Attorney General of India, KK Venugopal, has reportedly told the Supreme Court that the documents relating to the Rafale deal were stolen from the Ministry of Defence and that the petitioners seeking review of the apex court verdict dismissing all the pleas against the purchase of Rafale jets relied upon these stolen documents. The attorney general also said that those who put the documents about the Rafale deal in public domain are guilty under the Official Secrets Act and also for the contempt of court. When Bhushan referred to an article authored by N. Ram in The Hindu, Venugopal stated that it was based upon stolen documents. He also said that the document was published by omitting the word ‘secret’ on top.
However, N. Ram, Chairman of The Hindu Publishing Group said that the documents were published in public interest and that nobody would get information about the confidential sources who had provided the said documents. He said, “We are fully committed, absolutely committed to protect the confidentiality of our sources…. No force on Earth is going to change our mind on that.” He also said, “You may call it stolen documents…we are not concerned. We got it from confidential sources and we are committed to protecting these sources. Nobody is going to get any information from us on these sources. But the documents speak for themselves and the stories speak for themselves.” He further argued that the documents have been published in public interest because the concerned details were withheld or covered up. N. Ram added, “… It is the duty of the press – through investigative journalism – to bring out relevant information or issues of great importance for the public interest.”
Today, N Ram might argue about not revealing the confidentiality of his sources, but the account provided by journalist Chitra Subramaniam, who had broken the Bofors story, clearly suggests that N. Ram had acted in a totally different manner during the Bofors case. Chitra Subramaniam tweeted, “#Bofors #India was a ten-year investigation. N. Ram and I worked on it together only for some 20 months. My principle source in Sweden was Sten Lindstrom. N. Ram shared his name in Delhi without telling me.”
#Bofors #India was a ten year investigation. N. Ram and I worked on it together only for some 20 months. My principle source in Sweden was Sten Lindstrom. N. Ram shared his name in Delhi without telling me. 1/n #journalism #InternationalWomensDay2019
— Chitra Subramaniam (@chitraSD) March 6, 2019
In another tweet, Chitra Subramaniam said, “#Bofors My security and that of Sten Lindstrom was severely compromised by N Ram. I was not allowed to call Sten Lindstrom while he figured out who was responsible for outing his name.”
#Bofors My security and that of Sten Lindstrom was severely compromised by N. Ram. I was not allowed to call Sten Lindstrom while he figured out who was responsible for outing his name. 2/n #journalism #InternationalWomensDay2019
— Chitra Subramaniam (@chitraSD) March 6, 2019
Her allegations make it clear how her security had been compromised owing to shoddy and sub-standard journalism on N Ram’s part. At that time he did not care at all for his sources. By exposing their identity, N Ram had seriously compromised their security. His conduct post the Bofors story and his stress on maintaining the confidentiality of the sources after the Rafale story is poles apart.
