Saturday, February 7, 2009

Donate More Documents.

Do you have some documents or informations to share ??

Post a comment with your email address, we will get back to you.

We will be publishing more documents and commentaries.
Thank you for visiting and commenting

15 comments:

  1. Can we have a malayalam version of this blog. If so pls let us know, we want to publish it in every possible channel in kerala for the sake of all malayalees

    ReplyDelete
  2. ലാവലിന്‍ രേഖകള്‍ ഇന്റര്‍നെറ്റില്‍
    തൊടുപുഴ: എസ്‌.എന്‍.സി. ലാവലിന്‍ കേസില്‍ പിണറായി വിജയന്‍ തെറ്റുചെയ്‌തിട്ടില്ലെന്ന പാര്‍ട്ടിയുടെ വാദം പൊളിക്കുന്നതിന്‌, ഇതുസംബന്ധിച്ച മുഴുവന്‍ രേഖകളും ജനങ്ങള്‍ക്കുമുമ്പിലെത്തിക്കാന്‍ അണിയറയില്‍ ശ്രമം തുടങ്ങി. കഴിഞ്ഞദിവസം ജനശക്തി വാരിക, ഇ.ബാലാനന്ദന്‍ പ്രകാശ്‌ കാരാട്ടിനയച്ച കത്തിന്റെ പൂര്‍ണരൂപം പ്രസിദ്ധീകരിച്ചിരുന്നു. ഇതോടൊപ്പം ഇന്റര്‍നെറ്റിലും ഇതുസംബന്ധിച്ച രേഖകള്‍ പ്രസിദ്ധീകരിച്ചുതുടങ്ങി. http://snclavalin.blogspot.com എന്ന ബ്ലോഗിലാണ്‌ പേരുവയ്‌ക്കാതെ രേഖകള്‍ പ്രസിദ്ധീകരിച്ചിട്ടുള്ളത്‌. ജനവരി അവസാനം തുറന്ന ഈ ബ്ലോഗില്‍ അനുദിനം രേഖകളും അനുബന്ധ വിവരങ്ങളും അപ്‌ലോഡ്‌ ചെയ്‌തുവരികയാണ്‌.

    1996 ഫിബ്രവരി 24ന്‌ യു.ഡി.എഫ്‌. സര്‍ക്കാര്‍ ഒപ്പിട്ട കരാറിന്റെ 23 പേജുകള്‍, ഈ കരാറിന്റെ അനുബന്ധങ്ങളായ 28 പേജുകള്‍, പിണറായി വിജയന്‍ ഒപ്പിട്ട കരാറും അതിന്റെ അനുബന്ധങ്ങളുമായി 25 പേജുകള്‍, ഇതിനോടുള്ള ചില പ്രതികരണങ്ങള്‍, മന്ത്രി തോമസ്‌ ഐസക്കിന്‍േറതുള്‍പ്പെടെ പിണറായിയെ പിന്തുണയ്‌ക്കുന്ന ലേഖനങ്ങളിലെ ഓരോ വാദഗതിയെയും ഖണ്ഡിക്കുന്ന മറുപടി, എല്ലാറ്റിനുമൊടുവില്‍ ലാവലിന്‍ കേസില്‍ പിണറായിയെ പ്രതിസ്ഥാനത്ത്‌ നിര്‍ത്തുന്ന വിധത്തില്‍ പ്രധാന പ്രശ്‌നങ്ങള്‍ ഉള്‍പ്പെടുത്തിയ ചോദ്യോത്തരങ്ങള്‍ എന്നിവയാണ്‌ ബ്ലോഗിലുള്ളത്‌. ഇതിനുപുറമെ 49 സ്ലൈ്‌ളഡുകളുള്ള ഒരു പ്രസന്‍േറഷനും ഇതില്‍ കാണാം.

    പിണറായി വിജയന്‍ ഇടപെട്ട്‌ പന്നിയാര്‍, ചെങ്കുളം, പള്ളിവാസല്‍ പദ്ധതികള്‍ക്ക്‌ ഓരോന്നിനും ലാവലിനുമായി പ്രത്യേകം കരാറുണ്ടാക്കിയത്‌, ഓരോ കരാറും നൂറുകോടിക്കുതാഴെ വരുത്തി കേന്ദ്ര വൈദ്യുതി അതോറിട്ടിയുടെ അനുമതിവ്യവസ്ഥ ഒഴിവാക്കാനാണെന്ന്‌ ബ്ലോഗ്‌ പറയുന്നു.

