Seshasayee Hits Back at NRN’s ‘Personal Attacks and Slander’

Former Infy chairman says he had been ‘candid and truthful’ in all his statements

Bengaluru: R Seshasayee, former chairman of Infosys, said he had been ‘candid and truthful’ in all his statements and that founder NR Narayana Murthy’s campaign on alleged governance lapses at the IT company had ‘slipped into personal attacks and slander,’ in a statement released to the media on Friday.

This latest salvo, which also includes statements from Jeffrey Lehman and John Echtemendy — both of whom resigned from the board of Infosys last month — comes days after Murthy’s address to Infosys’ investors on the turmoil in the top ranks of India’s second-largest IT services firm.

Speaking to investors on Tuesday, Murthy quoted an anonymous whistleblower letter that said the former board chairman (Seshasayee) had lied to shareholders about payments made to former CFO Rajiv Bansal. In the same speech, Murthy had also said current board member Roopa Kudva had asked him (Murthy) to sign a non-disclosure agreement if he wished to receive details on the severance payment to Bansal.

“Mr Murthy’s statement to the investors reported by the press, however, forces me to issue this statement, which is done only to defend myself against personal attacks and patently false and slanderous accusations,” Seshasayee said.

Following the sudden resignation of CEO Vishal Sikka on August 18, four members of the board, including Seshasayee, stepped down from their posts. In a move designed to restore stability, the former CEO and Aadhaar architect Nandan Nilekani was appointed non-executive chairman of Infosys on August 25.

Seshasayee said he had previously stayed away from making public statements to help the company move forward but that Murthy’s speech to investors on Tuesday evening had forced his hand.

“The words that Mr. Murthy attributes to Jeff Lehman and Roopa Kudva, from their private conversation with him, are also egregiously taken out of context. It is regrettable that Mr. Murthy's campaign on the alleged governance lapses has continually slipped into personal attacks and slander on individual Board members,” he added.

Murthy and Infosys did not reply to email queries from ET about Seshasayee’s statement. Seshasayee’s strong rebuttal comes at a time when the 36-year-old company is still recovering from months of attrition over charges of lapses of corporate governance levelled by Murthy. The issues of contention include the outsize severance package for Bansal as well as the terms of acquisition of Israeli software company Panaya by Infosys in February 2015.

After Sikka quit on August18, the then board of Infosys put out a statement critici- sing Murthy. “I am fully conversant with the details of the Rajiv Bansal issue and I can categorically state that at no point did Sesh say anything in public or, to the best of my knowledge, in private that was untrue or did not reflect the collective view of the Board,” John Echtemendy, former director of Infosys, said in the statement on Friday. He stepped down from the board of the company last month.

Jeffrey Lehman, who served on the board of Infosys for 11 years and who has personally come under fire from Murthy, also backed Seshasayee. “An anonymous, so-called “whistleblower” made outrageous charges against management; the Board engaged several sets of outside counsel and investigators of impeccable reputation, and those investigators determined that every charge was false and without any foundation. For the good of Infosys, I wish Mr. Murthy would stop quoting those lies as if they were reputable,” Lehman said. He added that Murthy should stop his attacks against other board members. Murthy had said the rejuvenation of Infosys’ board was still a work-in-progress.

“For the good of Infosys, I wish Mr. Murthy would stop defaming Mr. Seshasayee and the other members of a Board who have served with dedication and integrity, who have turned the other cheek when slandered, and who have acted only in the best interests of the company,” Lehman added.

Your phone camera is the lens to tech future

From Infra-Red Facial Recognition To Virtual Furniture Try-Outs, Mobiles Set To Get Smarter

We all know the drill. For the last decade, smartphones have gotten thinner and faster and thinner and faster and, well, you get the picture.

But it’s too soon to write off our smartphones as boring. For a clue as to what the smartphone of the future might look like, turn your attention to the device’s cameras and the software and sensors that make them tick.

Here’s a peek into how the camera may come into play: As soon as you pick up your gadget, it will see you and know you are the owner and unlock the screen. Overseas, you will be able to point the camera at a restaurant menu to translate items into your native language. When shopping for furniture, you can point your phone camera at your living room floor and place a virtual rendering of a coffee table down to see how it looks. Some of this futurism is already starting to happen.

Next month, Apple plans to introduce new iPhones, including a premium model that can scan 3D objects — including your face. Samsung also recently introduced the Galaxy Note 8, highlighting its fast dual-lens camera as the signature feature. And rivals will soon work to catch up.

