A 'huge muddle' but none is guilty

By Hasan Suroor

LONDON, MARCH 9. It is now official. Nobody committed any impropriety in the Hindujas' passport affair, according to the Hammond inquiry report officially released here this morning confirming the media leaks over the past two weeks. Its burden, as one commentator put it, was that though there was a ``huge muddle'' involving some very high-profile people in the end nobody was responsible for it - in effect, a smoking gun not traceable to anyone.

The main thrust of the report, frequently loaded with ambiguity, is that neither the former Minister, Mr. Peter Mandelson, nor the Foreign Office Minister, Mr. Keith Vaz, influenced the grant of British citizenship to the two Hinduja brothers, Mr. G.P. Hinduja and Mr. S.P. Hinduja. Also, there was no evidence to link the Hindujas' œ 1-million donation to the Millennium Dome in 1998 and the decision to give Mr. S.P. Hinduja a British passport a few months later. Mr. Mandelson, who was forced to resign for allegedly lying about a telephone call he made to the then Home Office Minister, Mr. Mike O'Brien, on behalf of Mr. S.P. Hinduja, is cleared of any wrongdoing.

On whether the Hinduja brothers should have been given British citizenship when they were being investigated in a major corruption case in India, the inquiry says that it was a matter of judgment of those who processed the applications. Sir Anthony Hammond QC, who led the inquiry and wrote the report, does not comment on the merit of the judgment. Much of the report is characterised by such non-judgmental equivocation tempting analysts to read between the lines. On Mr. Mandelson's crucial phone call to Mr. O'Brien, for instance, it acknowledges that he did not disclose it when questioned about it after the controversy erupted but says that his claim that he ``forgot'' about it was ``honestly held''.

Mr. Mandelson, who was in his parliamentary constituency of Hartlepool, was quick to seize the report as a vindication of his reputation and reacted to it with a ``sense of gratitude and relief.'' He thanked Sir Anthony for clearing him as he had consistently maintained that he had been sacked on the strength of inadequate evidence and was a victim of a ``conspiracy'' by detractors in the Government. With his reputation cleared, he said he wished to ``draw the line'' under the episode which he described as a ``muddle''.

However, he made it clear that he had ``no desire'' to return to the Government as he felt there were ``other ways to serve New Labour''. He intended to contest the Hartlepool seat again. The former Northern Ireland Secretary read out extracts from the report exonerating him. Among other things, it said Mr. Mandelson ``behaved perfectly'' and did not try to influence anyone at any point or make any representation on Hindujas' behalf. Sir Anthony did ``not believe'' that Mr. Mandelson ``was seeking to be evasive or set out to mislead.'' He found ``no evidence'' of an improper relationship with the Hindujas brothers and no trace of any letter by Mr. Keith Vaz to the Prime Minister on behalf of the Hindujas.

Downing Street said the report would allow Mr. Mandelson to ``rebuild his life without a stain on his character.''

The report was seen as an embarrassment for the Prime Minister who, in retrospect, appeared to have acted in ``panic'' to force out Mr. Mandelson from the Cabinet allegedly under pressure from those who did not like him. The Prime Minister's official spokesman, Mr. Alastair Campbell, was said to have played a crucial role.

Even as there was a view that Mr. Mandelson should be taken back, the ``official'' perception seemed to rule this out. The report was widely seen as a ``clever'' piece of work which let everybody off the hook while at the same time leaving people guessing. The Liberal Democrat MP, Mr. Norman Baker, whose parliamentary question brought the controversy into the open said it left many questions unanswered - and the most important was how a business family could gain access to the heart of the Government.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : International
Next     : Policies of developed countries discriminatory,
           says Sinha