Anatomy of AgustaWestland helicopter deal
- LIVE: ISI supports LeT, JeM and Hizbul, David Headley tells court
- J&K govt formation: Ram Madhav to hold talks with Mehbooba Mufti to break impasse
- Soldier, who survived Siachen avalanche, being flown to Delhi hospital
- DDCA row: Delhi HC dismisses Kirti Azad's plea seeking court-monitored probe
- Net bad assets of govt banks a third of their net worth
2006: Agusta officials 'tie up' with Haschke and Gerosa, sign consultancy contracts. Deal is that Euro 51 million commission will be paid, partly through engineering consultancy contracts for bagging the deal. UK-based consultant Christian Michel too enters the picture.
2007: After the down selection of AgustaWestland for the contract along with an American contender, payments start funneling in from the consultancy contracts. At first they are small — ranging from Euro 111,000 to 286,987 — but over next few years swell up to an average of Euro 550,000 per month.
2009-10: Contract is bagged by AgustaWestland. Payments made through engineering contracts continue.
2011: An Agusta insider spills the beans to Italian investigators. Inquiry is ordered, including wire traps, phone taps, car bugging and electronic surveillance.
2012: Italian prosecutors start filing cases. Name Indian players, reveal a nexus of arms agents and fixers.
2013: Finmeccanica CEO held, former Indian Air Chief named as receiving bribes.
ORSI Giuseppe, CEO and president of Finmeccanica from May 4, 2011, previously CEO of AgustaWestland Holdings NV from 2005 to May 2011
SPAGNOLINI Bruno, CEO from May 2011 of AgustaWestland Holdings NV based in Holland
HASCHKE Guido Ralph, chief and partner of Gadit SA of Lugano and Gordian Services SARL based in Tunis
GEROSA Carlo, Haschke's partner in the above companies
Plea in SC against deal
A DELHI lawyer on Wednesday filed a PIL in the Supreme Court in the controversial AgustaWestland VVIP chopper deal and demanded quashing of the entire procurement contract, besides an investigation by a Special Investigation Team (SIT).
The petition by advocate M L Sharma claimed it was imperative for a fair investigation into the matter that a SIT, under the monitoring of the apex court, is set up in the wake of the failure of the government to act in the matter until now.