    1996 ഫിബ്രവരി 23ന്‌ യു.ഡി.എഫ്‌. സര്‍ക്കാര്‍ ഒപ്പിട്ടത്‌ കണ്‍സള്‍ട്ടന്‍സി കരാര്‍ മാത്രമാണെന്നും സാങ്കേതിക ഉപദേശം നല്‍കാന്‍ 26 കോടിയില്‍ കവിയാത്ത തുകയ്‌ക്കാണ്‌ ലാവലിനുമായി ഈ കരാര്‍ ഉണ്ടാക്കിയതെന്നും രേഖകള്‍ സമര്‍ത്ഥിക്കുന്നു. പദ്ധതിക്കായി കാനഡയിലെ എക്‌സ്‌പോര്‍ട്ട്‌ ഡവലപ്‌മെന്റ്‌ കോര്‍പ്പറേഷനില്‍നിന്ന്‌ വായ്‌പയെടുക്കാന്‍ കഴിയുമെന്നും, ഈ വായ്‌പ സ്വീകരിക്കുന്നില്ലെങ്കില്‍ കരാര്‍ തനിയെ അസ്ഥിരമാകുമെന്നും വ്യവസ്ഥചെയ്‌തിരുന്നു. പിന്നാലെ വന്ന എല്‍.ഡി.എഫ്‌. സര്‍ക്കാരിന്‌ വായ്‌പ വേണ്ടെന്നുവച്ചാല്‍മാത്രം മതിയായിരുന്നു കരാര്‍ റദ്ദാക്കാനെന്ന്‌ ഇതു ചൂണ്ടിക്കാട്ടി സൈറ്റ്‌ സമര്‍ഥിക്കുന്നു.

    ഇ.ഡി.സി. വായ്‌പ അനുവദിച്ചപ്പോള്‍ കാനഡയില്‍നിന്ന്‌ യന്ത്രങ്ങള്‍ വാങ്ങണമെന്നേ പറഞ്ഞിരുന്നുള്ളു. ലാവലിനില്‍നിന്ന്‌ വാങ്ങണമെന്ന്‌ നിര്‍ബന്ധമില്ലായിരുന്നു. യു.ഡി.എഫ്‌. സര്‍ക്കാര്‍ ഇതനുസരിച്ച്‌ കാനഡയില്‍ ടെന്‍ഡര്‍ നല്‍കാന്‍ ഉദ്ദേശിച്ചിരുന്നു. ഈ ടെന്‍ഡര്‍നടപടിയെ ലാവലിന്‍ ഇടനിലക്കാരനായി സഹായിക്കണമെന്നായിരുന്നു വ്യവസ്ഥ. എന്നാല്‍, പിണറായി ഒപ്പിട്ട കരാറിലൂടെ ഇടനിലക്കാരനെ വിതരണക്കാരനാക്കിമാറ്റി. ലാവലിന്‍ യന്ത്രങ്ങള്‍ നിര്‍മിക്കുന്നില്ല. അവരെ വിതരണക്കാരാക്കിയതിലൂടെ അവര്‍ വേറെ കമ്പനിയില്‍നിന്ന്‌ സാധനം വാങ്ങി അതിന്റെ കമ്മീഷന്‍ പറ്റുന്നു. ഈ പണം കേരളത്തിന്റെ ഖജനാവില്‍നിന്ന്‌ ചോര്‍ന്നതായും ബ്ലോഗ്‌ രേഖകളിലൂടെ ചൂണ്ടിക്കാട്ടുന്നു.

    ഇതിനുപുറമെ, പിണറായി ഒപ്പിട്ട കരാറില്‍ കെ.എസ്‌.ഇ.ബി.യെ 1956-ലെ കമ്പനിനിയമം അനുസരിച്ച്‌ രജിസ്റ്റര്‍ചെയ്‌ത കമ്പനിയാണെന്നു കാണിച്ചിട്ടുള്ളതും സൈറ്റ്‌ ചൂണ്ടിക്കാട്ടുന്നു. ബോര്‍ഡിനെ കമ്പനിയാക്കിയ ഈ മറിമായം ബ്ലോഗില്‍ എടുത്തുപറയുന്നുണ്ട്‌.

    പിണറായി ഒപ്പിട്ട കരാറില്‍ ഇലക്‌ട്രോ കെമിക്കല്‍ ഉപകരണങ്ങള്‍ നല്‍കാന്‍ ലാവലിനെ ചുമതലപ്പെടുത്തുന്ന കാര്യവും സൈറ്റ്‌ പ്രത്യേകം ചൂണ്ടിക്കാട്ടുന്നു.

    അവസാനഭാഗത്ത്‌ കൊടുത്തിട്ടുള്ള ചോദ്യോത്തരങ്ങള്‍, ഇടപാടിലെ പിണറായിവിജയന്റെ പങ്ക്‌ വെളിവാക്കാനുദ്ദേശിച്ചുള്ളതാണ്‌.

