The opposition cited a report in the New York Times which stated that the powerful tool, developed by the NSO Group, used to sneak into mobile phones to spy, was associated with Pegasus with nearly $2 billion worth of sophisticated weapons and intelligence gear. was part of the package. A missile system as the centerpiece” was agreed during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Israel in 2017.
The government declined to comment on the allegation. However, sources tried to downplay the matter saying that it is pending with the Supreme Court, which has already ordered a probe.
Congress leader Rahul Gandhi The report was immediately captured and accused the Modi government of sedition. He said, “The Modi government bought Pegasus to spy on our primary democratic institutions… Politicians, public and government officials, opposition leaders, armed forces, judiciary were all targeted by these phone-tappings. This is treason, ” They said.
The issue may see fresh confrontation in Parliament over a claim in an American daily on the eve of the budget session. In fact, the Leader of the Opposition Rajya Sabhaof Congress Mallikarjun Kharge, indicated as much, saying the government had halted demands for an investigation into allegations of illegal use of Israeli surveillance equipment to target opposition leaders.
NSO, the Israeli company that developed the Pegasus software, has said it is sold to government agencies and not private entities.
However, the government does not seem to be panicking about it. While it refrained from formally replying to the allegation, sources said a committee constituted by the SC is already probing the allegations and has issued a public notice seeking answers from all concerned. “People should cooperate with the panel and await the court’s response on the findings,” a source said on condition of anonymity.
Restraint tracked the government’s stand in the Supreme Court last year, where it confirmed or denied whether it had purchased spyware from Israel or any other source. In August, the Solicitor General Tushar Mehta The reason for the reluctance to make the acquisition of Pegasus and other devices a matter of public debate explained in detail to the court. Stating that the government uses various software to intercept communications to track terrorist activities and conspiracies by forces hostile towards the country, Mehta said on August 17: “The nature of the software cannot be disclosed. Because it will prove to be injurious to national security.”
The NYT report, which pointed to countries ranging from Mexico to Poland, Hungary and the UAE, as well as the FBI buying cyber tools, suggested that the two countries have had strong ties since Modi came to power. Along with led the “package”. Voting along with Israel in the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations to block India from granting observer status to the Palestinian Human Rights Organization.
The SG had told the top court in August: “For national security purposes and counter terrorism, various software are used. The petitioners want the government to state which software was used and which was not. The moment this information is disclosed, terrorist networks can take pre-emptive or corrective steps.”
Refusing to give relevant details in an affidavit, Mehta had said the government had nothing to hide and would share everything with the committee. “It cannot be a matter of affidavit and public debate,” he had categorically stated.
According to media reports, election strategist with Rahul Prashant Kishor and Ashok Lavasa, a former election commissioner, were among those whose phones were potentially targeted using Pegasus, but this could not be conclusively proven. Reported “targets” include IT and communications ministers Ashwini VaishaviHowever, at that time he was not a member of the government.
At a press conference, Kharge said that when the Center stalled a debate on Pegasus in Parliament, thereby ending the last monsoon session, it was clear that the BJP government had something to hide.
“He lied in Parliament,” Kharge said while challenging the government to file a defamation case against the New York Times if its disclosures were false.
,