Sharad Pawar Snubs JPC Demand, Defends Adani Group Over Hindenburg Report Controversy

The Nationalist Congress Party's Sharad Pawar, has dismissed the joint parliamentary committee (JPC) demand following a dampened parliamentary session.

In addition, he has backed the Adani Group and criticised the narrative surrounding the US short-seller Hindenburg's report.

"Such statements were given by other individuals too earlier and there was a ruckus in parliament for a few days but this time out of proportion importance was given to the issue. The issues that were kept, who kept them, we had never heard of these people who gave the statement, what is the background.

"When they raise issues that cause a ruckus across the country, the cost is borne by the country's economy, we cannot disregard these things. It seems this was targeted," Mr Pawar told NDTV.  

"An individual industrial group of the country was targeted, that is what it seems. If they have done anything wrong, there should be an inquiry," he said. 

Pawar disagreed with the Congress's demand for a JPC probe into the Hindenburg report, stating he had a different viewpoint than his Maharashtra ally.

Following the raised demand, he said, a committee was appointed by the Supreme Court consisting of a retired judge, an expert, an administrator, and an economist with specific guidelines and a timeframe to conduct an inquiry.

"On the other hand, the opposition wanted a parliamentary committee to be appointed. If a parliamentary committee is appointed, then monitoring is with the ruling party. The demand was against the ruling party, and if the committee appointed for an inquiry has a ruling party majority, then how will the truth come out is a valid concern.

"If the Supreme Court, who no one can influence, if they were to conduct the inquiry, then there was a better chance of the truth coming to light. So, after the Supreme Court announced an inquiry, there was no significance of a JPC probe. It was not needed."  

Pawar disagreed with Gandhi's criticism of big businesses using the "Adani-Ambani" approach and found it pointless. He referred to the past "Tata-Birla" narrative.

"This has been happening in this country for many years. I remember many years ago that when we came into politics, if we had to speak against the government, we used to speak against Tata-Birla. Who was the target? Tata-Birla. When we understood the contribution of Tata, we used to wonder why we kept on saying Tata-Birla. But one had to target someone so we used to target Tata-Birla.

"Today the name of Tata-Birla is not at the forefront, different Tata-Birla's have come before the government. So these days if you have to attack the government, the name of Ambani and Adani is taken."  

Mr Pawar continued: "Today, Ambani has contributed in the petrochemical sector, does the country not need it? In the field of electricity, Adani has contributed. Does the country not need electricity? These are people who take up such responsibility and work for the name of the country. If they have done wrong, you attack, but they have created this infrastructure, to criticise them does not feel right to me." 

In an oblique reference to the Congress and its protests focused on a JPC probe, Mr Pawar said, "There can be different viewpoints, criticism, one has the right to speak strongly about the policies of the government, but a discussion should take place."

"It is everyone's responsibility that there is conflict in parliament... and ok, the session will not run that day, but to get the house to run the next day, whether you sit in the evening or the next day, there must be an effort to find a solution. This process of dialogue is absent these days," he added.