    എസ്‌.ഡി.സതീശന്‍ നായര്‍
    Courtesy: Mathrubhumi 08-02-09

    ReplyDelete
  3. The website is to create an India which follow the ideas of fundamentalist and to favour an economy the disaster of which the world is facing now. I am not a CPM member. But when objectively analyse, CPM and other left is correcting our admistration and a protection to our citizen, eventhough their strength is very minimal. They are not bahind money. I respect AKG, EMS, EK Nayanar, Achuthamenon, PKV,Achuthanandan,Prakash karat, Pinarayi from Left and a few from Congress such as J.Nehru,I.Gandhi,Vajpeyi and VM sudheeran. Now I think Pinarayi is the right person to lead CPM. You compare Pinarayi with VS during the last 3 years. VS has narrowed as a political leader to defeat pinarayi. You compare the administration of VS with any other ministers of present Kerala.What is contribution of VS as CM and compare with other. What he do to lead this Govt as a team. He seemed to destroy the pary and which is enjoyed by other who do not want a secular, democratic India. You people and some press, I suspect has getting finacial or other support from some sources. So far in Kerala politics, this type of personal harassment had occured.

    ReplyDelete
  4. A Discussion in Malayalam is available in THIS POST.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Why the fear!A man is known by the company he keeps!Think about Mr.Farris Muhammed and Santiago martin.burmingham unvsty,Read K M roy in Mangalam !That is the problem.Court won't punish an innocent man

    ReplyDelete
  6. please upload the kerala highcourt judgement in snc lavalin case. The full text is available in www.answeringlaw.com The judgement discusses elaborately the reasona for ordering CBI probe. The vigilance report is also discussed.
    The portions of the judgement which blunts the arguments of CPI M may be highlighted and published as they claim that vigilance has given a clean chit to pinari

    ReplyDelete
  7. The SNC Lavalin judgement is available in this link

    http://www.answeringlaw.com/php/displayContent.php?linkId=266

    ReplyDelete
  8. 16-1-2007 ല്‍ ക്രൈം പത്രാധിപര്‍ നന്ദകുമാര്‍ കൊടുത്ത ഒരു റിട്ട് പെറ്റീഷനീലൂടെ യാണ് ഈ കേസ്സ് വീണ്ടും അന്വേഷിക്കാന്‍ കോടതി ഉത്തരവിട്ടത്. ആ കോടതി ഉത്തരവ് വായിക്കണമെന്നാഗ്രഹമുണ്ടോ. ക്ഷമയുണ്ടെങ്കില്‍ അതിവിടെ വായിക്കാം.

    ReplyDelete
  9. HC to hear Vijayan's case on Wednesday
    KOCHI: The case of alleged corruption by Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) Kerala secretary Pinarayi Vijayan will be heard by the high court here Wednesday. The case has taken Kerala by storm and has created ripples in national politics.

    On Monday, a division bench of the Kerala High Court ordered that on Wednesday it will hear Vijayan's response to a notice served to him last week regarding his alleged involvement in the graft case.

    An NGO had filed a petition with the court, stating that the governor's sanction was not required to prosecute Vijayan, who has been accused in a multi-million rupee corruption scam by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) after awarding contracts to renovate two hydro-power projects to Canadian company SNC Lavalin 12 years ago when he was power minister.

    The NGO filed the petition since there have been cases in the past when ministers were prosecuted only after sanction was obtained from the governor.

    The division bench had last week asked advocate general C.P. Sudhakar Prasad for his views and also asked Vijayan to file his response to the NGO's petition.

    Veteran advocate M.K. Damodaran appeared in court for Vijayan Monday. The bench headed by Acting Chief Justice J.B. Koshy decided to postpone the hearing to Wednesday as others have now come forward to join the petition.
    Courtesy: Expressbuzz 9-02-09

    ReplyDelete
  10. ക്രൈം മാസികക്കും ആരധകരോ...........
    കാലം പോയ പോക്കേ........

    ReplyDelete
  11. some piarayi fans here are talking about his "leadership quality and calibre.They cant imagine a CPM without him.CPM is transformed in to a party of "humangod" as K.E.N observed.This is a same situation like "india mean Indira" during 70's.
    Kerala farmer" here noted a wrong point about Vijayan case.CBI didnt furnished charge sheet in its court.Kerala high court cant do anything related to the merrit of the case.The only thing High court decide whether Goverors sanction is mandatory for the prosecution.
    comrade "anonymous", please give answer for the two questions
    1)Why CPM,resisted when government decided lalanin issue to be probed by CBI.
    2)In the so called vigilance report,there is a paragraph including recomendation for detailed investigation as the issue related to international organisation and culprits have international relation,why this government is not publishing the vigilance report if it says that pinarayi is clean?

