Skip to main content

When did Union ministers queue up to deposit money in banks?

By Venkatesh Nayak*
Readers will recollect the headlines in several newspapers today — the Hon’ble Prime Minister has directed MPs of his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) to declare their bank transactions to the President of the Party in a bid to lead by example to come clean on their actions ‘after’ the decision to demonetise currency notes of Rs. 500 and Rs. 1000 denomination. The leader of a prominent political party has demanded transparency regarding the alleged financial dealings of the top leaders of the BJP.
Meanwhile the print and the electronic media have covered the travails of citizens across the country who have rushed to banks to deposit their old currency notes and exchange some for the newly printed Rs. 2000 and Rs. 500 bank notes. With the exception of the Vice President of the Indian National Congress (INC) who queued up before a bank branch in Delhi to exchange a small sum of the demonetised notes for new ones, people did not see any other political leader from any other political party queueing up before banks like them with money in hand and worries in their minds about the uncertain future. Media reports indicate several unfortunate incidents of citizens dying while standing in serpentine queues. Many more have been asking publicly why the political leaders are not found standing before banks like them.

“Cash in hand” declaration made by Union Ministers in 2016

Thanks to the Code of Conduct laid down for Ministers (Union and State levels) during the 1960s and revised from time to time, they are required to declare their assets and liabilities details apart from other dealings, where they may have financial interests. Similarly, as Members of the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha, Ministers declare details of their assets and liabilities in accordance with Section 75A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (see pages 38-39 in this document).
These declarations are voluntarily disclosed by the Government. They contain details of the “cash in hand” declared by every Minister in addition to details of bank deposits, other movable and immovable property that they own along with similar details of assets owned by hi or her spouse and dependent children. These details declared by most of the Union Ministers as on 31st March 2016 are accessible on the official website of the Prime Minister’s office. While some declrations seem to have been made for the purpose of complying with the Code of Conduct, others seem to have submitted the declarations furnished to Parliament under the respective House Rules.
I have compiled the data about how much “cash in hand” Ministers including the Hon’ble Prime Minister have declared officially by the end of March 2016. As this is publicly declared information, there is no reason to suspect any connection with “black money”. Frustrating people with black money and forcing them to come clean is one of the reasons why the Government has said that it too the decision to demonetise high value currency notes.
However, every citizen who has stood for hours before banks to either deposit the old currency notes in their accounts or exchange them for the new ones has the right to know when and where did the Ministers deposit the small and large sums of cash they held in their bank accounts. This is a small way of commemorating those citizens who died standing in serpentine queues before banks. The first question that every citizen should ask is:
1) whether these Ministers ever stood in queues like the common citizen whom they are sworn to serve, to deposit their demonetised notes unless all of them had cash in smaller denominations or sent their peons or relatives or some other person to make the transaction? When did they actually make these deposits?
The Government has indicated that the Income Tax (IT) Department may turn its scanner on account holders who deposit more than Rs. 2.5 lakhs in cash in their accounts either in one go or in installments. So the second question that citizens should ask is:
2) whether the IT Dept. will look at Ministers making deposits above Rs. 2.5 lakhs with the same degree of suspicion as they will at an ordinary citizen who makes similar high value deposits?
In order to dispel any doubt about whether the declaration includes money deposited in bank have compiled this data also in a separate column to contrast it with the data about “cash in hand” declared by the Ministers. Please note the following caveats while reading the compiled data:
1) A large number of Ministers have declared cash in hand separately from bank balance and deposits of various kinds. I have indicated both figures against each name wherever data is available separately. I have not included these categories of disclosure for their spouses and dependents as they are not public figures. The remarks in the last column at some rows contain my comments about the quality of data.
2) The cells highlighted in red indicate those Ministers whose tax history must be scrutinised, in theory, if they have deposited demonetised notes worth above Rs. 2.5 lakhs because such rules are applicable to ordinary citizens.
3) Assets and Liabilities Declarations of 2 Cabinet Ministers, and 17 Ministers of State are not published on the PMO’s website. Whether they have actually made any declaration to the PM or to the Houses of which they are Members is not known.
The biggest amount of “cash in hand” in the Council of Ministers was declared by the Finance Minister – more than Rs. 65 lakhs. I have triple checked this data published on the PMO’s website. The Hon’ble Prime Minister declared more than Rs. 89,000 as cash in hand. When did all these Ministers go to banks or whom did they send to deposit these amounts and when, are very important question that every citizen must ask.
4) 6 Cabinet Ministers and 5 Ministers of State have not included “cash in hand” data in their declarations, to the best of my knowledge.

Disclosing such information will not be a violation of privacy of the Ministers

Citizens can use The Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) to ask the Central Government such questions without worrying about violating the right to privacy of the Ministers. In August 2015, the Central Government got the Attorney General of India (AGI) to question a catena of judgements of the Supreme Court that the right to privacy was a fundamental right. In a bunch of matters challenging the actions of the Government to make Aadhaar Unique Identification compulsory for a range of services and welfare programmes, the AGI put this question to the Apex Court. The Hon’ble Supreme Court felt persuaded to refer the matter to a Constitution Bench to determine whether people in India indeed have a constitutionally guaranteed right to privacy. I have commented about this issue extensively last year.
Given these facts, in my humble opinion, the Government’s view is that there is no fundamental right to privacy for anybody including for Ministers under the Constitution. So Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act which was designed to protect personal information from being disclosed leading to unwarranted invasion of the privacy of an individual, becomes an unreasonable restriction on the fundamental right to information which is a part of the right to freedom of speech end expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. So, there should be no legal bar on providing answers to the information sought in the two queries listed above.
Readers may kindly note that I am not making any allegations of “black money” or money that is not accounted for in the declarations of Ministers. However in a country whose national motto is satyameva jayate (truth alone shall triumph) and given the BJP’s latest step to demand transparency from its own MPs, citizens should push the envelope towards greater transparency of Ministers and other elected representatives.
Information about how much “cash in hand” was declared by candidates who got elected as MPs and MLAs is available on the dedicated website being maintained by the Association for Democratic Reforms- http://myneta.info/. Readers might like to ask similar questions from MPs and MLAs belonging to all political parties.

