A corruption case has been filed against 14 people, including a former minister, four former secretaries and a current secretary, for corruption in granting tax exemptions to a construction company contrary to the original agreement while constructing the Pokhara Regional International Airport. The Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA) on Thursday filed a case against the then Finance Minister Gyanendra Bahadur Karki and the then Finance Secretary Shankar Prasad Adhikari, as well as officials and companies involved in the decision-making process, fixing a fine of Rs 3.62 billion 522 thousand 160.

Danduraj Ghimire, the then Joint Secretary of Tourism and currently the Chief Secretary of Gandaki Province, is also involved in this irregularity. Ghimire has been suspended with the filing of the case. A case has also been filed against the Chinese construction company CAMC Engineering and its two representatives as accomplices, seeking punishment as the main defendants, on the charge of taking tax exemptions with malicious intent.

A case has also been filed against Chinese construction company CAMC Engineering and its two representatives as accomplices, seeking punishment as the main defendants on the charge of taking tax exemptions with malicious intent. According to the CIAA's assistant spokesperson Ganesh Bahadur Adhikari, the other accused in this case are Maheshwor Neupane, then secretary of the Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Civil Aviation, Cable Prasad Bhandari, then joint secretary of finance, and Suresh Acharya, then joint secretary of tourism. Bhandari and Acharya have retired from the posts of secretaries. 

Similarly, the then director general of the Civil Aviation Authority, Sanjeev Gautam, the then national pride project chief and director of the authority, Pradeep Adhikari, who later became the director general, Yogesh Aryal, then electronics engineer of the Ministry of Tourism, Yugraj Pandey, then deputy secretary of the Ministry of Finance, and branch officer Urmila Bhandari are also included. Airport construction company CMMC and its chairman Wang Bo and project manager Yang Zhigang have also been made accomplices. Pradeep Adhikari is currently in jail on remand in a corruption case. Five cases against him are pending in the special court. 

The corruption case filed on Thursday in the Pokhara airport construction case is the third. On 21 Mangsir 2082, the CIAA had filed the first case in the special court against 56 people, including the then Finance Minister Ram Sharan Mahat, 5 former ministers, 9 former secretaries, and a former registrar of the Supreme Court, claiming that they had caused losses of 74.343 million US dollars (8.367 billion rupees at the time of the contract award) on charges of awarding a contract to a Chinese company at an inflated price.

The Authority filed a second case on 8 Chaitra 2082 against the then Tourism Secretary Kedar Bahadur Adhikari, then Directors General of the Authority Sanjeev Gautam, Rajan Pokharel and Pradeep Adhikari, and representatives of the construction company CMMC, including 21 others, claiming a loss of Rs 461.1584,434.

They were made defendants on charges of not appointing a consultant for $2.8 million as per the terms and provisions of the procurement and contract for the construction of the airport, unnaturally increasing the cost estimate to Rs 503.440,696, and making additional and duplicate expenditures from the Authority's assets. On Thursday, the third case was filed against them for providing tax exemptions contrary to the original agreement related to the airport construction. According to an official of the Authority, other irregularities related to the airport construction are also being investigated. The charge sheet filed on Thursday states that the loan amount received from the Chinese government was embezzled under the cover of tax exemptions with the connivance of ministers, employees and contractors.

The charge sheet filed by the Authority in the Special Court states that tax exemption was granted in bad faith, even though there was a provision in the original agreement between the Authority and the contractor company that taxes, duties and other fees should be paid/paid by the contractor company. The charge sheet filed by the Authority in the Special Court states that tax exemption was granted in bad faith, even though there was a provision in the original agreement between the Authority and the contractor company that taxes, duties and other fees should be paid/paid by the contractor company. ‘It has been found that the implementation agreement was made with the condition that the contractor company would be exempted from taxes, duties and other fees, contrary to the provisions of the original agreement, and on that basis, the payment was made including taxes, duties and other fees, but the tax and duties included in the payment were not deposited in the state treasury, thereby providing double benefits to the contractor company CAMC, causing loss and misuse of Rs 3.62 billion, 522 thousand, 160 out of the public property received as a loan by the Government of Nepal,’ the charge sheet filed by the Authority in the Special Court states.

Among the defendants, the then Minister Karki has been demanded to be fined according to the amount claimed, to recover the embezzled amount, and to be sentenced to imprisonment. A lump sum has been demanded against the then Secretaries of the Ministry of Finance and Tourism, Adhikari and Neupane, and a lump sum has been demanded against the then Joint Secretaries Bhandari, Acharya and Ghimire, and the then Director General of the Authority, Gautam. A lump sum has been demanded against the Chinese company and its two officials as accomplices, a fine according to the amount, to recover the embezzled amount, and to be sentenced to imprisonment against the company's representative. A lump sum has been demanded against the then Project Chief Officer and the rest.

