether it was proper for his father to stay on as Union minister in the wake of the inquiry into the allegations made against him by the Volcker report on the oil-for-food scam, he said, "Nowhere is it written that a Union minister cannot be investigated against. People can come here and question him."
He also said that it was clear that the Enforcement Directorate had not been able to find any evidence against him despite questioning his friend Andaleeb Sehgal of Hamdan Exports, who had also been on the 2001 trip to Iraq, and others over the past one month.
"The investigations have been on for the past one month. Whatever they have found so far, had they been able to link me with that, won't they have called me," he said.
He said he did not help Andaleeb to be part of the oil-for-food programme. "Of course, I did not. Even it I had tried to do it, in what capacity was I trying to do it?
"My father was not a minister, he was not a member of Parliament. I was not an legislator. We were nothing," he said.
Jagat said that during their visit to Baghdad in 2001, they were not even put up in the main Al Rashid Hotel where government delegates were hosted.
"Because we were the opposition party, they put us in some three-star hotel. So I know the level of courtesy, which was extended to us over there. There are protocols, which are involved. Why on earth would anybody want to give anything to us. And even if they give it to anybody, why would they give it to Jagat Singh to execute," Jagat said.
He also pointed out that his name was nowhere in the Volcker committee report. "This is all speculation. The fact of the matter is that Andaleeb Sehgal's name is there, Natwar Singh's name is there and Congress party's name is there." Jagat said he had no know-how of who had taken part in the oil-for-food programme.
He said he did not have any business links with Hamdan Exports or with Andaleeb, whom he, however, described as an "old friend".
Jagat said a "witch-hunt" was on, and he and his father will not be "scapegoats". "What I do find very objectionable is that in today's day and age, this kind of witch-hunting is going on to try and find a scapegoat. We will not be scapegoats," he said.
He attacked former ambassador to Croatia Aneil Mathrani for his reported comments on the issue, saying, "Why did Matherani say that the delegation went with the blessings of Sonia Gandhiji? Why did he say the oil minister in 2000 came back to Soniaji and then it was decided that the delegation should go? What is Matherani trying to do? Why is he discrediting the whole party?"
He demanded to know why documents brought back by Virendra Dayal, appointed special envoy to gather relevant documents in the case, were lying in a locker in a bank in Parliament Street and were not with Justice Pathak.
"And if you said you came back with so much information from over there, all important documents, which are relevant to the case, then why are you going to Jordan and Baghdad? Why? Because you found nothing in New York?" Jagat asked.
He added, "So whatever you have got, put it on the table. If we are guilty, send us to jail. But you cannot hang us or the party or anybody else until you establish whether Mr Volcker's allegations have any basis or they don't."
