Amar: More trouble

New Delhi, Dec. 23: The Centre is in a spot over ally Amar Singh’s alleged contribution of at least $1 million (Rs 4.8 crore) to the William J. Clinton Foundation because of concern this may have created a “conflict of interest” for US secretary of state-designate Hillary Clinton.

Revelations of the alleged contribution came smack in the middle of the Parliament session, but the BJP was too busy gunning for A.R. Antulay to bother with Amar Singh, whose name appears on the list of donors released by the Clinton foundation.

According to the list, the Samajwadi Party general secretary donated between $1 million and $5 million (Rs 24 crore). The foundation did not specify the amount.

A former Congress worker, Vishwanath Chaturvedi, has now asked the Election Commission to probe Amar’s accounts and find how he gave away such a large chunk of his wealth. In an affidavit the Samajwadi MP recently filed with the Rajya Sabha, Amar said his assets were valued at Rs 35 crore.

“He would be a saint or a mahatma to make such a gesture. Either the affidavit has incorrect information or the foundation is making up the amount,” Chaturvedi said.

Amar could not be reached for comment. But he has in the past been quoted as saying he does not have so much money to donate.

Government sources said the alleged donation was discussed in a core group meeting of senior ministers, to which Amar was called to explain. Amar maintained he had not given any money and no cheque could be traced to him, so the government need not lose sleep, sources said.

Asked how his name was on the list, Amar said “maybe” he facilitated the payment and therefore it “erroneously” appeared in the records.

The sources said the government would have to come into the picture if the Election Commission took cognisance of Chaturvedi’s complaint and sought an answer. Behind the scenes, its financial and legal brains have started working on a response.

The government could have problems on two counts: a possible violation of RBI guidelines which do not allow repatriation in excess of $200,000 in a year, and, secondly, the insinuation that Amar could have swung the Democrats’ support for the Indo-US nuclear deal as a quid pro quo.

The US media has reported that last September, Amar was in America to “lobby” for the deal and had met Senator Hillary Clinton who promised him the Democrats would not block its passage.

The Samajwadis had bailed out the government in Parliament after the Left withdrew support over the deal.

Chaturvedi, a former Uttar Pradesh Congress functionary, is the Samajwadi Party’s bete noire. He had moved a PIL against party chief Mulayam Singh Yadav and his family for owning assets “disproportionate” to their known sources of income. He also filed a PIL against Amar for declaring himself a person from the economically weaker section in 1994 to acquire a prime plot in Lucknow.

After the Congress and the Samajwadis came together, Chaturvedi was “advised” to stay off the Congress headquarters on Akbar Road. “In 2002 itself, I sundered my links with the Congress,” he said.