    ReplyDelete
  12. SNC Lavalin sambadhichu G Kaarthikeyan kerala niyama sabhayile chodyathinu nalkiya marupadi deshabhimani yil labhyamaanu... http://www.deshabhimani.com/Profile.aspx?user=71144

    ReplyDelete
  13. CIDA Launches Private Sector Consultations in Response to Damning Internal Report
    by Lee Berthiaume
    PRINT SMALL LARGE
    Published Mar. 26, 2008

    A CIDA program that doled out almost $500 million over a 10-year period to thousands of Canadian companies for development projects has been slammed in an internal audit that found the vast majority of projects weren't actually implemented.

    Now CIDA Minister Bev Oda and International Trade Minister David Emerson are quietly meeting with key members of the business community to discuss ways the private sector can be better included in Canadian international development efforts and programs as the government prepares to unveil its new aid policy.

    The Canadian International Development Assistance—Industrial Co-operation program (CIDA-INC) was established in 1978 to help cover the costs of private sector initiatives in developing countries.

    By paying for up to 75 per cent of the total costs, the government hoped businesses would take a chance in risky developing countries they otherwise would have ignored, with the idea that a profitable initiative would also result in wealth creation, training and various other spinoffs in the recipient country.

    According to the internal evaluation conducted last year and quietly released on the aid agency's website in December, CIDA-INC disbursed $1.1 billion in support of Canadian private sector initiatives in developing countries from 1978 to 2005. A total of 8,138 proposals were approved and funded.

    However, the evaluation team found that only 972 projects had actually been implemented, raising serious questions about what happened to the hundreds of millions of dollars that were disbursed.

    The evaluation team looked specifically at 721 projects approved between 1997 and 2002, finding that only 112—about 15.5 per cent—had been implemented, while 188 had shown no signs of progress in three years and the remainder hadn't gotten off the ground.

    Meanwhile, companies only had to pay CIDA-INC back if it lends $100,000 to a company for one project, the company secures a contract worth $5 million, or exports that amount of goods. There was no indication how many of the non-implemented projects resulted in money being returned.

    In addition, while the agency publicly reported that the program was directly responsible for attracting billions of dollars of investment into recipient countries and $6 billion in sales of Canadian goods and services, more recent figures were not available "and the evaluation team was not in a position to confirm these numbers."

    The report also criticized the way project information was gathered and recorded.

    "The quality of the database is very closely linked to the availability and willingness of the Canadian clients to provide this information and of the CIDA-INC Program Advisors to obtain and register it in a timely manner," the report said.

    In an effort to improve the percentage of approved projects that were being implemented, CIDA-INC implemented a number of changes over the years.

    "This has not produced any noticeable improvement in the rate of implementation," the report reads. "Moreover, it is the understanding of the evaluation team that file documents are now more costly to produce by the companies and to monitor and approve by CIDA-INC.... This new approach has increasingly discouraged many firms from participating in the program."

    The evaluation team wrapped up its report with several recommendations, including that the government consult with "senior representatives of the private sector" to figure out better ways to include them in international development. This, the team added, may result in a thorough revamping of CIDA-INC, or its complete dissolution in favour of a new program.

    The government, reportedly led by ministers Oda and Emerson, started consultations last month, meeting with representatives from a variety of companies to discuss ways the Canadian private sector can be better included in development efforts.

    CIDA-INC Problems Can Be Fixed

    Michel Côté, CEO of Montreal-based consulting company CRC Sogema, wrote a letter to Ms. Oda in November to explain how important CIDA-INC is to his company after catching wind of rumours the program was going to be scrapped.

    Mr. Côté acknowledged last week there are things about CIDA-INC that need to change, and that some companies were using the CIDA-INC program as a cash cow, sending in project proposals with no intention of ever following through.

    "I know the program is not working very well," he said. "There's too much paperwork that has to be done. There's too much costs. It's really a mess as far as the [way the] program is being done."

    But Mr. Côté said CIDA-INC has been extremely helpful to his business, helping it land contracts and business in a range of countries in Africa. In fact, he's waiting to hear back about another proposal he recently submitted.

    In reply to Mr. Côté's letter, Ms. Oda said in December no decision had yet been taken on CIDA-INC's future. CRC Sogema hasn't yet been consulted about the program, but Mr. Côté said rather than scrap CIDA-INC, the aid agency should make significant changes while keeping the main parts intact, including ensuring it doesn't become a program that avoids all risky proposals to ensure money is accounted for.

