Author: Krishen Kak
Publication: Vijayvaani.com
Date: April 21, 2011
URL: http://www.vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayArticle.aspx?id=1743
An earlier essay[1] presented data to establish
that Anna Hazare & co. have double standards, that they or their NGOs
demand integrity from public officials when their own record is murky, and
that clearly and emphatically theirs is a case of double standards. In Hazare's
own case, the Justice P.B. Sawant Commission of Inquiry detailed instances
of corruption, illegality and maladministration. State Ministers indicted
by the Commission had to resign, but Hazare was morphed into an anti-corruption
icon.
Hazare's company that was scanned in the earlier
essay was Swami Agnivesh, Kiran Bedi, Mallika Sarabhai and Arvind Kejriwal
(and Medha Patkar and Aruna Roy who too were in his news). That essay drew
attention to unrefuted published data and added fresh data pertaining to Kejriwal's
NGOs. This essay expands on Kejriwal's NGO's publicly-stated accounts.
First, to recapitulate:
The movement called "India Against Corruption"
(IAC) solicits money from the public, but has no account of its own. This
money is passed on to a Kejriwal NGO called "Public Cause Research Foundation"
(PCRF, founded 2006) that in its website till at least April 18, 2011 listed
no information of IAC money it had collected. It presented its accounts from
2006 to 2009 and analysis showed that, for 2006 to 2008, money reported as
used for "charitable purposes" had in fact been used entirely on
itself for routine office/administration expenses. It reported a corpus fund,
the amount and nature of which fluctuated -
- On April 1, 2006 the corpus fund was Rs
13,01,000.[2]
- On March 31, 2007 this had grown to Rs 14,49,168.10
notwithstanding expenses debited from it of Rs 6,31,797, loans given from
it of Rs 2,15,000, and donations received of only Rs 21,400.
- On April 1, 2007 the corpus fund had become
a.: a "specific corpus fund" with
only Re 1,000 (that added Rs 8,10,000 to itself by March 31, 2008), and
b.: a "nonspecific corpus fund"
with Rs 12,48,566 in it.
- No donations were reported for that year,
and the loans from PCRF were to another Kejriwal NGO founded in 1999, that
solicited funds on its website but gave no account of them there.
- On March 31, 2009, the corpus fund (a single
one again) had shot up to Rs 31,51,416, the loans given were Rs 2,46,274,
and no donations were reported.
- There is no financial information for after
31/3/09.
Recall that Kejriwal was in the income-tax
service.
Your IAC money - which you gave because of
Hazare? - is channeled into Kejriwal's PCRF, and from there into other Kejriwal
NGOs.
Then, during and after the "picnic"[3]
that was the Hazare "fast-unto-death", questions were loudly asked
(including by this writer) of who had paid for that media and marketing event,
and who had kept its accounts.
Forced to respond, IAC issued a press statement
and also put up data on its website.
It is not clear from the IAC website when
this "movement" was started[4] but the money it collects goes to
PCRF - which, at least till April 18, 2011, had made no reference in its website
to IAC or IAC's money.
Now, click on "Receipts and Expenditure"
in IAC's website.[5] It opens to a receipt and expenditure "statement...for
30th January rally, indefinite fast in April and all activities related to
preparations thereof."
It reports donations received of Rs 82,87,668,
including 2,871 donations of less than Rs 5,000 each. There are 101 donors
of Rs 5,000 and above (though, oddly, the amount has not been totaled), including
- Rs 25,00,000 by "Jindal Aluminium Ltd/Mr.
Sitaram Jindal",
- Rs 3,00,000 by the "Eicher Good Earth
Trust Mr. Vikram Lal",
- Rs 2,00,000 by Shriram Investments,
- Rs 50,000 by HDFC Bank,
- Rs 25,000 by Common Cause,
- Rs 20,000 by Carmel Convent School, and
- Rs 10,000 by the Jammu & Kashmir Bank
Ltd.[6]
The expenses reported are Rs 32,69,900, including
Rs 81,751 for "food", Rs 44,908 for "medical for those on fast",
and Rs 4,61,382 for "traveling and conveyance".
