[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 74 (Thursday, May 23, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H5549-H5551]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
INDIAN EMBASSY CAUGHT RED-HANDED
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Burton] is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, for many years I have talked
about the horrible human rights violations that have been talking place
around the world, but in particular in a place called Punjab in Kashmir
and Nagaland in India. Because of that, I have been the target of
people who support the Indian lobby in the United States.
At one time, my life was threatened, as well as that of my wife and
my children, and they have supported my opponents in campaigns year in
and year out. I understand that because I have been talking about the
gang raping of women that has been taking place over there, the
tortures of individuals who have been taken out of their homes in the
middle of the night to be tortured to death never to be seen again, and
the placing of about 1.1 million Indian troops in Punjab and Kashmir
and Nagaland to repress those people up there because all they want is
freedom, democracy and human rights.
But today, Mr. Speaker, I found out some additional things that need
to be brought to the attention of my colleagues and the American
people. I found out, Mr. Speaker, that the Indian Embassy has been
caught red-handed violating America's national sovereignty and
democratic values. Newspapers have reported that a Maryland political
fundraiser named Lalit Gadhia confessed that the Embassy provided over
$46,000, which he used to reimburse friends of associates for political
contributions that he solicited.
These contributions went to pro-India Members of Congress and to a
political action committee, the Indian American Leadership Investment
Fund. India's violations of democratic principles have now come to the
United States of America. The scheme was run by former Indian
Ambassador S.S. Ray and Embassy official Devendra Singh. It is illegal
for noncitizens to contribute to U.S. political campaigns or for anyone
to make a contribution in another person's name. Yet this is not the
first time that the Indian Embassy has been caught interfering in U.S.
political campaigns.
Earlier this year, it came to light that former Ambassador Ray urged
Indian Americans to support a candidate in the South Dakota senate
race, and the Embassy sent out a letter attacking a member of this
House who is running for senator in New Jersey.
Mr. Speaker, now they are infecting the American political process
with foreign money. They must believe that America is corrupt. This
interference leads one to believe that the Indian journalist Rajinder
Puri of the Times of India was right when he described India as, ``A
rotten, corrupt, repressive and antipeople system.''
The U.S. Government must make it clear that India's interference in
American politics is unacceptable. I urge my colleagues to support H.R.
1425, which will cut off U.S. development aid to India until it
respects human rights, and House Concurrent Resolution 32, which calls
for self-determination for the Sikhs of Khalistan. These two measures
will show the Indian Government that their disregard for human rights
and democratic principles are not to be tolerated.
In addition, India illegally tried to influence congressional
elections and that will not be tolerated as well. I hope that the new
government of India will correct these practices and that India and the
United States can begin to live together in mutual respect for freedom,
democracy and human rights, and that the new government will respect
the sovereignty of other nations and not be in fear in our elective
process.
Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record the articles referred to
earlier and a press release from the Council of Khalistan of the Gadhia
case:
[From the Washington Times, May 9, 1996]
Democrat Guilty of Laundering Contributions
(By Mary Pemberton)
Baltimore.--A Democratic Party activist pleaded guilty
yesterday to devising a scheme to funnel $46,000 in illegal
contributions to a political action committee and several
federal election campaigns.
[[Page H5550]]
Lalit H. Gadhia, 57, who had been Gov. Parris Glendening's
campaign treasurer, pleaded guilty in federal court to one
count of causing a false statement to be made to the Federal
Election Commission, U.S. Attorney Lynne A. Battaglia said.
He faces up to five years in prison and a $250,000 fine at
sentencing Aug. 6.
None of the money in question went to the governor's
campaign. But Maryland Republican Party Chairman Joyce Lyons
Terhes said Gadhia's activities are indicative of the type of
people Mr. Glendening surrounds himself with.
``I think it is one more example of the flawed
administration of Glendening,'' she said.
But a state Democratic Party spokesman said it has nothing
to do with Mr. Glendening and, if anything, reflects
positively on the party.
``It is very unfortunate that he became overzealous, but
the Clinton administration does not back off . . . even
though this guy has been a strong supporter of Democrats,''
David Paulson said.
