Skip to main content

If PM-CARES isn't public authority, why are Indian embassies 'seeking' funds for it?

Counterview Desk

In an open letter, addressed to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, as many as 100 ex-civil servants, forming part of the Constitutional Conduct Group (CCG), have wondered as to why the Government of India has refused to divulge details of why the PM-CARES Fund cannot be considered considered a Public Authority under the ambit of Section 2(h) of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005.
The refusal, which came in a reply to an RTI plea, said that PM-CARES or the or the Prime Minister’s Citizen Assistance and Relief in Emergency Situations fund, is “controlled by government” but doesn’t come under RTI Act.
The civil servants ask, “If it is not a public authority, how have the Prime Minister, Home Minister, Defence Minister and Finance Minister, as members of the government, lent their designations and official positions to it? Why are they Trustees in their official capacity and not as private citizens?”

Text:

We are a group of former civil servants of the All India and Central Services who have worked for decades with the Central and State Governments. As a group, we have no affiliation with any political party but are committed to the Constitution of India.
We have been keenly following the ongoing debate about the “Citizen Assistance and Relief in Emergency Situations”, or "PM-CARES" – a fund created for the benefit of people affected by the Covid pandemic. Both the purpose for which it has been created as well as the way it has been administered have left a number of questions unanswered.
The speed with which the fund was set up was breath-taking. It was registered on 27 March 2020, within three days of the first nationwide lockdown. As per information available on the website of the fund, in less than a week, the fund had received Rs 3,076.62 crore. The actual amount received to date is yet to be disclosed.
The immediate cause of this letter is the refusal of the Government of India on December 24, 2020, to divulge details under the Right to Information (RTI) Act on the grounds that the PM Cares Fund is not a Public Authority under the ambit of Section 2(h) of the RTI Act, 2005. If it is not a public authority, how have the Prime Minister, Home Minister, Defence Minister and Finance Minister, as members of the government, lent their designations and official positions to it? Why are they Trustees in their official capacity and not as private citizens?
If PM-CARES is a private Trust, should donations to it be eligible as Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) expenditure? Schedule VII (ix) under Section 135 of the Companies Act allows CSR exemptions for only certain types of funds established by Government including for socio-economic and relief work. On March 28, 2020, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs issued a circular stating:
“Item no. (viii) of Schedule VII of the Companies Act, 2013, which enumerates activities that may be undertaken by companies in discharge of their CSR obligations, inter alia provides that contribution to any fund set up by the Central Government for socio-economic development and relief qualifies as CSR expenditure. The PM-CARES Fund has been set up to provide relief to those affected by any kind of emergency or distress situation. Accordingly, it is clarified that any contribution made to the PM-CARES Fund shall qualify as CSR expenditure under the Companies Act 2013.”
Clearly, contributions to the fund could not have been legitimate CSR expenditure had the fund not been “set up by the Central Government”.
The question that then arises is whether the circular of March 28, 2020 is legally deficient, more particularly when the Ministry of Corporate Affairs issues a gazette notification on May 26, 2020 to include this fund in Schedule VII under Section 135 of the Companies Act as eligible to receive CSR funds with retrospective effect from March 28, 2020. The new entry of PM-CARES to the list at item (viii) in Schedule VII comes after the entry “Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund (PMNRF)”. Why was the new fund necessary when the nation already had a fund for national relief?
The Trust deed of the PM-CARES fund states in point 5.3 that:
“This trust is neither intended to be or is in fact owned, controlled or substantially financed by any government or any instrumentality of the government. There is no control of either the central government or any state governments, either direct or indirect, in the functioning of the trust in any manner whatsoever."
AR Antulay

Then how is it that such large deposits have come from the public sector? If the Fund is not a public authority, why are our Embassies seeking funds from abroad? The MEA’s press release of March 30, 2020 states that in a video conference you had with our Ambassadors on that day, you had explicitly “advised Heads of Mission to suitably publicize the newly-established PM-CARES Fund to mobilize donations from abroad.”
BJP challenged AR Antulay, who in 1980, as Maharashtra chief minister, created a private fund couched as government's, Indira Gandhi Pratibha Pratishthan
Most certainly, the fact that you and other senior Ministers of Government handling sensitive portfolios are Trustees would ensure a substantial flow of funds. Also, contributions are being solicited by government officials from private citizens. The then Secretary, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, appealed to the Institute of Chartered Accountants (ICAI) to donate to the Fund and the ICAI complied. Can the Secretary seek donations from an organisation he has official dealings with?
Though the PM-CARES fund is not being accepted as a public authority, under the RTI Act, in 2019, the Supreme Court held that trusts, societies and non-government organisations, both private and public, which enjoy “substantial government financing”, should be treated as “public authorities” under the RTI Act. The substantial government funding in the case of PM-CARES is evident from the wages and other moneys received directly or indirectly from the Consolidated Fund.
As per a “Times of India” report on May 19, 2020, out of over Rs 10,600 crore in the fund, over Rs 3,200 crore was from public companies and nearly Rs 1,200 crore from public sector employees – apparently from out of salaries and wages of members of the defence forces, and other government and semi-government organisations.
There is a clear absence of transparency in every aspect of PM-CARES. Neither details of donors and amounts received nor details of expenditures incurred are in the public domain. This opacity is disturbing as the State governments handling the Covid-19 challenge were, and continue to be, sorely in need of financial assistance.
Public memory is short, Mr Prime Minister. The young people of our country may not have even heard of AR Antulay, who in 1980, as the Chief Minister of Maharashtra, created a number of funds, including one called the Indira Gandhi Pratibha Pratishthan. In that case, the fund was apparently a private fund but couched as if it were the Government’s. Ultimately, Antulay was charged by BJP functionaries in court and had to resign.
It is necessary that, for reasons of probity and adherence to standards of public accountability, the financial details of receipts and expenditures be made available in order to avoid doubts of wrongdoing. In the well-known 1975 Raj Narain case, Justice Mathew observed that “the people of this country have a right to know every public act, everything that is done in a public way by their public functionaries.” It is essential that the position and stature of the Prime Minister is kept intact by ensuring total transparency in all dealings the Prime Minister is associated with.
---
Click here for signatories