*Programme Coordinator, Access to Information Programme, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, New Delhi

Comments

TRENDING

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

Jayanthi Natarajan "never stood by tribals' rights" in MNC Vedanta's move to mine Niyamigiri Hills in Odisha

By A Representative The Odisha Chapter of the Campaign for Survival and Dignity (CSD), which played a vital role in the struggle for the enactment of historic Forest Rights Act, 2006 has blamed former Union environment minister Jaynaynthi Natarjan for failing to play any vital role to defend the tribals' rights in the forest areas during her tenure under the former UPA government. Countering her recent statement that she rejected environmental clearance to Vendanta, the top UK-based NMC, despite tremendous pressure from her colleagues in Cabinet and huge criticism from industry, and the claim that her decision was “upheld by the Supreme Court”, the CSD said this is simply not true, and actually she "disrespected" FRA.

Stands 'exposed': Cavalier attitude towards rushed construction of Char Dham project

By Bharat Dogra*  The nation heaved a big sigh of relief when the 41 workers trapped in the under-construction Silkyara-Barkot tunnel (Uttarkashi district of Uttarakhand) were finally rescued on November 28 after a 17-day rescue effort. All those involved in the rescue effort deserve a big thanks of the entire country. The government deserves appreciation for providing all-round support.

Urgent need to study cause of large number of natural deaths in Gulf countries

By Venkatesh Nayak* According to data tabled in Parliament in April 2018, there are 87.76 lakh (8.77 million) Indians in six Gulf countries, namely Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). While replying to an Unstarred Question (#6091) raised in the Lok Sabha, the Union Minister of State for External Affairs said, during the first half of this financial year alone (between April-September 2018), blue-collared Indian workers in these countries had remitted USD 33.47 Billion back home. Not much is known about the human cost of such earnings which swell up the country’s forex reserves quietly. My recent RTI intervention and research of proceedings in Parliament has revealed that between 2012 and mid-2018 more than 24,570 Indian Workers died in these Gulf countries. This works out to an average of more than 10 deaths per day. For every US$ 1 Billion they remitted to India during the same period there were at least 117 deaths of Indian Workers in Gulf ...

Uttarakhand tunnel disaster: 'Question mark' on rescue plan, appraisal, construction

By Bhim Singh Rawat*  As many as 40 workers were trapped inside Barkot-Silkyara tunnel in Uttarkashi after a portion of the 4.5 km long, supposedly completed portion of the tunnel, collapsed early morning on Sunday, Nov 12, 2023. The incident has once again raised several questions over negligence in planning, appraisal and construction, absence of emergency rescue plan, violations of labour laws and environmental norms resulting in this avoidable accident.

Celebrating 125 yr old legacy of healthcare work of missionaries

Vilas Shende, director, Mure Memorial Hospital By Moin Qazi* Central India has been one of the most fertile belts for several unique experiments undertaken by missionaries in the field of education and healthcare. The result is a network of several well-known schools, colleges and hospitals that have woven themselves into the social landscape of the region. They have also become a byword for quality and affordable services delivered to all sections of the society. These institutions are characterised by committed and compassionate staff driven by the selfless pursuit of improving the well-being of society. This is the reason why the region has nursed and nurtured so many eminent people who occupy high positions in varied fields across the country as well as beyond. One of the fruits of this legacy is a more than century old iconic hospital that nestles in the heart of Nagpur city. Named as Mure Memorial Hospital after a British warrior who lost his life in a war while defending his cou...

Pairing not with law but with perpetrators: Pavlovian response to lynchings in India

By Vikash Narain Rai* Lynch-law owes its name to James Lynch, the legendary Warden of Galway, Ireland, who tried, condemned and executed his own son in 1493 for defrauding and killing strangers. But, today, what kind of a person will justify the lynching for any reason whatsoever? Will perhaps resemble the proverbial ‘wrong man to meet at wrong road at night!’

New RTI draft rules inspired by citizen-unfriendly, overtly bureaucratic approach

By Venkatesh Nayak* The Department of Personnel and Training , Government of India has invited comments on a new set of Draft Rules (available in English only) to implement The Right to Information Act, 2005 . The RTI Rules were last amended in 2012 after a long period of consultation with various stakeholders. The Government’s move to put the draft RTI Rules out for people’s comments and suggestions for change is a welcome continuation of the tradition of public consultation. Positive aspects of the Draft RTI Rules While 60-65% of the Draft RTI Rules repeat the content of the 2012 RTI Rules, some new aspects deserve appreciation as they clarify the manner of implementation of key provisions of the RTI Act. These are: Provisions for dealing with non-compliance of the orders and directives of the Central Information Commission (CIC) by public authorities- this was missing in the 2012 RTI Rules. Non-compliance is increasingly becoming a major problem- two of my non-compliance cases are...

Dowry over duty: How material greed shattered a seven-year bond

By Archana Kumar*  This account does not seek to expose names or tarnish identities. Its purpose is not to cast blame, but to articulate—with dignity—the silent suffering of a woman who lived her life anchored in love, trust, and duty, only to be ultimately abandoned.