Atwal sorry for causing embarrassment to Trudeau
The former Khalistani militant at the centre of a controversy that engulfed Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s visit to India has said he was “shocked and devastated” by the furore over an invitation to him to attend a dinner reception at the residence of the Canadian envoy in New Delhi.
Jaspal Atwal, who attempted to assassinate a visiting minister from Punjab in 1986 and was convicted for it the next year, made his first public appearance after the row in India at the law office of Rishi Gill in Vancouver on Thursday.
He read out a six-page statement, which said he was “sorry for any embarrassment” the incident had caused to “Canada, India, my community and my family” and made clear that he disavowed the Khalistani cause. Referring to the attempt on the life of the Punjab minister, Atwal said he had “nothing but regret and remorse for my actions”.
He mentioned he had planned his visit to India in December and January and that before leaving Vancouver, he had reached out to Liberal Party MP Randeep Sarai to “see whether there was any possibility of attending the reception for the Prime Minister during his government visit to India”.
Atwal did not take any questions and sat stony faced as the Q&A began, and swiftly left the venue once the meet concluded.
In New Delhi, external affairs ministry spokesperson Raveesh Kumar said on Friday that Atwal had travelled to India on “a valid visa” and had visited the India earlier too. “India has a policy of outreach to diaspora, including to misguided elements who have since given up on earlier views,” he said.
Gill responded to questions related to the charge by a senior Canadian official that Atwal had been planted by rogue elements in the Indian government to embarrass Trudeau, saying, “Mr Atwal at no point has considered himself or been approached by any Indian representative in such a fashion that he would act as an agent of some sort. There is some bandying about of the word informant. That is not correct.”
Atwal said he “attended a reception” before the invitation to the New Delhi reception was rescinded after details about his past became public and a media sensation. “When I asked to be considered to attend the reception I had assumed there would be no problems. No one had at any point indicated there would be any issues. On three previous occasions in 2013 and 2014, I had visited the House of Commons in Ottawa and been provided with a cleared visitor pass,” Atwal said in his statement. His lawyer said Atwal “assumed he was vetted properly” for the events he was invited to during Trudeau’s visit.
“There is no close relationship with any diplomats,” Gill said, when asked about Atwal’s ties to officials in the Indian consulate in Vancouver. Gill pointed out Atwal had visited India in 1999 and 2002, but was denied a visa in the mid-2000s. He was then given a one-month visa in 2017, followed by visas of three-month and oneyear validity.
Referring to his attempt to assassinate the Punjab minister, Atwal said he had “nothing but regret and remorse for my actions and the suffering I caused to the victim. What I did was described as an act of terror by the judge who dealt with this matter. I accept full responsibility. I do not disagree with the court’s conclusions.”
Atwal also made clear that he disavowed the Khalistani cause, which he was involved with in the 1980s. Describing himself as almost 63 years old and a husband, father and grandfather, he said, “I again renounce any form of terrorism. I do not advocate in any sense for an independent Sikh nation.
TORONTO:
A sessions court has ordered the husband of a 46-yearold homemaker from Goregaon to give her at least ₹10,000 every month for personal expenses, after overturning a trial court ruling that rejected her plea.
The Dindoshi sessions court passed the order on March 1, after the woman appealed saying that her husband, a habitual drinker, abused her both physically and mentally, gave her just ₹500 every fortnight to run the house, and nothing for her personal needs. Seeking an interim maintenance of ₹75,000, the woman had said that her husband, 51, “draws a huge salary of ₹1.5 lakh” per month, whereas she has no source of income.
The couple, residents of Goregaon (east), are married since January 1999, and have an 18-year-old son. In her application, the woman said her husband would get drunk and abuse her, and that after he threatened her with dire consequences in 2016, she registered a case of domestic violence against him at the Borivli metropolitan court. Case proceedings are on.
She then filed an application for interim relief, appealing that her husband be restrained from acting on his threats, and allow her to live in their house, or then rent another flat.
MUMBAI: