When a case was filed against a high-level employee in the irregularity of excise sticker printing, the then finance minister who was involved in it was not even questioned. The contract between the government and the Omni Group for the procurement of crores worth of medical supplies was disputed during the corona epidemic, but was ignored. Case against one ex-minister in Teramox purchase case, two ex-ministers acquitted.
What you should know
Congress and UML ministers joined in the procurement of Telecommunication Traffic Monitoring and Forward Control System (Teramax). The Commission for Investigation of Abuse of Authority filed a case against Congress leader and former minister Mohan Bahadur Basnet and former law secretary Dhanraj Gyawali and 16 individuals and two companies in a special court on June 1 with a claim of 3 billion 21 crores.
However, former Communications Ministers Gyanendra Bahadur Karki (Congress) and Gokul Baskota (UML), then Communications Secretaries Mahendraman Gurung and Vaikunth Aryal (retired from Chief Secretary) and then Joint Secretary of the Ministry of Communications (now retired from Secretary) Vinod Singh were not made defendants.
Teramox procurement process was initiated in 2074 when Mohan Basnet was the Minister of Communications. But due to litigation, this process was blocked. After the general election of 2074, the government led by Sher Bahadur Deuba was removed and the government was formed under the leadership of KP Sharma Oli and Gokul Baskota became the Minister of Communications.
Baskota proceeds with Terramax's equipment procurement process. When the authority sent a letter asking for Rs 25 crore to buy equipment, the then Minister Baskota approved a budget of Rs 70 crore. A year and a half later, in February 2076, Baskota resigned after being involved in a `70 crore bribe deal' for the purchase of security printing equipment.
Congress President Sher Bahadur Deuba became the Prime Minister again in June 2077 after Oli was relieved of his post by the order of the Supreme Court. Then the previously stalled procurement process went ahead. Congress leader Karki was the Communications Minister and Aryal the Secretary when the decision was taken. During the same period, a contract was signed to buy equipment worth 3.5 billion rupees through Venrise Solutions, registered in Cyprus and having an office in Lebanon.
In the first phase, 109 servers, 2 laptops and 8 mobile sets were brought on 21 August 2079. As the purchase price of those goods was found to be abnormally high, the customs stopped the goods without passing the inspection.
When it was said that the ownership of the goods would be given to the authority only after the purchasing company handed them over, the authority officials had already acted as 'middlemen' to release the goods. The authority paid 1 billion 11 billion 25 lakh 52 thousand 143 rupees to Venrise to bring the first phase of goods. The case filed by the abnormal value authority is pending before the special court. An official of the Authority said that since the incomplete case has been filed in this case, the Authority should file a supplementary charge sheet, but as there is no investigation, it is not possible to file an additional charge sheet. If the supplementary indictment is not filed, the others involved will be acquitted on the basis of political access.
Minister acquitted in excise sticker case
In the case of corruption in excise sticker printing, on 10 June 2081, the Authority initiated a case against 12 people including the then Chief Secretary Vaikunth Aryal. This was the first case where a high-level employee was dragged into the case. In which 38 crore 67 lakh 17 thousand 640 rupees were claimed. The special court delivered its verdict on 14 October 2081.
Vikal Paudel, the then executive director of Surakshan Printing Center, and Safal Shrestha, the then director of the National Information Technology Center, were found guilty. But Chief Secretary Aryal was acquitted. It was seen that they entered into an agreement with Printcell Pvt Ltd to print the stickers without even obtaining an agreement and purchase order from the Revenue Investigation Department.
Excise sticker case: The authority's decision to file a corruption case against Chief Secretary Aryal
The Ministry of Communications decided to demand an additional 27 billion rupees in the same year for the security printing press. In the decision of Secretary Aryal, it was mentioned that 3 billion 300 million rupees are needed for digital printing presses and equipment with high level of security. Apart from that, the center asked for an additional 4.72 billion rupees for the machinery tools of Surakshan Printing Center.
The Ministry of Communication requested funds at the rate of 9.45 billion rupees for the equipment of Surakshan Printing Center in the following two years. After the budget was not managed as much as requested, Vikal Poudel, the executive director of Surakshan Printing Center, sent a letter to the media in December 2078 and requested for resource assurance as it would cost 33 billion 29 crores to establish Surakshan Printing Center. Through a letter, he drew attention to the fact that due to lack of budget allocation, it was difficult to carry out the work of security printing.
The special court has said that the authority did not investigate the fact that the purchase process was initiated by the decision of the ministerial level, saying that the then Finance Minister Sharma's infamy was seen in the printing of security excise stickers. The bench headed by Special Chairman Teknarayan Kunwar acquitted the then secretary of the Ministry of Communications, Aryal Sahib, in the corruption case related to the printing of excise stickers.
special said in the judgment, "In the case of Director General of Internal Revenue Department Ritesh Kumar Shakya and Deputy Director General Tank Prasad Pandey of the same department, Deputy Secretary Ganesh Vikram Shahi and Branch Officer Ravindra Prasad Paudel, from the overall missile study, it appears that the Internal Revenue Department has only requested the principle consent of the Ministry of Finance to print excise stickers, but it appears that the Ministry of Finance has raised the issue of printing costs and expenses." No investigation has been done on the officials of the Ministry of Finance who are involved in the process for the said work. There is no dispute that according to the decision of the Hon'ble Minister of Finance dated 26 August 2079, the material procurement process has been initiated. It is not even seen from Missile that the Honorable Minister who is the decision making authority has been understood in the investigation. Looking at it this way, the researcher did not appear to be clean and impartial.
The bench of the special court chairperson Teknarayan Kunwar and judges Khushi Prasad Tharu and Ritendra Thapa held on Wednesday found the then executive director of Surakshan Mudran Kendra Vikal Poudel and director Safal Shrestha guilty of corruption.
Government's ignorance in the Yeti and Omni cases
Nepal Trust's Gokarna Resort and Darbarmarg land leased was reported to the Abuse of Authority Investigation Commission for irregularities. The Cabinet led by KP Sharma Oli had decided to lease the land to this group for a suspiciously long period. Although a complaint was filed against it, there was no investigation.
Act amendment all favors, business benefit phrase more
A complaint was made to the authority that some members of Prime Minister Oli's advisory group along with the leadership of the high-level committee for the prevention of corona infection and the leadership of the Ministry of Health were actively involved in the hasty agreement.
With the lockdown, the health service department, which had canceled the previous notification for the purchase of medical supplies, called the businessmen for a discussion on 11th Chait, giving them 24 hours. And, the government gave the sole contract to Omni. Later, after Omni did not deliver the goods, the government blacklisted him .