In the tax exemption case, the then Accounts Committee had also directed the Authority to investigate and take action against the culprits. A subcommittee formed under the leadership of then member of the Accounts Committee, Rajendra Lingden, had investigated the issues including tax exemption and recommended action against those involved and submitted a report to the committee. The then chairman of the committee, Hrishikesh Pokharel, had sent a letter with the report to the Authority on 9 Jestha 2082. The 60th report of the Auditor General's Office had also raised questions about the loss of the loan amount by entering into a 'contract agreement' to get tax exemptions contrary to the original agreement.

During the investigation, the then Secretary of the Ministry of Tourism, Neupane, had distanced himself from the matter saying that the tax exemption issue fell within the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Finance. 'Since the authority for work related to foreign loans is vested in the Ministry of Finance and the agreement is also made there, the Ministry of Finance should be aware of its legal basis. Since the decision to make the agreement started from the Ministry of Finance and started from there, only the then officials of the Ministry of Finance would have known for sure,' Neupane's statement states. 

The then Finance Minister Karki has claimed that the agreement had been reached before he became a minister and that he had approved the decision on tax exemption as a continuation of his regular work. During the same statement, the then Secretary of Finance Adhikari had claimed that the tax exemption proposal was submitted with good intentions and there was no malice in it. ‘The Nepal government has an established policy of providing tax exemptions to goods purchased and imported by projects run with foreign aid, and in this context, the issue of providing tax exemptions should be included as per the same policy,’ the official said in a statement. ‘After seeking the opinion of the Ministry of Tourism and receiving a positive opinion, the implementation agreement was approved and an agreement was signed with the Authority. There was no information from the Ministry of Tourism about how the contract agreement was made. If the original agreement had been made without tax exemption, the Authority should have informed the Ministry of Finance through the Ministry of Tourism. This did not appear to have been done. I submitted a decision for an agreement with a provision for tax exemption in good faith.’ 

The then Finance Minister Karki has claimed that the agreement had been reached before he became a minister and that he had approved the decision on tax exemption as a continuation of his regular work. "Before I was appointed as the Finance Minister, contract agreements, loan agreements, and subsidiary loan agreements had been signed for the construction of Pokhara International Airport. The project implementation agreement was signed as part of the routine work," he said in his statement to the Authority. "I was told that a project implementation agreement should be signed. It was said that this is a routine process. Accordingly, comments were raised at various levels and a project implementation agreement should be signed. In that agreement, there was a comment that the agreement was in accordance with Section 19 of the prevailing Economic Act, 2074 BS and the Development Assistance Policy, and that implementation agreements are also made in other projects with the friendly Chinese government. Therefore, I have approved the comment to authorize the signing of the project implementation agreement."

A study on the master plan for the construction of Pokhara Airport had been started in 2065 BS to reduce the pressure on Tribhuvan International Airport. The Authority had Joshi Associates conduct a study on it and proposed a cost estimate, and the Civil Aviation Authority Board of Directors approved a cost estimate of 145 million US dollars excluding VAT on 6 Asoj 2068 BS.

Then the Chinese government showed interest in it. China proposed that the project could be built through EPC (Engineering, Procurement-Construction) with loan assistance. It submitted a cost proposal of $286.526 million (excluding taxes) on November 26, 2068, to get the project directly through CAMC Engineering.

The Authority Board (Steering Committee) meeting led by the then Tourism Minister Post Bahadur Bogati had started work to move it forward. The Authority Board (Steering Committee) meeting led by the then Tourism Minister Post Bahadur Bogati had started work to move it forward. The then Tourism Secretary Sushil Ghimire had approved it. There was also opposition at that time that the project was being handed over directly to a Chinese company without open competition. After that, the Authority formed a cost review committee for CAMC under the coordination of Manoj Karki. The committee prepared a cost estimate of $169,697,000 including 3 percent contingency and 13 percent VAT. There were allegations of collusion in it. However, after the Authority Board approved it, bids were invited.

At that time, Triratna Manandhar was the Director General of the Authority and Sushil Ghimire was the Secretary of Tourism. Ten Chinese companies, including CAMC, submitted bids, but all of them failed in the technical evaluation. They were declared ineligible because they had already worked on airport construction projects worth at least $120 million. However, the Authority Board decided to open financial proposals on June 31, 2069, in violation of the Public Procurement Act.

