Wife went for climate project, I visited once: Gaurav Gogoi on Pak link claim
Taking a swipe at Himanta Biswa Sarma, Gogoi said that the BJP leader 'has this old habit of deceiving people'.He referred to Himanta Biswa Sarma's previous claim that Rahul Gandhi was using a "body double" for his Bharat Jodo Nyay Yatra in 2024.'Now, as he is making false allegations against me, I believe he thinks of my 'body double' too,' Gogoi was quoted as saying by news agency ANI.In response to Gogoi's remarks on Wednesday, Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma issued a fresh statement, saying: 'Finally, Congress MP Gaurav Gogoi has admitted that he visited Pakistan. But let us be very clear — this is just the beginning, not the end.'advertisementClaiming that 'credible inputs and documented information' point to Gogoi's proximity with the Pakistani establishment, Sarma said the Assam government would make everything public on September 10 once a Special Investigation Team concludes its inquiry.'The people of Assam and the nation deserve the truth — and they shall have it, in full,' he added, warning that the Congress and Rahul Gandhi would be held accountable for promoting a 'compromised individual'.GAURAV GOGOI VS HIMANTA BISWA SARMAHimanta Biswa Sarma has repeatedly alleged that Gaurav Gogoi's wife, Elizabeth Colburn, has links to Pakistan's spy agency. Sarma alleged that Colburn made 19 trips between India and Pakistan and had connections with the Pakistani Army and ISI.Sarma also accused Gogoi of visiting Pakistan on the invitation of the ISI and undergoing training there. He claimed Gogoi received an invitation letter from Pakistan's Home Department and stayed there for 15 days without informing Indian authorities.The Assam Chief Minister said Gogoi opposed the Rafale deal after returning from Pakistan and further alleged that his wife received a salary from a Pakistan-based NGO while working in India.Himanta Biswa Sarma has offered to resign as Assam Chief Minister if any of his claims are proven false and said the SIT's findings would be revealed by September 10.advertisementGaurav Gogoi has dismissed the allegations, calling them 'ridiculous, baseless and nonsense'. He questioned why the Centre — which he said was aware of his visit — took no issue with it at the time.'Since becoming an MP in 2014, I have followed all official protocols, submitted all my passports and used a diplomatic passport. Every detail is documented and available with the relevant authorities,' Gogoi said.He accused Sarma of trying to 'run from the public and avoid responsibility' by deferring evidence to September 10. He also demanded two SITs led by retired judges — one to investigate him and another to probe the Chief Minister.He accused Himanta Biswa Sarma of targeting his late father, former Chief Minister Tarun Gogoi, and even his minor grandchildren out of 'deep insecurity'.'I am the son of Tarun Gogoi. I will not be intimidated. The truth will prevail,' Gaurav Gogoi said.Must Watch
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
6 minutes ago
- The Hindu
House of wars: on Parliament, Operation Sindoor discussion
The government and the Opposition crossed swords in Parliament during a discussion on Operation Sindoor this week. There was unanimity in praising India's armed forces, but there was little common ground beyond that. Operation Sindoor was India's military response to the terrorist attack in Pahalgam, on April 22, 2025, which claimed 26 lives. The elimination of three terrorists behind the attack, just before the parliamentary debate, helped the government's case. It told Parliament that these terrorists were Lashkar-e-Taiba members from Pakistan. The Narendra Modi government's strident approach seeks to change the behaviour of Pakistan and reassure its domestic audience. The success of this approach is debatable and the Opposition sought to put the government on the spot on both counts. A demonstrated willingness to use force against Pakistan in the event of a terrorism incident is a definitive turn in India's strategy, and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) takes pride in that. But there is no evidence yet that it is working though there has been chest thumping around it by the ruling party. The discussion in Parliament barely addressed the implications of this approach, which is being touted as the new normal. The Opposition and the government agreed on the need to punish Pakistan, and also disagreed on who would do it better. The government claimed success in meeting its objectives of launching a military operation and denied that it had acted under pressure in ending the war. Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi demanded a pointed response to repeated claims by U.S. President Donald Trump that he mediated the ceasefire but the Prime Minister evaded a direct response on it. The government contradicts itself when it says that the operation was a success, and that it is continuing. It is also exasperating to hear a party that is now in its eleventh year of uninterrupted power, blame people who passed away decades ago for any challenge that India faces now. There was little self-reflection regarding the lapses that led to the terrorism incident, and whether and how the government plans to address them. The government had sent joint teams including several MPs from the Opposition abroad to garner support for India in the aftermath of the operation, but that sign of statesmanship was a short-lived aberration, as it turns out. The world is changing rapidly and India's capacity to navigate those changes will be largely determined by its own character. Questioning the patriotism of political opponents is an easy route to take to evade tough questions, but the BJP must realise that such an approach has diminishing returns.