The FBI said Gadhia approached the Indian-American
Leadership Fund in the fall of 1994 and persuaded the New
Mexico PAC to contribute to candidates other than Indian-
Americans, as long as he did the fund raising.
For three weeks in October 1994, Gadhia presented the PAC
with checks totaling $34,900, which he said were
contributions from a number of individuals. He also provided
names, addresses and occupations for those individuals so
that the PAC could file the required reports with the FEC.
The PAC, in return, made political contributions to federal
candidates selected by Gadhia in the November elections.
For the most part, the money donated to the PAC did not
come from the contributors, prosecutors, said. At least
$31,400 of the funds provided to the PAC were laundered by
individuals who issued checks to the Indian-American
Leadership Fund and then were reimbursed in cash for their
contributions by Gadhia or his intermediaries, according to
the FBI.
Prosecutors said Gadhia used the same type of scheme to
launder $15,000 in illegal contributions that he provided
directly to a number of federal election campaigns.
____
U.S. Concern on Embassy Political Role
(By Aziz Haniffa)
Washington.--Barely two weeks into his term after
presenting his credentials to President Clinton, India's new
Ambassador, Naresh Chandra, received a strong complaint from
the Clinton Administration about its concern over the Indian
Embassy's alleged interference in the American political
process.
State Department officials said that Robin Raphel,
Assistant Secretary of State for South Asian Affairs and the
Administration's point person for the subcontinent, had
called Chandra to raise the issue about the Justice
Department's finding that an Indian diplomat at the embassy
here was the source of thousand of dollars of illegal
campaign contributions funneled through an Indian-American
political action committee by a longtime Democratic Party
activist.
On May 8, in a submission of a ``statement of facts'' filed
in court as the basis for a guilty plea entered by Lalit H.
Gadhia, 58, the office of the U.S. District Attorney in
Baltimore, Maryland, said, ``The evidence indicates that the
source of the cash used by Mr. Gadhia to finance the nominee
contributions was Devendra Singh, an individual assigned to
the Indian Embassy in Washington.'' Singh, who was Minister,
Community Affairs, at the embassy from late 1990 to early
1995, returned to India to take up the position of Director-
General of Police in Rajasthan.
State Department officials said that Raphel had called
Chandra ``to express our strong concern about this allegation
of an Indian Embassy official being involved'' in a money-
laundering scheme to make campaign contributions to pro-India
American lawmakers.
One official said that ``at this point, (the Raphel call to
Chandra) this is about it,'' as far as any raising of the
issue with the embassy is concerned. However, the official
acknowledged that ``anything further will depend on what
unfolds legally. So we'll have to see about that.''
State Department spokesman Nicholas Burns said the matter
was ``a criminal case'' and that aspect would be handled by
the Department of Justice. But he said, ``On the diplomatic
side of this, the diplomatic aspect of it, we have contacted
the Indian Embassy here in Washington and expressed our very
strong concern about this particular case.'' The embassy
spokesman, Shiv Shankar Mukherjee, declined comment on
Raphel's call to Chandra and only reiterated his earlier
statement that ``the Indian Embassy always has and continues
to operate strictly within the basis of diplomatic
propriety.''
On May 8, U.S. Attorney Lynne A. Battaglia, whose office
prosecuted the case, told The Baltimore Sun, which first
broke the story about this money-laundering plan, ``The fact
that the money came from the Indian Embassy and that so many
people were manipulated into participating in the scheme
takes this case to a higher level than we normally see in
these kinds of investigations.''
In an interview with India Abroad, she had said that ``we
don't normally have crimes involving diplomats,'' and
acknowledged that as far as she could remember, such a case
of a diplomat trying to circumvent U.S. election laws was
unprecedented.
The State Department official said that if Singh had
remained in Washington as an embassy official, even though he
would have enjoyed diplomatic immunity, ``it would have
raised other issues about his status in the country and
things like that,'' that could have resulted in the U.S.
calling for his expulsion.