In which China International had bid $349.283 million, Sino Hydro $337.561 million, and CAMC $305.123 million. Even though they did not have experience in doing airport work worth $120 million, the process was moved forward. The Chinese Embassy in Nepal had sent a letter to the Authority on July 10, 2012 (June 26, 2069) stating that all three companies that submitted bids were ‘qualified, experienced, capable of performing well and reliable for an international airport’, and the Authority Board had initiated the process on July 31, 2069.

On July 15, 2069, a committee was formed under the leadership of the then Joint Secretary to study the evaluation committee report from the Authority Board meeting, and CAMC had sent a letter saying that ‘negotiations’ could be held with the Authority. In a letter sent by CAMC to the Authority on August 8, 2069, it was mentioned that the cost could be ‘verified’ by mutual agreement between both parties after the completion of ‘detail engineering and project design’.

१५ साउन २०६९ मा प्राधिकरण बोर्ड बैठकबाट मूल्यांकन समिति प्रतिवेदनमाथि अध्ययन गर्न तत्कालीन सहसचिवको नेतृत्वमा समिति गठन गरिएकामा सीएएमसीले प्राधिकरणसँग ‘नेगोसिएसन’ गर्न सकिने भन्दै पत्र पठाएको थियो । Three days later, the Ministry of Tourism decided to send a letter saying that it would seek the opinion of the Procurement Monitoring Office, inform the Chinese government side through diplomatic channels about the high cost, and that the Authority should consider and decide on the remaining issues. However, the Procurement Monitoring Office sent a letter stating that such negotiations were against the law. गैरकानुनी निर्णय हुन लागेको भन्दै यो विषय अख्तियारमा समेत पुग्यो । अख्तियारले १२ भदौ २०६९ मा ‘गैरकानुनी निर्णय नगर्न’ निर्देशन दियो । तर त्यसलाई समेत बेवास्ता गर्दै प्रक्रिया अघि बढाइयो ।

४ फागुन २०६९ को मन्त्रिपरिषद् बैठकले प्राधिकरणबाट तयार लागत अनुमान (१४५.५५९ मिलियन डलर) भित्र नै रहेर विमानस्थलको काम गर्न सैद्धान्तिक सहमति दियो । तर प्राधिकरणले मन्त्रिपरिषद् निर्णयलाई आफूखुसी अर्थ लगाएर पुनः सम्भाव्यता अध्ययन गर्न प्राधिकरणका उपमहानिर्देशक सुमनकुमार श्रेष्ठको संयोजकत्वमा समिति बनायो । समितिले लागत अनुमान २६४ मिलियन डलर कायम गरी प्रतिवेदन बुझाएको थियो । त्यसलाई प्राधिकरणका तत्कालीन महानिर्देशक रतीशचन्द्र लाल सुमनको अध्यक्षतामा बसेको बैठकले स्वीकृत गरेको थियो । 

त्यसपछि चुनावी सरकारका रूपमा खिलराज रेग्मी प्रधानमन्त्री भए भने पर्यटनमन्त्री रामकुमार श्रेष्ठ आए । प्राधिकरणले सर्वोच्च अदालतका पूर्वरजिस्ट्रार रामकृष्ण तिमल्सेनाको संयोजकत्वमा कार्यदल बनाएको थियो । जसमा विज्ञ पुरुषोत्तम डंगोल र पूर्वनिर्देशक विनोदानन्द चौधरी सदस्य बनाइए ।  

कार्यदलले २१५.९६५ मिलियनको सीमाभित्र रही ‘ईपीसी’ मोडलमा निर्माण अघि बढाउन राय दियो । कार्यदलले ‘प्राधिकरणले तयार पारेको लागत अनुमान (१४५ मिलियन डलर) खरिद प्रावधानअनुसार तयार गरिएको छैन’ भनी टिप्पणीसमेत गरेको थियो । त्यसपछि तत्कालीन पर्यटनमन्त्री श्रेष्ठको अध्यक्षतामा बसेको प्राधिकरण बोर्ड बैठकले तिमल्सेना कार्यदलको प्रतिवेदनअनुसार २१५.९६५ मिलियन डलर लागत अनुमान कायम गरी आयोजना अघि बढाउने निर्णय २९ कात्तिक २०७० मा गरेको थियो ।

उक्त निर्णय पर्यटन मन्त्रालय हुँदै मन्त्रिपरिषद् पठाइयो । मन्त्रिपरिषद्ले प्राधिकरण बोर्डको निर्णय उचित भन्दै टेन्डर अघि बढाउन ११ पुस २०७० मा सहमति दियो । त्यसपछि लागत अत्यधिक बढाइएको विषयमा अख्तियारमा पुनः उजुरी परेको थियो । उजुरीलाई अख्तियारले १२ चैत २०७० मा तामेलीमा राखिदिएपछि १२ वैशाख २०७१ मा प्राधिकरण बोर्ड बैठकले सम्झौताको मस्यौदा निर्माण समिति बनाएको थियो ।

