ROSEMARY PATRIZI, the Italian defence lawyer representing Christian Michel, says her client is “under pressure to name the Gandhi family”. Michel is an accused in the Rs3,600 crore AgustaWestland helicopter deal, and is currently in judicial custody. He was extradited to India from Dubai in early December, and Patrizi had flown down to represent her client. The CBI, which is investigating the case, objected to her representing Michel in an Indian court, and she returned to Italy shortly after.
Breaking her silence for the first time since leaving India, Patrizi spoke to THE WEEK about the “unfair approach” of the CBI and the deal the Indian investigators were allegedly trying to strike with Michel days before his extradition. Excerpts from an interview:
The CBI has objected to you representing Christian Michel in an Indian court. Your comments.
I have followed Michel’s practices from the beginning of the court proceedings in Italy. I have been in Italy, Switzerland, the UAE and now in India. I am his historical lawyer in these proceedings as well. But they (the CBI) have tried in every way to hinder my intervention.
What happened when you were in India?
The CBI told the judge that I was not a lawyer and that they intended to call me as a witness.
Christian Michel claimed he is being pressurised to sign certain documents. What were these documents?
Michel told me that when he was in Dubai, he was summoned by his local lawyers to a meeting at the Hyatt hotel on May 21 (2018). When he arrived, there were senior members of the UAE government present. He was given certain assurances before the meeting, about the potential extradition proceedings.
The delegation from India [consisted of officers] from the CBI. They brought with them a typed 20-page statement for him to sign. He was not allowed to keep a copy. The meeting was at 2pm. A UAE person took notes of the meeting. An Indian gentleman claimed that he was authorised to tell Michel that the Indian government was ready to remove him as a suspect and make him a witness. The Government of India would give an undertaking that he would not be arrested and that he would not be prevented from leaving India. Michel said that all of this was dependent on the signing of the statement. He said the statement involved the acceptance that all his contracts were a sham and that he had bribed senior Indian officials. None of this was true and he could not sign the statement. Another meeting was arranged and Michel attempted, with assistance, to draft a document that the Indians would accept. This proved impossible.
So you are saying Michel was guaranteed freedom if he signed the alleged confession papers?
Yes.
How many times did Indian investigators meet Michel before the arrest?
They met him once, in Dubai.
Do you think Michel is facing pressure in Indian custody?
The interrogation has caused him some pressure. In Europe, lawyers are always present and cannot be excluded. He was being interrogated for 11-hour periods and was denied proper access to his Indian lawyers. To suggest that his Indian lawyers could tutor him is laughable. There has been no disclosure in India. They do not have sufficient or real knowledge of the Italian proceedings and furthermore it is just an excuse to put more pressure on him. He is severely dyslexic, which makes reading large amounts of evidence extremely (difficult), particularly without the assistance of someone who can read normally. As he has nothing to fear, he has coped incredibly well.
What is the alleged political pressure Michel claims he is facing?
Every day in police custody, Michel said they asked him about the Gandhi family. They kept pressing him to say Gandhi.
Do you think he will name some powerful people?
He will not name powerful people as he has none to name. His knowledge of powerful people is all leaked information provided by third parties.
There are reports that Michel has named “the son of the Italian lady” in his recent confession to Indian investigators.
This is not true.
Do you think Michel will get justice in India?
Simple answer, no.
Can you tell us about the case proceedings in the Italian court?
The importance of the Italian proceedings is that they found that the crime of corruption had not taken place. Former Finmeccanica chairman Giuseppe Orsi and AgustaWestland CEO Bruno Spagnolini were actually tried, and there was no evidence of corruption. The judges heard all the witnesses, including the star witness Guido Haschke (another alleged middleman). What other people find difficult to understand is how the Italian legal system functions. Haschke did a patteggiamento. The literal translation is plea bargain. However, in Italian law, that is not an admission of guilt. It is a device that the lawyers agree on and put before a judge. In this case, Haschke accepted a two-year sentence. However, he knew he would not have to serve the sentence. When he gave evidence, he did not accept that corruption had taken place. Orsi and Spagnolini were acquitted, (after) the judges heard all the financial evidence relating to Christian Michel. The judgment makes clear that Christian Michel did not participate in corruption.
As a UK citizen, why did Michel not approach UK authorities in Dubai?
Michel was advised that his extradition from Europe was highly unlikely because of the Indian legal system and lack of safeguards for an accused person. For example, India does not abide by the European Convention on Human Rights. Michel chose to stay in Dubai, confident of his innocence.
Do you plan to return to India?
I will come back if necessary.
How do you compare the CBI with the FBI in the US or other investigating agencies in London or Italy?
The CBI is inferior to the other agencies you have mentioned. It is light-years away. It would appear there may well be corruption. The problem here is that they are conducting this investigation on the personal whim of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, whose agenda is political advantage and neither truth nor justice.