Sachin's Ferrari triggers commotion
Men, Matters & Memories

By M L Kotru

Poor Sachin Tendulkar, everyone seems to be gunning for him. The heart-throb of a cricket crazy nation subjected to the humiliation of being asked to pay customs duty on a 75 -lakh rupee Ferrari, a gift from its makers, Fiat. How could anyone grudge our little master a duty waiver of a mere 1.6 crores of rupees?

It's not that Sachin Tendulkar cannot afford to pay what truly must be a pittance for him Remember the man earns annually something like Rs. 30 crores from endorsements of high profile products such as Fiat's Palio or Visa cards. His match fees too are by our middle class standards on the verge of the phenomenal.

So, why are people asking all those silly questions about the Government having waived the customs duty on the Ferrari gifted to him by Fiat and presented to him by who else but the Grand Prix King Schumacher? May be some are worried that Bombay does not have the kind of roads where Sachin could run his Ferrari. That could be a legitimate concern, risking the well-being of our cricketing hero just for the thrill of running a Ferrari.

Sachin was gifted the Ferrari for having equalled the number of centuries (29) scored by the legendary Don Bradman during this quick-fire interrupted career. The problem with that is that there is another Indian, whom Sachin probably still continues to admire, who holds the record, for having scored the maximum number of centuries, Sunil Gavaskar to wit (34).

But Sachin being Sachin, how dare you blame Finance Minister Jaswant Singh, a man of great probity, an ex-soldier to boot, when he says 'yes' to the customs waiver? Who knows Sachin could be persuaded to return the compliment during the upcoming elections. I am not saying this a probability but you can never tell how the minds of the rich, famous and the powerful work.

In defence of Sachin an argument is advanced that why blame him if the Government has granted him a waiver. The Government, it is said, could well have refused the waiver. Or the Government could well develop transparency in its policies and apply the same ground rules to others. So the pro-Sachin argument goes.

Having said that we are not told how or why the same Government refused to waive a niggardly import duty of Rs. 5.02 lakhs on the grand piano gifted to the Mehli Mehta Music Foundation, a registered charitable trust in Mumbai. Mehli Mehta, if you care to remember, was the father of the renowned conductor Zubin Mehta and the foundation was set up by Zubin to help aspiring Mumbai musicians. Yet the application for tax ememption to the Ministry of Finance was rejected on the ground that the Government could except only such goods as are of a secret or strategic nature or are meant for charitable purpose and the Mehli Mehta foundation was not covered by any policy justifying an exemption.

It could also be said by Sachin's defenders that his was not the first time that the Government has waived import duty in the case of a major sportsman. It has done so in the case of Ravi Shastri. The only difference is that Shastri got an Audi not as a gift but as a prize announced well before the commencement of a series in Australia. It so happened that Shastri was declared the champion of champions by an elite panel at the end of that series of matches. It was not a gift as the Ferrari happens to be.

This is where the rub lies. Sachin happens to be the brand ambassador of Fiat, the manufacturers of Ferrari as well as Palio, the car which he has so extensively endorsed in the Indian market. And the gift as it happens was made long after Sachin had equalled the Don's 29 centuries in test cricket. The controversy has fuelled speculation, as pointed out by the former World Billiards champion, our own Michael Ferreria, that the gift of the car is in fact in lieu of payments due to Tendulkar under his contract with Fiat India. The obvious corollary to that speculation, according to Ferriera, suggests that income-tax otherwise attracted on such payments is avoided.

Fiat has not helped matters by doing an about turn by offering to pay the duty. Strange that a company that has suffered staggering accumulated losses should be offering to pay Rs. 1.6 crores as duty on the Ferrari 'gifted' to Sachin by Fiat's parent company in Italy. Sachin we are assured by knowledgeable people is a socially aware person. He is involved in several charities and indeed, to go by one account, he even gets terminally ill and underprivileged children home and "on many occasions spends the whole day with them". He is also running several charities which is laudable. After all how many young men, coming from modest backgrounds, come to rake in crores year after year and while doing so also manage to capture the hearts of an adoring cricket-crazy people.

Sachin Tendulkar in the circumstances would certainly not like his name to be bandied about or his reputation compromised. Unfortunately, that is exactly what seems to be happening to him in the wake of the gift. If Fiat were to pay the duty on the gift he would still be liable to pay other taxes, including income-tax, on the Ferrari considering that it is seen as payment of money owed by Fiat to the cricketer. Even otherwise it does not in any manner add to the legend of Saching Tendulkar to see his running here and there to avoid paying customs duty or any other taxes.

Sachin is also a successful businessman with a brighter future beckconting him. On the face of it he has not yet lost the common touch. His friends and neighbours do vouch for that. It is therefore important that he does not do anything that tends to besmirch his image as a cricketing icon.

I have been scanning the letters to the editor columns of many newspapers and journals these past few days and am truly amazed by the kind of reaction I' affaire Ferrari has aroused. One typical letter read. "Many people have rightly objected to the waiving of duty on Sachin Tendulkar's Ferrari. Tendulkar earns at least Rs. 36 to Rs. 40 crores every year on product endorsement alone. Add to this the match fees that he is entitled to when he plays Tests and one-dayers. Whatever his achievements, when a sportsperson of Tendulkar's calibre earns so much, he should not find it difficult to pay the duty of a crore and a half for his imported car. The Government can honour him in many ways. Give him the Padma Bhushan or Bharat Ratna. But why waive the duty on his car?" This is typical of the tenor of say 90 percent of the letters I have read.

