Coronavirus: Secret surrounds India’s Covid-19 fund PM Narendra Modi ‘$ 1bn’

A fund created by Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to fight Covid-19 is now shrouded in controversy and concern over an alleged lack of transparency, writes the BBC’s Geeta Pandey in Delhi.

On March 27, just days after India started a national blockade to stop the spread of the coronavirus, Narendra Modi created the Prime Minister’s Citizen Relief and Assistance Fund for emergencies. The PM Cares Fund, for short.

A day later, Modi called on “all Indians” to donate.

“It is my call to my Indian compatriots, to kindly contribute to the PM-Cares Fund,” he tweeted, telling the nation that his donations would strengthen India’s fight against Covid-19 and “similar distressing situations” in the future.

“This will go a long way towards creating a healthier India,” he wrote.

Donations came from industrialists, celebrities, companies and the common man. In one week, donations reportedly reached 65 billion rupees ($ 858 million; £ 689 million). The fund is now believed to have exceeded Rs 100 billion.

But PM Cares has been controversial from the start. Many questioned the need for a new fund when a similar one, the PM National Relief Fund or PMNRF, has been in the country since 1948.

Sonia Gandhi, leader of the opposition Congress Party, suggested that the money raised be transferred to the PMNRF. Congress also suggested that the fund be used for the welfare of migrants.

On the day PM Cares was established, a massive humanitarian crisis began to unfold in India: Millions of migrant workers, some of India’s poorest people, began fleeing cities after Modi imposed a sudden national blockade . For weeks, they walked hundreds of miles, hungry and thirsty, to reach their villages. More than 100 died.

It was thought that the government would spend at least part of the money to help those forced to travel, but that did not happen, prompting an opposition member of parliament to change the name of the fund to “PM doesn’t really care.”

In the weeks after the fund was created, questions have also been raised about how it is established and managed, how much money has been raised, from whom and how it is being used.

• Why is India reopening amid a surge in virus cases?
• Could hunger kill more people than coronavirus?

There are no responses to any of these queries on the PM Cares website, and the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO), which manages the fund, has declined to provide any information. Now are opposition politicians, independent activists, and journalists wondering if the government has something to hide?

Petitions have been filed under the Right to Information Law (RTI) and in the courts, seeking greater transparency. But so far, the fund has avoided any public scrutiny by insisting that PM Cares is not a “public authority,” meaning that it is not substantially controlled or funded by the government, and therefore not subject to the Law. RTI. It also means that it cannot be examined by government auditors.

“It is absurd to say that PM Cares is not a public authority,” Kandukuri Sri Harsh, a law student, told the BBC. “Millions of people did not donate to the fund thinking it is a private trust. The money was raised thanks to the strength of the prime minister’s name.”

Kandukuri was one of the first to seek information with an RTI application, filed on April 1, requesting documents on how the trust was formed and how it operates.

He offered several arguments as to why the fund should be a public authority:

• It is controlled by the government: the prime minister is the president, three of his cabinet colleagues are trustees, and the remaining three are appointed by the prime minister.
• The PM Cares website is hosted by “gov.in”, the official government domain
• The fund uses the national emblem of India, which can only be used by government entities
• It is “substantially funded” by the government: all BJP MPs have been asked to donate Rs 10 million from their constituent fund, which is a constitutionally established fund; Government-controlled public sector companies have donated hundreds of millions of rupees; and one day of salary for soldiers, officials and judges have been compulsorily donated to the fund.

“Why is the government hampering?” Mr. Kandukuri said. “What can there be to hide in it?”

A lot, said Saket Gokhale, an activist and former journalist, who described the fund as “the government’s Achilles heel, a blatant scam.”

Colleagues at Modi’s party have denied any wrongdoing regarding the fund. Recently, after weeks of questions about how the money was being used, the Prime Minister’s office said it was spending Rs 20 billion to buy 50,000 fans, Rs 10 billion for the welfare of migrants and Rs 1 billion for the vaccine development.

But the funds allocated to migrants have been criticized for being “too little, too late,” and the choice of fans has also struggled.

“There were no bids for fans, there was no competitive bidding process, it was all very arbitrary,” said Gokhale.

And last week, a report said two government-appointed panels had raised concerns about the reliability and capacity of 10,000 fans purchased under PM Cares.

• Five questions about the growing Covid-19 infections in India
• ‘The Indian health system failed my family’

Mr. Gokhale also questioned the choice of SARC & Associates, the private company that has been chosen to audit the fund. The firm was appointed by Modi to audit the PMNRF in March 2018 without a bidding process.

“All he has to do is his deep connections to the BJP,” said Gokhale. “SK Gupta, who heads it, is a vocal advocate for BJP policies, is the author of a book on Make in India, which is Modi’s favorite project, and organizes quasi-government events abroad. And he has also contributed 20 Rs million to the prime minister. Take care of the fund. Raises fears of suspicious audits. ”

Gupta personally announced the contribution of Rs 20 million through his Twitter account. The BBC asked him to respond to allegations that SARC & Associates was chosen to audit the fund because of his ties to the BJP, but declined to comment.

Nalin Kohli, a BJP spokesperson, defended the fund.

Kohli said that the PMNRF was generally used for natural calamities, and that the reason for establishing PM Cares was to have a more focused approach to dealing with a pandemic. He noted that the PMNRF, created by India’s Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, included the chairman of the Congress party among the administrators.

“There are many political parties in the country and why should a party be included in something that involves public funding for public purposes?” He said.

He said Modi and the other top ministers were involved with PM Cares because of the positions they held, not as representatives of any political party.

Kohli also rejected the charge that the fund lacked transparency. She insisted that SARC & Associates had been “committed solely on merit” and that the fund would comply with all legal compliance.

Concerns about the fund were raised by a few from the opposition, he added. “It is a new fund. What is this urgent need for public responsibility at a time when everyone is busy fighting a pandemic?”

But the opposition not only raises questions about the opacity of the fund. Supreme Court lawyer Surender Singh Hooda, who had filed a petition in the Delhi High Court, described the apparent reluctance of fund managers to disclose information as “unfathomable”.

Mr. Hooda had to withdraw his request because he had not contacted the PMO first as required by law. Now he has emailed them and is preparing to return to court to seek answers.

“I want them to display information on their site: how much money have they received, where and where have they spent it,” he said.

“It is well known that sunlight is the best disinfectant and all undesirable activities are carried out under cover of darkness. Transparency is the foundation of the rule of law, and opacity smells of a hidden motive.”