How would phones scan your face? The so-called depthsensing camera system Spectra by Qualcomm, a chip maker that provides components to smartphone makers, is one example of how it works. The system includes a module that sprays an object with infrared dots to gather information about its depth based on the size and the contortion of the dots. If the dots are smaller, the object is farther away; if they are bigger, it is closer. The system can then stitch the patterns into a detailed 3D image of your face to determine if you are indeed the owner before unlocking the phone.

Because of the uniqueness of a person’s head shape, the likelihood of bypassing facial recognition with the incorrect face is 1 in a million, said Sy Choudhury of Qual- comm. That compares with a false acceptance rate of 1 in 100 for previous systems.

There are, however, limitations. For example, objects that you wear, like a hat, might throw off the camera, according to Qualcomm. In addition, experts said infrared light can get drowned out by bright sunlight.

Philip-James Jacobowitz, a product manager for Qualcomm, said emerging camera technologies would be the key to stronger security features and applications for so-called augmented reality (AR), which uses data to digitally manipulate the physical world when people look through a smart- phone lens. All the tech giants are betting big onAR. For years, Microsoft has been developing HoloLens, an AR headset. In April, Facebook announced Camera Effects Platform, an environment for software developers to build AR apps. This week, Google unveiled ARCore, an AR tool kit for Android devices, in response to Apple’s ARKit.

Blair MacIntyre, a research scientist working on AR for Mozilla, said it has huge potential when it matures. He envisioned people being able to take a tour of a museum, pointing their phone cameras at a fossil exhibit to bring a dinosaur back to life.

5 Haryana cops, part of Dera chief’s security, dismissed: Police

FIVE Haryana policemen, who were part of Dera Sacha Sauda chief Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh’s security and were charged with sedition, were dismissed from service on Thursday, police officials said.

Sedition and attempt to murder charges were slapped against seven persons, including the five police personnel, in charge of the Dera chief ’s security when he had arrived at Panchkula to appear in a CBI court on Friday. They had allegedly tried to free the Dera chief when he was brought outside the Panchkula Court complex, after a special CBI court convicted him in a 15-year-old rape case, the police had said. They were produced before a court on Wednesday which sent them to seven days in police remand, the officials said.

Kenya court nullifies Prez win, calls for new vote

Nairobi: Kenya’s Supreme Court on Friday nullified President Uhuru Kenyatta’s election win, citing irregularities, and ordered a new poll within 60 days, an unprecedented move in Africa where governments often hold sway over judges.

The ruling, broadcast to a stunned nation on television, sets up a new race between Kenyatta, 55, and veteran opponent Raila Odinga, 72.

Kenyatta called for calm and respect for the ruling and said he would run again in a televised speech. “The court has made its decision. We respect it. We don’t agree with it. And again, I say peace ... peace, peace, peace,” he told the nation. But he later struck a more combative note, criticising the court for ignoring the will of the people and dismissing the chief justice’s colleagues as “wakora” (crooks).

Arow over a 2007 poll, which Odinga challenged after being declared loser, was followed by weeks of ethnic bloodshed that killed more than 1,200 people.

Chief justice David Maraga announced the Supreme Court’s verdict that was backed by four of the six judges, saying the declaration of Kenyatta’s victory was “invalid, null and void”. Details of the ruling will be released within 21days.

Judges said they found no misconduct by Kenyatta but said the election board “failed, neglected or refused to conduct the presidential election in a manner consistent with the dictates of the constitution.”

Cabinet rejig at 10am Sunday, Uma may stay

Gadkari ‘Reluctant’ To Take Additional Charge Of Railways

New Delhi: The reshuffle of the Modi ministry has been set for 10am on Sunday. While considerable chopping and changing is on the cards, water resources minister Uma Bharati is unlikely to be dropped and road transport and highways minister Nitin Gadkari remains reluctant to handle railways in addition to his charge.

Speculation continued over exits, entries, demotions and elevations in the ministry even as it was confirmed on Friday that minister of state for labour (independent charge) Bandaru Dattatreya has quit. The exercise to finalise the list for Sunday’s swearingin continues with senior ministers Rajnath Singh, Sushma Swaraj, Arun Jaitley and Gadkari meeting at Singh’s residence on Friday evening.