Comments

TRENDING

Savarkar 'criminally betrayed' Netaji and his INA by siding with the British rulers

By Shamsul Islam* RSS-BJP rulers of India have been trying to show off as great fans of Netaji. But Indians must know what role ideological parents of today's RSS/BJP played against Netaji and Indian National Army (INA). The Hindu Mahasabha and RSS which always had prominent lawyers on their rolls made no attempt to defend the INA accused at Red Fort trials.

Did Netaji turn blind eye to Japanese massacre while in Andaman during World War-II?

Dr Diwan Singh Kalepani museum off Chandigarh By Rajiv Shah  Did Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose ignore the massacre carried out by the Japanese army in Andaman and Nicobar islands during the Second World War? It would seem so, if one goes by the account of Mohinder Singh Dhillon, who authored a book in memory of his father, 'A Titan in the Andamans, Dr Diwan Singh Kalepani'. Dr Diwan Singh was tortured to death by the Japanese soldiers in the cellular jail in Andaman in 1944.

A golden goose, GoI bent on selling LIC 'for pittance' without consulting stakeholders

By Thomas Franco*  In spite of strong opposition from all sections of the society, the Finance Minister (FM) recently asked her Ministries to speed up Life Insurance Corporation (LIC) Initial Public Offer (IPO). Does she realise that this can lead to collapse of the economy over a period of time because LIC is a golden goose which is giving golden eggs regularly to the economy, development projects and providing social security to the majority of the marginalised people of this country.

Modi's Gujarat 'ignores' India's biggest donor of Azad Hind Fauj, Dhoraji's Habib Sheth

By Dr Hari Desai* One surely feels happy that the statue of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose is being installed near the India Gate in New Delhi. Every Indian and even Netaji’s 79-year-old daughter Prof Anita Bose Pfaff feels happy about the statue at the most important area of the capital. In an interview with an Indian TV, Anita, who is a German citizen, mentions that she thinks if not Netaji’s only Mahatma Gandhi’s statue should have been there. She may be aware that there existed a plan to install life-sized statue of the Father of the Nation at that place.  Even after differences with Mahatma Gandhi and Sardar Patel which led Netaji to leave the Indian National Congress, Bose was the first person to call Mahtma Gandhi Father of the Nation on July 6,1944 in his Ragoon Radio broadcast, and sought Bapu’s blessings as the Supreme Commander of the Indian National Army (INA). Till 1968 there was statue of King George V at India Gate. It was removed and placed in the Coronation Park, New Del

Sweden-backed study: India won't achieve 2030 UN goals, officials can't recognise SDG

By Rajiv Shah  A Swedish Society for Nature Conservation (SSNC)-sponsored study, carried out by the advocacy group Consumer Unity & Trust Society (CUTS) India, seeking to analyse the United Nation's Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) No 12, Responsible Consumption and Production (RCP), has regretted, it is "very unlikely" India will achieve any of the targets of SDG 12 by 2030 "unless some serious measures are taken by the government to reverse the present trend."

Savarkar 'opposed' Bhagat Singh's, Netaji's dream of India, supported British war efforts

By Shamsul Islam* In a shocking development, the student wing of the RSS put the busts of martyrs Bhagat Singh and Subhash Chandra Bose with Savarkar's on one pedestal at the University of Delhi late in the night on August 20, 2019. Bhagat Singh sacrificed his life for a socialist-democratic-secular republic and Netaji raised Azad Hind Fauj (INA) consisting of people of all religions and regions for armed liberation of India.

Biodiversity bill 'undermines' tribal rights, ayurveda, India's federal structure

Counterview Desk  Demanding immediate and complete withdrawal of proposed Biodiversity Act Amendment Bill, 2021, a statement issued by the Coalition for Environmental Justice in India, consisting of tens of civil society organisations, activists and experts, has said that it is a “well calibrated and clear attempt to progressively undermine and destroy the sovereign rights and control that the people of India have over their biodiversity, bioresources and associated traditional knowledge.” Floated by the Bangaluru-based Environment Support Group, it adds, the proposed Act would undermine “a right that is particularly crucial for adivasis, Dalits, farmers, fishers, vaids, hakims, nomadic and de-notified tribes, and such other natural resource dependent peoples whose lives, livelihoods and socio-economic wellbeing are intricately linked to nature.” Text : The Union Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) has proposed comprehensive amendments to the Biological D

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.

Is it time to celebrate India's 'improved' sex ratio? Reasons to question NFHS data

By Aditi Chaudhary*  The recently published National Family Health Survey (NFHS) factsheet brought cheers amongst the public and the government. With Child Sex ratio (number of females per 1000 males in the age group 0 - 6 years) and overall sex ratio (the total number of females per 1000 males), both showing an improvement, NFHS-5 (2019-21) got applauded by all around.

Blunting Constitution? 'Secular' parties using communalism to compete with BJP

By Prem Singh*  Most spheres of Indian politics have been tainted by communalism. Looking at the current political scene of the country, it seems that just as there is a consensus on neoliberalism among the political and intellectual elite of India, similarly a consensus has been made on communal politics or political communalism.