Now, Modi govt too refuses to name foreign bank account holders

[Saheli]

Jethmalani is just a two faced gas bag. He has no problem accepting payment from the proceeds of Jayalalitha's black money, does anyone believe that Jayalalitha paid him from her Rs. 1/- salary

He rendered a service and he got paid for it. Are you suggesting being paid for legal work is wrong? Does all money Jayalalitha have is black?

 

[Bang Galore]

He rendered a service and he got paid for it. Are you suggesting being paid for legal work is wrong? Does all money Jayalalitha have is black?

Nope. I'm not suggesting that anything legally wrong was done, pointed out that when Jayalalitha or Lalu Prasad Yadav engage his services, he cannot be sure ( and there is more than an even likelihood) that he is benefitting from the proceeds of black money transactions. This is not particularly connected to him alone but many high profile lawyers who then have no problems discussing about curbing black money on Tv. A bit like slaughter house owners discussing the benefits of vegetarianism. Nothing legally wrong but pecuinary interests triumphs all else.

 

[Saheli]

Nope. I'm not suggesting that anything legally wrong was done, pointed out that when Jayalalitha or Lalu Prasad Yadav engage his services, he cannot be sure ( and there is more than an even likelihood) that he is benefitting from the proceeds of black money transactions. This is not particularly connected to him alone but many high profile lawyers who then have no problems discussing about curbing black money on Tv. A bit like slaughter house owners discussing the benefits of vegetarianism. Nothing legally wrong but pecuinary interests triumphs all else.

It is not pecuniary interest but his legal obligation to defend a case when it is presented to him. At his age, neither is he in a position to enjoy his wealth nor is that his primary concern. In India even a person like Kasab is entitled to legal defense. That does not make his lawyer a hypocrite if he claims to be patriotic. As long as Jethmalani is paying his taxes, he is not involved in creation of or defense of black money and is not a hypocrite when he argues for the same.

 

[Bang Galore]

It is not pecuniary interest but his legal obligation to defend a case when it is presented to him. At his age, neither is he in a position to enjoy his wealth nor is that his primary concern. In India even a person like Kasab is entitled to legal defense. That does not make his lawyer a hypocrite if he claims to be patriotic. As long as Jethmalani is paying his taxes, he is not involved in creation of or defense of black money and is not a hypocrite when he argues for the same.

There is no legal obligation to defend anyone, he hasn't been appointed by the court. He chooses to do so & charges his fees for doing that which will come from the black money (even if whitewashed) that his clients have produced. I have not suggested he is not patriotic, I have said that his claims on the crusade against black money should be taken with a truck load of salt. The connection with Kasab is irrelevant, the lawyers there were court appointed. Mayawathi pays her taxes, Jayalalitha pays her taxes as do Lalu Yadav & many others, the source of that money is what is questioned. What logical reason then to shout yourself hoarse about black money stashed elsewhere? His argument presented before the supreme court was to ask for the revealing of all those who have foreign accounts. On what basis?, holding foreign accounts is not a crime in itself, it is only if the source is proven to be ill gotten money. Using your argument, you can then take the position that they have as much right to their privacy on their accounts as Mr. Jethmalani has a right to take the ill gotten money of his clients as legitimate fees for services rendered.

 

[Saheli]

There is no legal obligation to defend anyone, he hasn't been appointed by the court. He chooses to do so & charges his fees for doing that which will come from the black money (even if whitewashed) that his clients have produced. I have not suggested he is not patriotic, I have said that his claims on the crusade against black money should be taken with a truck load of salt. The connection with Kasab is irrelevant, the lawyers there were court appointed. Mayawathi pays her taxes, Jayalalitha pays her taxes as do Lalu Yadav & many others, the source of that money is what is questioned. What logical reason then to shout yourself hoarse about black money stashed elsewhere? His argument presented before the supreme court was to ask for the revealing of all those who have foreign accounts. On what basis?, holding foreign accounts is not a crime in itself, it is only if the source is proven to be ill gotten money. Using your argument, you can then take the position that they have as much right to their privacy on their accounts as Mr. Jethmalani has a right to take the ill gotten money of his clients as legitimate fees for services rendered.