The consultations among top BJP leaders are believed to have taken stock of regional and electoral considerations ahead of forthcoming assembly elections.

The ministers to have quit ahead of the reshuffle include Rajiv Rudy, Sanjeev Balyan, Faggan Singh Kulaste, Kalraj Mishra and Mahendra Pandey; the last will now be BJP’s UP unit chief.

Bharati, who was in her constituency of Jhansi on Friday, made her annoyance quite clear with reports that she had offered to quit on health grounds, saying it was up to party chief Amit Shah to clarify. Her portfolio may be changed but the firebrand sanyasin is expected to remain in the ministry. Sources said Gadkari had been sounded out to take charge of railways but he was reluctant as there was not much time to change the state of affairs in railways and he had his plate full.

Railway minister Suresh Prabhu had offered to quit after the recent train derailments, including the one involving Utkal Express which killed 23 people and was seen to be the result of staff negligence. A performance audit of ministers at a time when the Modi government has completed three years in of- fice is also an important benchmark as the functioning of some half a dozen ministries is not seen to be up to the mark. The reshuffle is also likely to see changes among ministers of state who have not impressed and the new look of the cabinet is expected to signal political priorities ahead of the 2019 polls.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi will leave for China to attend the BRICS summit soon after the swearing-in ceremony in the Rashtrapati Bhavan. Sources said some 14-15 new ministers could be inducted while 7-8 could leave, some for the party organisation. Other than performance, state polls are important determinants in view of elections in Himachal Pradesh, Gujarat, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Rajasthan, where state polls are due later this year and in 2018.

There possibility of induction of Suresh Angadi, Shobha Karandlaje, Prahlad Joshi(Karnataka), Satyapal Singh (UP), Prahlad Patel (Madhya Pradesh ), Vinay Sahasrabuddhe (Maharashtra), Himanta Biswa Sarma (Assam), Maheish Giri (Delhi), Anurag Thakur (Himachal Pradesh), Bhupendra Yadav (Rajasthan) JD(U)’s R C P Singh and Santosh Kushwaha is doing the rounds.

Shifting goal posts

It’s official. Demonetisation has totally failed to curb black money — its professed objective

On November 8, 2016, when Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced to the nation that ₹500 and ₹1,000 currency notes would cease to be legal tender from midnight, he was unequivocal in asserting that the measure was aimed at breaking “the grip of corruption and black money”. Explaining how the shock move would work, he said: “The... notes hoarded by anti-national and anti-social elements will become just worthless pieces of paper.” The premise then was that a sizeable part of the ₹15.44 lakh crore of the two high-value banknotes would remain in the hands of the holders and would not be tendered back into the banking system due to fear of punitive government action. There were hints that the windfall gains made from the scrapped currency notes that couldn’t be deposited in banks, estimated at anything between ₹3 lakh crore to ₹5 lakh crore, would be deployed for larger purposes — social welfare schemes and infrastructure projects, for example. This would be effected with the Reserve Bank of India, which bears the liability to honour the value of the country’s currency, paying as dividend to the government the majority, if not all, of its extinguished liabilities. But with the RBI’s annual report, released on August 30, showing that as much as 98.96% of the demonetised currency had returned to the central bank as of June 30, the gains in the form of cancelled liability from the note ban have been piffling.

For the Finance Minister to now claim that the “confiscation of money” had not been an objective, and for his Ministry to say that the government “had expected all the SBNs [specified bank notes] to come back to the banking system to become effectively usable currency,” is disingenuous. If that were indeed the case, the rationale behind the various stop-go announcements that followed in the wake of the November 8 decision are hard to fathom. For instance, the RBI circular setting a ₹5,000 limit on deposits of withdrawn notes unless done under the government’s amnesty scheme, tendered for the first time or explained otherwise was clearly a measure intended to dissuade bank customers from returning the demonetised currency. True, demonetisation has had some beneficial spin-offs such as arguably fostering greater compliance with the tax laws and reducing the economy’s reliance on cash through increased adoption of digital payments. But such gains could have been achieved by other and less self-defeating ways. As things stand, it is unclear how many of those who have laundered their black money will be punished. Despite the large amounts that were deposited in banks post-demonetisation, it is doubtful whether the Income Tax authorities have the necessary resources to track down and penalise the corrupt. All in all, the costs of demonetisation, which has resulted in robbing the country of its economic momentum, are far greater than the benefits it has bestowed.