Kantipur made some serious errors in the main news published on the first day of the Gregorian New Year. The story, titled “Half a Billion of Widebody Bribes Managed from Singapore and Dubai,” bylined by Matrika Dahal, covers details about the fraud that occurred when Nepal Airlines purchased two wide-body aircraft around 2016/17. It claims that the payment made for the planes reached Ireland, and from there, bribes were routed through Singapore and Dubai. However, the long article contains several factual inaccuracies.
Where’s the Proof of the FBI’s Investigation?
The story mentions the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) twice:
- Midway through the article:
“The FBI also showed interest in the bribe transactions, engaging with Nepal’s Ministry of Tourism and Civil Aviation and the Ministry of Law.” - At the end of the article:
“The case was filed based on an investigation conducted by the FBI, and the U.S. court issued its judgment in the second week of December. During the investigation, U.S. officials collaborated with various countries, including Nepal, Africa, Dubai, Singapore, and the UK.”
There’s no evidence supporting the first claim of FBI interest. Either FBI officials should have stated it, or Nepal’s mentioned ministries should have confirmed it. And what kind of “interest” was this—verbal or written? That isn’t clear either. Let’s assume the FBI did show interest (just like I can be interested in the U.S. presidential elections while sitting in Nepal).
But the second claim is serious. It asserts that the FBI conducted an investigation, and the case was filed based on its findings. For this, Kantipur needs to provide proof. Where is the evidence that the FBI investigated this case and that it led to the filing of a case?
Public Documents Don’t Show FBI Involvement
A press release issued by the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Public Affairs on December 19, 2024, doesn’t mention the FBI conducting any investigation. Instead, it credits the Department of Justice (DoJ) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for the investigation.
Think of the SEC as similar to Nepal’s Securities Board (SEBON).
Here’s an excerpt from the press release.
It also mentions that HSI New York (Homeland Security Investigations New York’s Field Office) conducted the investigation, with a quote from the Special Agent in Charge of that office included in the press release.
Judgment by U.S. Court? No, It’s Kantipur’s Verdict
Let’s read the final lines of the article:
“The case was filed based on an investigation conducted by the FBI, and the U.S. court issued its judgment in the second week of December. During this, U.S. officials collaborated with several countries, including Nepal, Africa, Dubai, Singapore, and the UK. While the case against the company has been concluded, the verdict against Sharma is still pending.”
According to Kantipur, the U.S. court has already issued a “judgment” in this case. But upon investigation, it becomes clear that this wasn’t a court judgment; it was Kantipur’s conclusion.
Let’s revisit the press release from the Department of Justice. It clarifies everything:
In legal terms, a “court judgment” refers to a written decision issued by a judge or court at the end of a trial or plea proceedings.
But the press release here talks about a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) between the Department of Justice and the company AAR Corp. This is a settlement that happens outside the courtroom, avoiding formal prosecution.
Is this a “court judgment”?
What Does the Press Release Actually Say?
The release makes it clear that:
- This isn’t a court judgment:
Instead, AAR Corp. entered into an NPA with the Department of Justice and the SEC over violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). Essentially, the company admitted its wrongdoing and agreed to pay about $55 million (penalties, fines, and disgorgements). - The agreement avoids formal prosecution:
The NPA states that if the company fails to comply with the agreement’s terms (such as paying penalties or improving compliance), the Department of Justice can file a formal case in court. - It’s a settlement:
Under the terms of the NPA, the company admitted its misconduct, cooperated with authorities, paid fines, and avoided prosecution.
What About the Individuals Involved?
The press release also states:
“The Justice Department previously charged two individuals in related matters. Deepak Sharma pleaded guilty… Julian Aires pleaded guilty…”
These individuals (Deepak Sharma and Julian Aires) accepted plea deals in court. By pleading guilty, they aim to reduce their sentences or fines.
Their cases were filed in court, but a final verdict (sentencing) hasn’t been issued yet. The verdict is expected in mid-January or February.
So, in no way has this case reached its conclusion. It’s still ongoing.
Company AAR’s Case:
- No formal “guilty” or “not guilty” judgment was issued by the court.
- Instead, the company reached an NPA with the Department of Justice, which is essentially an out-of-court settlement or pre-trial agreement.
Individuals (e.g., Deepak Sharma):
- Their cases were formally filed in court.
- They accepted plea deals, admitting guilt. Sentencing is pending.
Want to Verify?
All the relevant documents about Deepak Sharma’s case are available on the Department of Justice’s website. You just need to know how to Google it. For those who don’t, click here to read.
Here’s the SEC document as well—click here to read.
If only Kantipur had checked these sources—or even translated news from its sister outlet, Kathmandu Post—this mess wouldn’t have happened.
After making such serious factual errors, will Kantipur, like in the Sujita Shahi case, claim, “No credible source says the U.S. court has issued a judgment, so we don’t have to show any documents”? What do you think? 😊
(This is translated version of original blog published in Nepali here)