Rajendra K. Pachauri

On 20 April 2002, Pachauri was elected Chairman of the United Nations established Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.[10]

Pachauri was vocal on the issue of climate change and said, "What is happening, and what is likely to happen, convinces me that the world must be really ambitious and very determined at moving toward a 350 target."[14] 350 refers to the level in parts per million of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere that some climate scientists such as NASA's James Hansen agree to be a safe upper limit to avoid a climate tipping point.[15] His career with IPCC came to an abrupt end after the sexual harassment charges against him surfaced in Indian courts.

Pachauri and Al Gore on the balcony of the Grand Hotel, Oslo.

The IPCC shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with former US Vice-President Al Gore, who had earlier criticised Pachauri when he was first elected in 2002.[16]

On 11 December 2007, Pachauri (representing the recipient IPCC) and co-recipient Al Gore delivered their acceptance speeches at an awards ceremony in Oslo, Norway, on a day when delegates to a United Nations climate conference were meeting in Bali, Indonesia.[17] Pachauri referenced his belief that the Hindu philosophy of "'Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam', which means 'the whole universe is one family,'" must dominate global efforts to protect the global commons."[18] Returning to this theme throughout his speech, he quoted president of the Maldives in 1987 (Maumoon Abdul Gayoom):

"...a mean sea level rise of two meters would suffice to virtually submerge the entire country of 1,190 small islands, most of which barely rise two meters above sea level. That would be the death of a nation."[18]

Pachauri repeatedly emphasised his concerns regarding the implications of climate change for the world's poorest nations, referring to studies that:

"...have raised the threat of dramatic population migration, conflict, and war over water and other resources, as well as a realignment of power among nations. Some also highlight the possibility of rising tensions between rich and poor nations, health problems caused particularly by water shortages and crop failures...

Rajendra K. Pachauri was a member of the Fondation Chirac's honour committee,[19] since its launch in 2008 by former French president Jacques Chirac to promote world peace.

Christopher Booker and Richard North wrote an article for the Daily Telegraph in January 2010 alleging potential conflicts of interest related to Pachauri's membership of the board of ONGC[23] and to research grants for TERI, a non-profit institution of which Pachauri was director general.[24] They further alleged that financial anomalies existed at TERI Europe.[25] Pachauri denied all allegations.[26][27]

In response to the allegations, the audit firm KPMG carried out a review at TERI's request.[28] The review stated: "No evidence was found that indicated personal financial benefits accruing to Dr Pachauri from his various advisory roles that would have led to a conflict of interest". The report explains its objectives and methodology and states that "Work done by us was as considered necessary at that point in time" and that it is based on the information provided by TERI, Pachauri and Pachauri's tax counsel. In a caveat the review explains that its scope was "significantly different from an audit and cannot be relied on to provide the same level of assurance as an audit".[28] KPMG examined payments made by private sector companies and found that payments amounting to $326,399 were made to TERI itself, not to Pachauri.[29][30] He had received only his annual salary from TERI, amounting to £45,000 a year, plus a maximum of about £2,174 from outside earnings. He received no payment for chairing the IPCC.[31]

On 21 August 2010, the Daily Telegraph issued an apology, saying that it had "not intended to suggest that Dr Pachauri was corrupt or abusing his position as head of the IPCC and we accept KPMG found Dr Pachauri had not made "millions of dollars" in recent years." It stated: "We apologise to Dr Pachauri for any embarrassment caused."[32] The Guardian reported that the Telegraph paid legal costs of over £100,000.[31] Pachauri welcomed the Telegraph's apology, saying that he was "glad that they have finally acknowledged the truth", and attributed the false allegations to "another attempt by the climate sceptics to discredit the IPCC. They now want to go after me and hope that it would serve their purpose."[33]

George Monbiot of The Guardian stated his view that despite Pachauri being cleared by KPMG of conflict of interest and financial wrongdoing, false claims had been repeated about him by Richard North, the Daily Mail and The Australian.[34]

On 18 February 2015, Delhi police filed a First Information Report (FIR) against Pachauri on allegations of sexual harassment, stalking and criminal intimidation.[35][36] On March 21, the Delhi High Court granted him anticipatory bail.[37] While in May 2015, Pachauri was found guilty of sexual harassment by an internal complaints committee (ICC) of TERI,[38] the findings of the ICC have been challenged before the Industrial Tribunal on the grounds of violation of the principles of natural justice.[39] An article in an Indian magazine The Caravan detailed the exploits of RK Pachauri during his tenure at TERI.[40]

In a statement, Pachauri said that the contents of the charge sheet are “allegations” levelled by the complainant and nothing has been “substantiated” after a year-long investigation.[41] Pachauri has maintained: “From my perspective this was nothing but a very cordial and mutual relationship. There was a light and friendly tone to our correspondence, but at no stage did I ever hint at having a physical relationship nor did I in any way engage in sexual harassment”.[42] Pachauri was granted regular bail from the trial court in July 2016. The court observed "The investigation of the case is complete. Charge sheet has already been filed. He was never arrested during the investigation in the instant case which goes on to show that his custody is not required for the purpose of investigation".[43]