Dissatisfied with the written responses sent to them by South African arms manufacturer Denel, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) has decided to continue its freeze on the company for further purchases.
Officials maintain that the action will include a freeze on all payments to be made to Denel, including payments due to them for transfer of technology for manufacturing Anti-material rifles (ARMs) in India.
Denel spokesperson Sam Basch, however, said he was not aware of the nature of communication exchanged between his company and the MoD.
Story continues below this
ad
‘‘South African authorities are in touch with Indian authorities. That is all I can say at this point,’’ he said.
The decision to continue the freeze follows receipt of what is being described as an ‘‘evasive’’ written communication from Denel last week (just before the deadline given by the MoD expired). It is understood that in the communication, Denel has informed the MoD that being a state-owned company, the matter could be dealt with only at a Government-to-Government level.
Irked with this response, MoD officials say that a decision has been taken not to lift the freeze on purchases and negotiations with Denel and to withhold pending payments to the company as well. Denel is shortly to be informed of the decision in writing.
This, incidentally, is the second official response from Denel, following allegations surfacing in the South African press about pay-offs to a company called Varas Associates for procuring papers of the Price Negotiating Committee (PNC) for ARM contracts. In their first response, the company denied all allegations that had appeared in their local press, following which the MoD had sent them a second more detailed missive listing the allegations.
Story continues below this ad
The MoD hardened its posture as the Central Bureau of Investigation prepares to file its FIR against ‘‘unknown’’ persons of the MoD and Denel in court. CBI’s legal wing is understood to have put in a request to see the original contracts signed with Denel and are in favor of filing a Regular Case (RC) in court, instead of filing a Preliminary Enquiry (PE) as they did first in the Bofors case.