Cricket crazy Indians too do finally appear to expect better standards of public and private behaviour from our over pampered cricketers. Only some weeks back we had the unbelievable spectacle of another cricketing icon, Kapil Dev, telling us he was not overly worried about the antecedents of a man who had presented him a Mercedez or whatever it was. The donor of the car he said was a fan of his. It's another matter that the donor of the car he said was a fan of his. It's another matter that the donor is currently faced with serious criminal charges. It was Kapil again who, if my recall is right, accepted another car from a South African Indian fan who in the end turned out to be involved, in match-fixing. Meanwhile would Bombay authorities, please, concede Sachin's very ordinary request: give his Ferrari the registration no. 9999. The two Mercedez cars he already owns bear the same number. A simple request from a humble man.

Bombing the United Nations!......
Yours Randomly,

By Dr. R. L. Bhat

United Nations was a great promise that, many would say, betrayed itself in its very inception when it lay under the thumb of the super and world powers. From the first serious issue it had to tackle viz. the Kashmir question, to its latest frustration over Iraq, there is a full half-a-century of high promise being broken on the hard rock of interests and stakes of the individual countries controlling it. While it lasted, the cold war kept the body relevant as the window and balance between the two superpowers. During that period the wider world saw how the world body was being used to press proxy points, to legitimize inequalities, to root interests and to play uncouth games at the world stage. All that generally kept the UNO from fulfilling its promise. If the newly independent nations formed the Non-Aligned forum in the fifties, the partisans on the right opened the Amnesty channel. That, probably, was the earliest hint that United Nations was not what it was supposed to be. That also gave substance to its critics that it was largely a failure masquerading as the conscience of the world.

Indeed, that was the greatest failure of the world body. It never took the role of the conscience of the world, though it always presumed to do it. Whether it was the Kashmir tangle, the Palestinian issue, apartheid, disarmament or enforcing peace in a chronically hostile world, the UNO did not prove a spectacular success in any of the grand disputes and issues of the world. In Kashmir, the clear politicking that took place behind the scenes is only now coming to light, though it was suspected all along. In South Africa it did nothing. The Palestinian issue did not come before it in any significant manner, as the Arabs rarely practiced or adhered to the tenets of freedom and openness that could have given them the opportunity to press UNO to tackle the issue dear to their heart. Indeed, all through the cold war the UNO was a bargain house for the world powers to broker truces to their respective advantage. The world, freedom and principles, its high flautin charter… none mattered much when it came to playing games there. Thus it is that many analysts believe UNO has been a failure through and through. Even the die hard adherents concede that the greatest achievement is that it has kept going.

Indeed, the greatest thing about UNO has been its promise and potential. It could be the great body the world was looking it to become. To be fair the UN tried everything to realize its potential. It set up diverse cares. From children’s welfare to windows on culture on to science and development it opened divisions, departments and wings that could address the world. They did try to but given the power structure it was caught in, it only has ended up tinkering with the issues. Kashmir has occupied the high spot in UN. Yet , as the latest Geneva meets shows, the ‘enslavement’ of people in the Pak occupied Kashmir, living in what is described as the ‘last colony’ in the world, reached it only fifty years after. That too without much redress. The UNO has ‘acted’ when, where and how the controllers have wanted it to act. For the rest, it cannot even appoint its Secretary General without accepting the power compulsions. Thus denial of a second term to Boutros Boutros Galli was rejection by a single country, the USA, accepted meekly by the 186 sovereigns there. And this is not the veto of consensus as in the SAARC where every decision has to be unanimous. Here the two supers ruled, and when one of them lost credit, the other one did it single-handedly.

One may not say that the real test and the final abdication came in the Iraq question. That happened many times before. But the way America treated the world body in the buildup to the Gulf-war II, wrenched the mask away and showed all its incapacities to full effect. UNO was chided, warned and finally rejected as inconsequential. For long America had its ‘says’ carried out as wishes of the world body. Bush brazenly threatened UNO and finally trashed it when it would not relent. Now, the terrorists or Saddam loyalists have blown its office in Baghdad to effectively press that irrelevance home. UNO has not been the impartial judge and conscience keeper of the world, but a hand maiden of the powerbrokers of the world. Though it took time to make good that realization, it could not be postponed indefinitely. Today the impartiality of the world body is in smithereens as is the immunity its personnel enjoyed. Of course, that is not to condone the dastardly strike on the UNO office in Baghdad which has killed two-dozen functionaries including the representative of Secretary General who was tipped to be the next Secretary General.

Yet, somehow the identification of the world body with the superpower interest and intent has been too complete to be mistaken. If its refusal to endorse the US-UK war-wish was a result of the European pressure, its meekly accepting to go ‘building Iraq’ on the express American orders was unbecoming. Between these pressures and power, UNO has been the prerogative of the half a dozen developed nations though on paper UNO is a 186-nation body. All that heads of these governments get in the September jamboree is to visit US and meet one another. In truth the UN Assembly has not served nor assumed any purposeful role. Even as the world mourns the dead of Baghdad blast, no tears are being shed for the UN. Indeed, the UNO has not seen it as the final nail in its coffin or something. It continues to be, which is what it has been best at. But in a world that is seeing unprecedented conflicts a sapless existence is no comfort. And, there is a pressing need for a real world forum. UN infrastructure is a most valuable thing. Its premises and charters are most comprehensive. Yet, its performance has been most dismal. Unless the world leaders sit together and find ways to give the world an effective conscience, the UNO would continue to live and write its saga of irrelevance. What a misfortune for the world that is a village now!