``But as things stand right now,'' the official said,
Raphel's strong expression of concern was the extent of the
State Department's action in the case, which had been
referred to it by the Justice Department.
Raphel's call to Chandra expressing the Administration's
strong concern comes close on the heels of the State
Department in March informing a senior member of Congress
that the Indian Embassy had given assurances that it was not
interfering in America's political process.
In a letter to India's most acerbic critic in Congress,
Rep. Dan Burton, Republican of Indiana, Barbara Larkin,
acting Assistant Secretary for Legislative Affairs, said,
``We have raised the episodes you mention and have been
reassured of India's commitment to noninterference in the
domestic political affairs on any state.''
On Feb. 13, Burton, a member of the House International
Relations Committee, wrote to Secretary of State Warren
Christopher complaining of a ``series of actions taken by the
Embassy of India, which I believe clearly constitute
inappropriate involvement in domestic U.S. politics.'' He
urged Christopher, at his ``earliest opportunity,'' to
protest ``this breach of protocol with the Indian
government.''
First, he said, ``Ambassador Siddhartha Shankar Ray openly
and actively endorsed Senator Larry Pressler's bid for re-
election in South Dakota'' in a December speech to the
Indian-American Forum for Political Education in Boston. Ray
told the audience to ``please make sure Larry Pressler
(Republican from South Dakota) goes to the Senate again,''
Burton said.
Second, he reported, the embassy has ``actively sought to
intervene in the current Senate race in New Jersey.'' Burton
said the deputy chief of mission, Shyamala Cowsik, had
circulated a letter to the Indian-American community
criticizing Democratic Representative Robert Torricelli for
his ``record'' in attacking alleged human rights abuses in
India. Cowsik's letter, Burton contended, ``not so subtly
notes that Torricelli is running for the Senate this
year,'' and added, ``It can only be assumed that these
instances of political interference that have come to
light point to a broader pattern of political
involvement.''
Torricelli is running for the Senate seat being vacated by
the retiring Democratic Senator Bill Bradley. He has co-
sponsored legislation by Burton calling for the suspension of
American development aid to India unless it alleviates rights
conditions.
In his letter to Christopher, Burton insisted that he was
``not writing out of partisan considerations,'' and noted
that, as a Republican, the embassy's actions were intended to
benefit Republican candidates in both races.
``There is a larger principal at stake,'' he declared. ``It
is a serious violation of diplomatic protocol for an
ambassador to attempt to influence or intervene in domestic
political contests. The voters of New Jersey and South Dakota
should have the opportunity to make up their own minds
without foreign interference.''
He said that had the American Ambassador to India attempted
``to sway an election, there would be howls to protest.''
In her reply to Burton, Larkin said the State Department
appreciated ``the nonpartisan nature of your concern.''
____
Ex-Envoy Denies U.S. Campaign Tie
(By P.B. Chandra)
Jaipur.--Devendra Singh, a former senior diplomat of the
Indian Embassy in Washington, has denied his involvement in
the illegal campaign contributions funneled through the
Indian American Political Action Committee (PAC).
Singh is currently the Director-General of Police of
Rajasthan. He served as a Minister, Community Affairs in the
Indian mission from 1990 to 1995 before returning to India.
Singh told ``India Abroad'' he did not give any money to
Lalit H. Gadhia, a longtime Democratic party activist, in
illegal campaign contributions. Reacting to media reports
that Gadhia had pleaded guilty to illegally raising the funds
and named Singh as the diplomat who gave Gadhia the money,
Singh said his job as Minister, Community Affairs demanded
that he should meet various people but he never paid any
amount to anyone for financing any candidate's election.
Singh was the security officer of late Prime Minister Rajiv
Gandhi before being transferred to the Washington mission.
When asked about an air freight receipt and copy of the
report sent by Gadhia to him and which was subsequently
seized by U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation agents in
Gadhia's office, Singh said he knew nothing about the air
freight receipt and reports. When Singh was asked whether he
could be called to court to give evidence against Gadhia, he
said the case related to the period when he enjoyed complete
diplomatic immunity.
When asked whether it was true that Gadhia has implicated
him while making the
[[Page H5551]]
guilty plea in the court, Singh said that in all such cases
the Indian mission was answerable. Singh said then Indian
Ambassador Siddhartha Siddhartha Shankar Ray had clarified
the Indian mission's viewpoint and there was nothing much
left to be added to that.
____
Indian Embassy Caught Red-Handed--Fund Raiser Admits Illegally
Laundering Political Contributions
Washington, D.C., May 14--Lalit H. Gadhia, a major
political fundraiser in Maryland, has confessed that he
laundered over $46,000 in political contributions from the
Indian Embassy to Members of Congress, Thursday's Baltimore
Sun reported. Gadhia, 57, former campaign treasurer for
Maryland Governor Parris Glendening and a Baltimore
immigration lawyer, confessed to the scheme in the U.S.
District Court in Baltimore, according to the report.
Under the plan, Gadhia used money provided by the Indian
Embassy here to reimburse Indian Americans and Indians living
in the United States for contributions they made to the
candidates the Embassy supported. According to the report,
the Embassy, through Gadhia, illegally gave $31,400 to the
Indian American Leadership Investment Fund, a Los Angeles-
based political action committee, which then distributed it
to candidates. It is illegal for noncitizens to contribute to
U.S. political campaigns or for anyone to make a contribution
in another person's name.
The Embassy officials in charge of the scheme, former
Ambassador S.S. Ray and former Embassy staffer Devendra
Singh, have both returned to India. Mr. Ray was a losing
candidate for Parliament in the recent elections and Mr.
Singh holds a high-ranking position with the Rajasthan state
police. On February 19, 1995, Indian Foreign Minister R.L.
Bhatia said at a press conference that ``there is a strong
anti-India lobby in the United States. We are spending large
sums of money through Ambassador Ray to neutralize it.''
During the time that Mr. Ray was Governor of Punjab. Sikhs
spoke of ``the three Rs--Ray, Ribeiro, and Rajiv''--a very
repressive trio. Julian Ribeiro was Director General of
Police at the time. He and Mr. Ray are responsible for
instituting the tactic of the fake ``encounter'' in Punjab.
In a fake encounter, a Sikh will be killed by the police or
while in custody, then they will report that he died in an
``encounter,'' thus providing cover for the killing.
Dr. Gurmit Singh Aulakh, President of the Council of
Khalistan, the government in exile of Khalistan, confronted
Mr. Ray in the hall of the Longworth House Office Building,
calling him ``the Butcher of Punjab.'' The confrontation was
picked up by the media. Mr. Ray returned to India shortly
after that confrontation. The new ambassador, Naresh Chandra,
brought his brother, Girish Chandra Saxena, to the Embassy
with him. Girish Saxena is a former head of India's Research
and Analysis Wing (RAW), which infiltrated Sikh militant
organizations before the ``Operation Bluestar'' attack on the
Golden Temple and 38 other Sikh temples throughout Punjab,
Khalistan, in June 1984 in which over 20,000 Sikhs were
killed. Ambassador Chandra himself has recently been
implicated in illegal smuggling of CFCs from India to the
United States. CFCs have been banned in the United States
since January 1. According to the Customs Service, CFCs are
now the number two problem after illegal drugs.
``Mr. Gadhia's confession shows the moral bankruptcy of the
Indian regime,'' said Dr. Aulakh. ``India has been murdering
Sikhs and other minorities for many years. The recent payoff
scandal that helped to bring down the Congress Party showed
the world that in addition to being a brutal tyranny, India
is corrupt and its claim to be a `democracy' is hollow. This
money-laundering campaign contribution scheme shows India's
total disregard for democratic principles in other countries
as well,'' Dr. Aulakh said. ``Obviously, the regime believes
that everyone is as corrupt as they are,'' he stated. ``These
practices are unacceptable, and I hope that Mr. Gadhia's
confession will not be the end of the investigation. The
Embassy is deeply involved in this scheme, and its
involvement should be exposed and punished.''
____________________