१४ वैशाखमा तत्कालीन मन्त्री श्रेष्ठकै अध्यक्षतामा बसेको बोर्ड बैठकले मस्यौदा स्वीकृत गराएकामा प्राधिकरणले निर्णय पहिले भइसकेकाले थप निर्णय आवश्यक नभएको भनी ५ जेठ २०७१ मा प्रक्रिया अघि बढाउन बाटो खोलिदिएको थियो । पर्यटन मन्त्रालयले ८ जेठ २०७१ मा सम्झौता गर्न प्राधिकरणलाई पत्र लेख्यो ।

अर्थ मन्त्रालयले ८ असोज २०७१ मा पर्यटन मन्त्रालयलाई पत्र लेखेर लागत वृद्धिको कारणबारे प्रश्न गरेकामा त्यसको जवाफमा इन्जिनियरिङ अध्ययन संस्थानले गरेको अध्ययनले नै पुष्टि गरेको तर्कसहित जवाफ दिएको थियो । त्यसपछि सीएएमसीसँग सोही दिन सम्झौता गर्‍यो । प्राधिकरणले २४ भदौ २०७१ मा निर्माण अघि बढाउने इन्जिनियरिङ अध्ययन संस्थान पुल्चोकलाई लागतका विषयमा अध्ययन गर्न पत्राचार गरेकामा इन्जिनियरिङ अध्ययन संस्थानका विज्ञ सम्मिलित टोलीले २३०.०६५ मिलियन डलरसम्म लागत हुने गरी प्रतिवेदन दिएको थियो । त्यसपछि अर्थ मन्त्रालयले ८ असोज २०७१ मा पर्यटन मन्त्रालयलाई पत्र लेखेर लागत वृद्धिको कारणबारे प्रश्न गरेकामा त्यसको जवाफमा इन्जिनियरिङ अध्ययन संस्थानले गरेको अध्ययनले नै पुष्टि गरेको तर्कसहित जवाफ दिएको थियो । त्यसपछि पर्यटन मन्त्रालयले ऋण सम्झौता अघि बढाउन अर्थ मन्त्रालयलाई प्रस्ताव गर्‍यो ।

त्यति बेला अर्थमन्त्री रामशरण महत, पर्यटनमन्त्री दीपक अमात्य, अर्थ सचिव सुमनप्रसाद शर्मा, कानुन सचिव भेषराज शर्मा र पर्यटन सचिव सुरेशमान श्रेष्ठ थिए । अर्थ मन्त्रालयमा महतको अध्यक्षतामा ३ कात्तिक २०७१ मा बसेको कानुन र पर्यटन सचिव, तत्कालीन अर्थ सहसचिव मधु मरासिनी तथा प्राधिकरणका तत्कालीन महानिर्देशक सुमनसहितको बैठकमा ऋण सम्झौताका लागि मन्त्रिपरिषद्मा प्रस्ताव लैजानेमा सहमति गरियो ।

लगत्तै पर्यटन मन्त्रालयले ऋण सम्झौता गर्ने प्रस्ताव मन्त्रिपरिषद्मा पेस गरेकामा मन्त्रिपरिषद्ले १० कात्तिक २०७१ मा ‘चिनियाँ सहुलियतपूर्ण ऋणअन्तर्गत ईपीसी मोडलबाट निर्माणका लागि आवश्यक पर्ने रकमको व्यवस्था अर्थ मन्त्रालयले गर्ने’ निर्णय गरेको थियो । जसमा कर छुटको विषय समावेश थिएन ।

त्यही निर्णयअनुसार १४ कात्तिकमा ऋण सम्झौताका लागि एक्जिम बैंक अफ चाइनालाई अर्थ मन्त्रालयले पत्राचार गरेको थियो । त्यतिबेला अमात्यले मन्त्रीबाट राजीनामा दिएपछि एमालेकै भीम आचार्य पर्यटनमन्त्रीको जिम्मेवारीमा आए । ८ चैत २०७२ मा नेपाल–चीन सरकारबीच पछिल्लो लागत अनुमानबमोजिम निर्माण गर्ने सम्झौता भएको थियो । १३ फागुन २०७४ सम्म सबैखाले प्रक्रियागत निर्णय र सम्झौता भएर आयोजना निर्माण अघि बढाइएको थियो ।