Jethmalani has not asked all the foreign account holders name to be made public but only those who are suspected of having evaded taxes and having black money. This is logical inference unless you are claiming he does not know the difference between those two after having practiced law all his life. He can and should take cases which come to him because the law of the country still holds people innocent until proven guilty and they have right to access legal counsel. For every such case he takes on, he also takes on lot of cases where he does not charge. You have no basis for claiming that the money paid to him is exclusively black money. Mayawati, Jayalalitha, or even Lalu Yadav all of them have black money but that does not preclude them having white money either. After all they all held govt jobs and were paid for it too. Jayalathitha was no beggar before she came into politics either. Plus just like other citizens of this country they too could have used their "white money" for investment purposes.

He has crusaded against black money and it was his effort which highlighted the issue when the entire govt machinery was involved in corruption and turning a Nelson's eye towards this issue.

The connection with Kasab is relevant because defense is the legal right of every accused in this country. The lawyers by refusing to represent Kasab were undermining the justice system of this country. The court was forced to step in. Jethmalani cannot be accused of undermining the judiciary or the legal system of this country and also of hypocrisy.

 

[Bang Galore]

Jethmalani has not asked all the foreign account holders name to be made public but only those who are suspected of having evaded taxes and having black money.

That was not what he accused the Modi government of doing, he said that they were using the same argument as the UPA did when not disclosing the names. Those suspected means nothing, only those charged by law matters.

He can and should take cases which come to him because the law of the country still holds people innocent until proven guilty and they have right to access legal counsel.

If you had read what I have posted, you would see that I have never questioned that.

You have no basis for claiming that the money paid to him is exclusively black money. Mayawati, Jayalalitha, or even Lalu Yadav all of them have black money but that does not preclude them having white money either

No but there is no way he knows the source either. Even if you argue it is the white money that he is being paid by, it is because they have so much black money that they can afford him & he is still defending them on the charge of making black money by corruption. it is not a legal argument, just a pointer that there is no need to get carried away by Jethmalini's statements about the government's betrayal etc.

Jayalathitha was no beggar before she came into politics either. Plus just like other citizens of this country they too could have used their "white money" for investment purposes.

She said she had 3 crores when she became CM, took Rs.1/- salary & had 68 crores atleast by 1996. Now probably worth a 1000 crores. People with just 3 crores can't afford Jethmalani unless they have more money after the case is done with.

He has crusaded against black money and it was his effort which highlighted the issue when the entire govt machinery was involved in corruption and turning a Nelson's eye towards this issue.

He has, I just pointed out an irony that I could clearly see.

Jethmalani cannot be accused of undermining the judiciary or the legal system of this country and also of hypocrisy.

Never accused Jethmalani of undermining the judiciary (where on earth did you get that?) but hypocrisy, I most certainly do. You are free to disagree. I have absolutely no problem with lawyers taking any & all cases, i understand how the judicial system works . What I don't care for is when they do grandstanding on a subject while claiming exemptions that they are not willing to offer for others. If Jayalalitha & others have and they do, a legitimate ground to appeal & have their case heard and be represented by eminent lawyers like Jethmalani, why should people whose names are on a list but against whom no charge has yet been made (Jaitley said the government is still in the process of making out cases against some of them) be not allowed the same benefit of doubt & why should Jethmalani throw such a fit. It is highly likely that quite a few of those names are in receipt of black money ( as is Jayalalitha), but that should await a court's judgment against them, should it not?

 

[Saheli]

She said she had 3 crores when she became CM, took Rs.1/- salary & had 68 crores atleast by 1996. Now probably worth a 1000 crores. People with just 3 crores can't afford Jethmalani unless they have more money after the case is done with.

That was not what he accused the Modi government of doing, he said that they were using the same argument as the UPA did when not disclosing the names. Those suspected means nothing, only those charged by law matters

He had an argument with the reasoning they were giving or initially gave out. Those suspected are suspected on the basis of evidence on hand and not arbitrarily.