    "They've got to revise the program in itself, they've got to revise the purpose," he said, "they've got to revise the administrative aspects of it, and it's a program that has to take some risks."

    One person who has been consulted by the government is Robert Blackburn, vice-president of international operations at Montreal-based engineering firm SNC-Lavalin, who has proposed a whole new approach to the way the private sector is involved in development.

    "The basic message is that people shouldn't see a conflict between giving economic development assistance and working with the private sector," Mr. Blackburn said. "Because here we are, we're saying these people should be part of the world economy; they need to trade and they need investment. So our argument all along is the private sector should have a major role in making that happen because here we are.

    "We're not saying the other things aren't important. You just need to balance it."

    Mr. Blackburn said CIDA appears to be recognizing the argument, and "there are some positive signs that Canada is looking again at its policies, including towards Africa."

    In last month's budget plan, the government said a new aid policy was being developed and should be released within the next few months.

    In his meetings with the government, Mr. Blackburn argued that more needs to be done to ensure Canadian companies have a fair chance to compete for development projects in developing countries that are paid for with Canadian international assistance.

    This could be accomplished in two ways.

    The first is channelling a smaller percentage of overall Canadian aid funds through institutions like the World Bank and United Nations, where the vast majority of funds are currently targeted.

    By bringing the funds back to CIDA for disbursement, Canadian companies will be better able to know when projects are coming down the pipeline, and thus better positioned to compete.

    "While the amount of international assistance has grown rapidly to non-Canadian deliverers, the amount of work with Canadian businesses has shrunk to five or six per cent," Mr. Blackburn said. "It's very frustrating."

    Secondly, the aid agency could focus on areas where Canadian companies specialize and have expertise, like infrastructure, Mr. Blackburn said.

    "Anybody can bid, but you want to do it in areas where Canadians are likely to bid," he says.

    Alex Campbell, director of research and development at Anyway Solid Environmental Solutions, a Toronto-based company that, among other things, build rural roads in developing countries, said applying for CIDA-INC funding "is really a nightmare."

    "There's so many hoops you have to jump through," he said, adding the problems extend to the Canadian aid agency in general. "The experiences we have had through CIDA have been fairly negative."

    In fact, he said, while companies like SNC-Lavalin have departments dedicated to applying for CIDA, UN and World Bank projects, smaller businesses are usually at a severe disadvantage.

    "At the end of the day, if Canada is providing funding, I'd rather it went to Canadian companies," he said.

    Lucien Bradet, president of the Canadian Council on Africa, an organization devoted to facilitating business links with Africa, said the business community is looking for a significant change with the new aid policy.

    "My understanding is that at this point in time there is a realization that there is a correction that is needed in this area," he said. The consultations are trying to determine "how the role of the private sector can be clarified and more effective in this aid agenda."

    Mr. Bradet said Britain's aid agency manages 50 per cent of that country's aid funds, with positive benefits to British companies.

    "So if they do a competition for infrastructure, it's more known in their country, there's more interest by UK companies, and while the competition is open to all, more UK companies win the bids," he said.

    No Call For Tied Aid

    For decades, Canada and other donor countries sought to ensure maximum domestic benefit for their aid dollars by stipulating that companies or products from their own countries benefit through the contracts. This is called "tied aid" and, in recent years, there have been moves to untie aid to ensure instead maximum benefit for the recipient country.

    Messrs. Blackburn and Bradet were adamant they are not calling for a return to the time when the majority of Canadian assistance was tied aid.

    "We don't want tied aid back. We want to ensure that the Canadian private sector has a chance to compete," Mr. Bradet said. "But if it's only competing with the multilateral, it is a very difficult game to win.

    "We just want to have a fair and open opportunity. But if you just send a cheque all over the place, you don't know when these bids are unless you're a large company, and you don't get a level playing field."

    Gerry Barr, president and CEO of the Canadian Council for International Co-operation, an umbrella group of civil society organizations, said he was disturbed to see so much money being wasted through CIDA-INC.

    In addition, while there should be a place for the private sector in development, he says CIDA already has a private sector policy that was adopted in 2003. The concern with these consultations is that the government may start considering the primary purpose of international development as ensuring Canadian companies can benefit, rather than what it is really designed for.

    "For NGOs and people been involved in development, the discussion is never about the vector," he said. "The only thing that would worry the NGO community in Canada is if CIDA is going off-track in terms of poverty focus. That's what aid is about. Aid has to be about poverty reduction and human rights and development."

    ReplyDelete
  14. some old press cuttings. interesting.

    ReplyDelete