The Hindu
6 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Indian fuel exports escape Trump's tariff net, no Russian penalty yet
India's exports of petroleum products such as diesel and jet fuel to the U.S. continue to be exempted from the levy of any import duty or tariff, and President Donald Trump has, for now, not indicated the penalty he plans to impose to deter New Delhi's energy trade with Russia. On Wednesday, Mr. Trump had announced plans to impose a 25% tariff on India, along with an additional penalty, citing concerns over the country's energy and defence ties with Russia, as well as existing trade barriers. However, the executive order he signed thereafter only gives effect to the 25% tariff on Indian goods coming to the U.S. Even this has an exclusion list that includes finished pharmaceutical products (tablets, injectables and syrups), active pharmaceutical ingredients, electronics and ICT goods (semiconductors, smartphones, SSDs and computers), and petroleum products (crude oil, LNG, refined fuels, electricity and coal). The executive order also does not indicate any penalty that is to be levied for Russian trade. According to official data, India exported 4.86 million tonnes of petroleum products to the U.S. in fiscal year 2024-25 (April 2024 to March 2025) for over $4 billion. Reliance Industries Ltd is the biggest exporter of fuel to the U.S. With fuel exports continuing to be on the exemption list, it means business as usual for India and companies like Reliance, analysts said. Also, a relief would be if no penalty is imposed to punish India for its oil imports from Russia, they said, adding that for now, the U.S. administration has not indicated any penalty. "For now, there is nothing but you never know," an analyst said. From just 0.2% before the Russia-Ukraine war to now accounting for 35-40% of total crude imports, India's reliance on Russian oil has surged — drawing fresh scrutiny with Mr. Trump announcing a penalty on top of a 25% tariff, or tax, on all goods going to the U.S. India historically bought most of its oil from the Middle East, including Iraq and Saudi Arabia. However, things changed when Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022. India, the world's third-largest crude importer after China and the U.S., began snapping up Russian oil that was available at a discount after some in the West shunned it as a means to punish Moscow for its invasion of Ukraine. From a market share of just 0.2% in India's import basket before the start of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, Russia overtook Iraq and Saudi Arabia to become India's No.1 supplier, with a share as high as 40% at one point of time. This month, Russia supplied 36% of all crude oil, which is converted into fuels like petrol and diesel, that India imported. Announcing the imposition of 25% tariff or tax on all Indian goods going to the U.S., Mr. Trump had said New Delhi "always bought a vast majority of their military equipment from Russia, and are Russia's largest buyer of energy, along with China, at a time when everyone wants Russia to STOP THE KILLING IN UKRAINE." "India will therefore be paying a tariff of 25%, plus a penalty for the above (Russian purchases), starting on August First," he said in a post on social media. India bought 68,000 barrels per day of crude oil from Russia in January 2022, according to global real-time data and analytics provider Kpler. That month, Indian imports from Iraq were 1.23 million bpd and 883,000 bpd from Saudi Arabia. In June 2022, Russia overtook Iraq to become India's largest oil supplier. That month, it supplied 1.12 million bpd as compared to 993,000 bpd that came from Iraq and 695,000 bpd from Saudi Arabia. Russian imports peaked to 2.15 million bpd in May 2023 and have varied since then, depending on the discount at which the oil was available. But the volumes never slipped below 1.4 million bpd, which is more than what India was buying from its top supplier Iraq before the Russia-Ukraine conflict. In July, imports from Russia averaged 1.8 million bpd, almost double of 950,000 bpd imports from Iraq. Saudi imports stood at 630,000 bpd, according to Kpler. After the Ukraine war, Western energy sanctions against Russia pushed it to cut prices for those buyers still willing to purchase its crude. The discounts on Russia's flagship Urals crude to Brent — the world's most well-known benchmark — were as high as $40 per barrel at one point but have been trimmed since to less than $ 3. G7 countries in December 2022 imposed a $60 per barrel price cap on Russian crude. Under the mechanism, European companies were permitted to transport and insure shipments of Russian oil to third countries as long as it is sold below the capped price — an effort to limit the impact of the sanctions on global oil flows but ensure Russia earns less from the trade. Last month, the European Union decided to lower the price cap to $47.6 and introduced an automatic and dynamic mechanism for its review in the future. The idea is to keep the cap at 15% lower than the average market price. In addition to stoking India's economy, cheap Russian oil gave refiners lucrative business — refining that crude and exporting the products to deficit countries. These included the European Union, which had banned direct crude oil purchases from Russia. This month, the European Union decided to ban the import of refined oil produced from Russian crude.
The Hindu
6 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Delhi court dismisses defamation case filed by AAP's Satyendra Jain against BJP MP Bansuri Swaraj
A Delhi court on Thursday dismissed an appeal filed by Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Satyendar Kumar Jain in a defamation case against Bharatiya Janata Party MP Bansuri Swaraj, citing that merely repeating information already in the public domain does not amount to defamation. The court also criticised the Enforcement Directorate (ED), which had initially posted on X the information shared by the BJP MP, saying that the central agency holds the responsibility of sharing only accurate and non-misleading information with the public. Special Judge Jitendra Singh of the Rouse Avenue Courts observed that sufficient ground does not exist for taking cognisance of the offence as defined and punishable under Section 356 of the BNS. The case filed by Mr. Jain is based on 'defamatory' comments about him during a television interview by Ms. Swaraj. The AAP leader stated that during the interview, Ms. Swaraj allegedly claimed that ₹3 crore in cash, 1.8 kilograms of gold, and 133 gold coins were recovered from the AAP leader's house. The ED also shared this information on its social media handle. Mr. Jain alleged that the statement made on TV had damaged his reputation. Mr. Jain had challenged a trial court order that rejected his criminal defamation complaint against the BJP MP earlier this year. In a strongly worded message, the court said that it is incumbent upon an investigative agency such as the ED to act impartially and uphold the principles of fairness and due process. 'Any dissemination of information, including but not limited to official social media platforms, must be accurate, non-misleading, and free from sensationalism,' the court said. 'The presentation of facts in a manner that is misleading, scandalous, or inten to defame or politically prejudice an individual would not only undermine the integrity of the agency but may also amount to an abuse of power and violation of the individual's fundamental rights, including the right to reputation under Article 21 of the Constitution,' it said. While dismissing the defamation case, the court added that there was no 'willful misrepresentation or malicious intent' of the accused, hence Ms. Swaraj cannot be held liable for the alleged offence of defamation. 'If at all any statement is perceived as defamatory, the liability, if any, would lie with the source agency, i.e., the ED, which originally disseminated the information. The proposed accused, being a secondary communicator of officially released material, cannot be fastened with criminal liability, especially in the absence of intent to harm the reputation of the Complainant,' it added.