No but there is no way he knows the source either. Even if you argue it is the white money that he is being paid by, it is because they have so much black money that they can afford him & he is still defending them on the charge of making black money by corruption. it is not a legal argument, just a pointer that there is no need to get carried away by Jethmalini's statements about the government's betrayal et

There is no way at all anyone can be privy to all sources anyways. Are you saying it is otherwise with other clients? Are you saying that only people with black money in India can afford him? What does he charge? Also as long as he is not lying in the court and misrepresenting the case of his client he is not breaching any ethics either leave alone law. He has a case about Govt's betrayal.

She said she had 3 crores when she became CM, took Rs.1/- salary & had 68 crores atleast by 1996. Now probably worth a 1000 crores. People with just 3 crores can't afford Jethmalani unless they have more money after the case is done with

3 crores in 1990s is a lot of money. It is not difficult to build up to 70 crores from that seed amount, especially if you are in power in India. It need not be illegal either. Or you expect Jayalalitha's 3 crore to stay 3 crores when even ordinary people with that kind of money in 1990s are worth hundreds of crores now?

He has, I just pointed out an irony that I could clearly see.

There is no irony here. He is a lawyer and his job is to defend his client. Does not indicate that he is in favor of black money.

Never accused Jethmalani of undermining the judiciary (where on earth did you get that?) but hypocrisy, I most certainly do. You are free to disagree. I have absolutely no problem with lawyers taking any & all cases, i understand how the judicial system works . What I don't care for is when they do grandstanding on a subject while claiming exemptions that they are not willing to offer for others. If Jayalalitha & others have and they do, a legitimate ground to appeal & have their case heard and be represented by eminent lawyers like Jethmalani, why should people whose names are on a list but against whom no charge has yet been made (Jaitley said the government is still in the process of making out cases against some of them) be not allowed the same benefit of doubt & why should Jethmalani throw such a fit. It is highly likely that quite a few of those names are in receipt of black money ( as is Jayalalitha), but that should await a court's judgment against them, should it not?

If he is not subverting the law or in breach of ethics then where is the hypocrisy when he expects the govt of the country to not neglect corruption. He is doing his job and he expect the govt to do its. Is that too much to ask? Where is the grandstanding? Is he asking that those who are hoarding black money be denied legal counsel? He just wants their names disclosed in pursuance of further legal proceedings against them. He has a reason to be suspicious given the whole culture prevalent in New Delhi until now was one of shielding the corrupt and fudging evidence. If due to his persistence we get the govt hurrying on the case, then we all should be thankful.

 

[Bang Galore]

He had an argument with the reasoning they were giving or initially gave out. Those suspected are suspected on the basis of evidence on hand and not arbitrarily.

It is pretty arbitrary, there is no case as of now against a single one on the list.

Also as long as he is not lying in the court and misrepresenting the case of his client he is not breaching any ethics either leave alone law. He has a case about Govt's betrayal.

Never my argument that he breached legal ethics or the law, merely that he can be accused of hypocrisy.

3 crores in 1990s is a lot of money. It is not difficult to build up to 70 crores from that seed amount, especially if you are in power in India. It need not be illegal either. Or you expect Jayalalitha's 3 crore to stay 3 crores when even ordinary people with that kind of money in 1990s are worth hundreds of crores now?

You haven't followed that case much, have you? The judge convicted her because she could not account for that increase from the proceedings of what she said she had. She had a net worth of 3 crores, not liquid assets amounting to that and she moved it up to over 60 crores during the 5 years she was CM. As I said, that land is now probably worth over a 1000 crores. In any case, a judge found her guilty & convicted her. It was a conviction that Jethmalani was appealing against, actually a bail during the appeal.

There is no irony here. He is a lawyer and his job is to defend his client. Does not indicate that he is in favor of black money.

The irony is in the standards that he uses, asking the government to declare names of those who haven't been tried but accepting a client who has been convicted. Seems pretty ironical to me even if you don't think so.

If he is not subverting the law or in breach of ethics then where is the hypocrisy when he expects the govt of the country to not neglect corruption. He is doing his job and he expect the govt to do its. Is that too much to ask? Where is the grandstanding? Is he asking that those who are hoarding black money be denied legal counsel? He just wants their names disclosed in pursuance of further legal proceedings against them. He has a reason to be suspicious given the whole culture prevalent in New Delhi until now was one of shielding the corrupt and fudging evidence. If due to his persistence we get the govt hurrying on the case, then we all should be thankful.

