The judgment of the Milan Court of Appeals in the VVIP chopper deal reveals a big nexus of middlemen and so-called defence consultants who had easy access to politicians, bureaucrats and military brass in India and Italy.The order also shows that middlemen dropped names of politicians on both sides, suggesting influence up to the top, and their conviction that the right connections were essential in landing the deal.

The judgment lists taped conversations, handwritten notes by accused and statements to Italian prosecutors of European middlemen Christian Michel, Guido Haschke and Peter Hullet, the then India head of AgustaWestland. One handwritten note in particular provides an estimate of expenditure in paying In dian officials for swinging the Rs 3,600 crore deal in favour of AgustaWestland.

The handwritten note of Michel, using abbreviations for names of Indian officials and designations, says the IAF was allotted 6 million euros and the bureaucracy, including defence ministry officials, were to be allotted 8.4 million euros. The note differentiates the designation of bureaucrats like DG (acquisitions), defence secretary (DS) and joint secretary (JS). Among others whom Michel spoke of in terms of making payments for a `share’ of kickbacks include a category called `POL’ (politicians) -where 3 million euros were earmarked for a person identified as `AP’, while 15-16 million euros were shown against `FAM’ (allegedly family of a top IAF officer).

The judgment also lists a conversation where Michel discusses Congress mem bers. “As Mrs Gandhi is the driving force behind the VIP, she will not fly any more in the Mi-8 (the Russian-origin helicopters the President, PM and other VVIPs currently use),“ says the note. It identifies her “key advisers“ as “Manmohan Singh, Ahmed Patel, Pranab Mukherjee, M Veerappa Moily, Oscar Fernandes, M K Narayanan and Vinay Singh“.

Even though the trial didn’t deal with corruption charge against IAF ex-chief S P Tyagi, it observed that his specific act of allegedly favouring AgustaWestland is contrary to his duty and constituted “wrongfulness of his conduct“ for cooperating with the company. The judgment listed details of meetings and conversations between AgustaWestland officials and Tyagi on several occasions, as produced by Italian prosecutors.