(1) The consortium of German Aviation and Hifly won the tender under the leadership of AAR Company in the tender call issued by Nepal Aviation Corporation. Those three companies and the Special Purpose Company (SPV) registered in Ireland under the name Hyfly-X cannot be called a 'Sail Company' at all.

The other nine companies that submitted tenders are fine, but calling only the three companies from America and Europe that won the tenders as 'cell companies' does not match any point of view. Also, it is completely wrong to call Hifly-X Company a 'cell company' as it is a common practice worldwide to establish a one-dollar SPV company in big projects.

(2) Savings Fund and Citizen Investment Fund have been approved by the Council of Ministers because the government must be surety according to the Loan and Guarantee Act. Even during the purchase of two narrowbodies 10/12 years ago, the Cabinet itself decided to bail.

(3) Among the 10 proposals that participated in the global tender, the bidder with the lowest price was selected through transparent evaluation. While the project is being completed and after completion, the corporation is informed about the internal affairs of the company (such as where the corporation sent the amount paid, which country the money was sent to which bank, to whom and how much money was given for what purpose, how much profit was distributed among the three partner companies, etc.) It didn't happen. The main concern of the corporation management and the corporation officers is whether the goods have been delivered as per the specification after the payment of the amount mentioned in the contract.

(4) The recent verdict of the Special Court is only on two technical issues - maximum weight that an aircraft can carry (MTOW) and price escalation (price escalation). It has only been mentioned in the judgment that the corporation has been 'caused illegal damage'. Certainly, if the commission was given to Nepalese citizens, it is within the scope of the authority and accordingly, in the same judgment, the honorable special court has mentioned in the brief judgment that 'immediately conduct a separate investigation and send a written report to the Abuse of Authority Investigation Commission to take necessary action'. Therefore, it is a request that it is not appropriate to assassinate someone's character without waiting for the results after the investigation by the authority.