My point is made above.

 

[Saheli]

It is pretty arbitrary, there is no case as of now against a single one on the list

Of course there wont be a case against anyone unless one is filed. But they are in the suspect category because of the large sums held without known verified sources of income. That is how people become suspects and are investigated and on having proof charged.

Never my argument that he breached legal ethics or the law, merely that he can be accused of hypocrisy.

If he is not in breach of any ethics or law, there is no hypocrisy on his part. If he was advocate of corruption and protesting against corruption then yes, you could accuse him of such.

You haven't followed that case much, have you? The judge convicted her because she could not account for that increase from the proceedings of what she said she had. She had a net worth of 3 crores, not liquid assets amounting to that and she moved it up to over 60 crores during the 5 years she was CM. As I said, that land is now probably worth over a 1000 crores. In any case, a judge found her guilty & convicted her. It was a conviction that Jethmalani was appealing against, actually a bail during the appeal.

They were well within their right to appeal for bail and conviction by special court is by no means final verdict. It can be overturned by the supreme court and indeed she was granted a bail by the SC. It is Jethmalani's job and he is duty bound to pursue all legal venues available to him. How can you mistake that as his blessing for corruption?

The irony is in the standards that he uses, asking the government to declare names of those who haven't been tried but accepting a client who has been convicted. Seems pretty ironical to me even if you don't think so

What is so strange in declaring the name of the suspects? Was Jayalalitha's name in corruption case a secret before being charged? The whole town and press were openly talking about her corruption.

My point is made abov

No it is not.

 

[Bang Galore]

Of course there wont be a case against anyone unless one is filed. But they are in the suspect category because of the large sums held without known verified sources of income. That is how people become suspects and are investigated and on having proof charged.

All that anyone knows now is that they have foreign accounts. Does not amount to much by itself. Private citizens can have legal accounts abroad. doesn't prove anything. will certainly be a violation of privacy if such names are arbitrarily put out with having proof, even if preliminary (i.e. a case filed) only.

If he is not in breach of any ethics or law, there is no hypocrisy on his part. If he was advocate of corruption and protesting against corruption then yes, you could accuse him of such.

Hypocrisy is not a legal issue, you seem to go where I haven't gone.

They were well within their right to appeal for bail and conviction by special court is by no means final verdict. It can be overturned by the supreme court and indeed she was granted a bail by the SC. It is Jethmalani's job and he is duty bound to pursue all legal venues available to him. How can you mistake that as his blessing for corruption?

Not arguing the merits of the legal case. Just pointed out that Jethmalani obviously has no problem representing people convicted of having black money & probably getting his fees from such money but wants the government to summarily reveal all names of people who may include those who have committed no crime just because there name is on a list of account holders. Hypocrisy in my opinion. You can disagree and you obviously do. no point in beating around the same bush.

What is so strange in declaring the name of the suspects? Was Jayalalitha's name in corruption case a secret before being charged? The whole town and press were openly talking about her corruption.

Jayalalalitha was charged and she was a public servant. No one on the list has been charged.

No it is not.

Your opinion. In mine, it is.

There is nothing to be achieved by rehashing this in slightly different sentences. My last post in this conversation.

 

[Ammyy]

Govt to tell SC names of Swiss bank account holders - Hindustan Times

 

[Saheli]

All that anyone knows now is that they have foreign accounts. Does not amount to much by itself. Private citizens can have legal accounts abroad. doesn't prove anything. will certainly be a violation of privacy if such names are arbitrarily put out with having proof, even if preliminary (i.e. a case filed) only.

No. Indian govt and supreme court are not dolts to just go at anyone for having a foreign account. These are well know tax havens and the names being pursued are suspects.

Hypocrisy is not a legal issue, you seem to go where I haven't gone

Perhaps you missed out on "ethics." Hypocrisy is an ethical issue and Jethmalani is not in breach of any ethics as far as I know of.