That's what IAC says.[7] But Kejriwal says
differently. According to him, the expenses include "Rs.6 lakh-Rs.7 lakh
spent in Mumbai. Mumbai accounts were also included in this".[8]
So, whom do we believe?
Rupees 82,87,668 was given over a number of
months to IAC (which has Kejriwal as a founder); IAC passed on the money to
PCRF (founded by Kejriwal) that, till April 18, 2011, still had not declared
this receipt on its official website.
IAC (PCRF?) spent Rs 32,69,900 on its 30th
January rally and its five-day April "picnic".
What happened to the balance of Rs 50,17,768?
That's right - 50 lakh rupees collected from
the public.
Is it held by PCRF in a separate account for
IAC, and is this legal? Or is it added to PCRF's corpus, and is that ethical?
Is it earning interest? Who gets that income?
Isn't the public entitled to know?
PCRF's website boasts it "works for just,
transparent, accountable and participatory governance", but there's not
a single word in its website regarding the IAC movement.[9]. And now with
a cool Rs 50 lakhs in his own NGO's kitty to take care of many of his expenses,
we need not be impressed that Kejriwal declines the sarkari allowance offered
for attending the meetings of the joint drafting committee, or, for that matter,
that he discloses his relatively modest personal assets.
Curiously, Hazare, in disclosing his personal
assets, declared cash assets worth Rs.68,688.36.[10] The same Hazare was able
to make cash advances to one of his NGOs of Rs 70,000 in 1993-94, Rs 50,122
in 1994-95, Rs 1,75,000 in 1997-98, and Rs 69,555 in 2002-03 with all that
money being returned to him in cash in violation of the Income Tax Act - an
illegality, as Justice Sawant noted.[11]
Justice Sawant exculpated Hazare of mala fides
- but that is not the point. As was asked in the earlier essay, are Hazare
& co. prepared to exculpate public officials who act likewise?
Then, after all that hangama of the "fast-unto-death"
("hang them", said Hazare, of the corrupt), he declared "Parliament
was supreme and [he] would accept its decision if it rejects the Lokpal Bill....
We will have to accept it. We believe in democracy". So, then, why did
he engage in that coercive Gandhian fast?[12]
Justice (retd) N Santosh Hegde is the third
"civil society" nominee to the joint drafting committee. He is generally
considered "an upright person in public service" though "he
was alleged to have pressured Chief Minister of Karnataka to remove then Bruhat
Bangalore Mahanagara Palike commissioner S. Subramanya".[13]
That leaves the two Bhushans over whose "civil
society" selection to the joint drafting committee there is a major controversy.
Columnist B.S. Raghavan very strongly supported Hazare's movement, welcomed
the formation of the joint drafting committee, and defended the two Bhushans
- "Both have outstanding legal credentials and their being father and
son is only incidental."[14] Then, at least about that selection, Raghavan
changed his mind, and his reason is worth noting -
"I feel that Shanti and Prashant Bhushan
should resign from the Committee until the SIT which they are demanding goes
into the CD and gives them a clean chit. If we begin accepting the words of
the concerned individuals themselves that whatever they are accused of is
politically motivated, fabricated and concocted dirty tricks, and that they
are innocent, then we need have no investigative and prosecuting agencies
and the judiciary. We may wind them up and save thousands of crores of rupees.
There is no satisfactory explanation for the words "four crores"
(the money with which Prashant was supposed to "manage" the judge)
occurring in the CD, admittedly in the voice of Shanti Bhushan: Prashant was
asked about it at the media meet, and he gave an evasive reply."[15]
And that is exactly the point.
Anna Hazare had demanded that the public officials
appointed to the joint drafting committee be untainted.
Therefore, those who, on behalf of "civil
society", have selected themselves to the joint drafting committee must
themselves be free of the slightest taint of corruption.
Like Caesar's wife, they must be above suspicion.
They're not.
Notes
1.: http://www.vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayArticle.aspx?id=1721;
expanded and updated at
http://www.vigilonline.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1513&Itemid=1
2.: "Mr Kejriwal donated the prize money
of his Magsaysay award as corpus fund to PCRF" - http://www.pcrf.in/index.html.
Did $50,000 convert to Rs 13 lakhs?
3.: http://www.dailypioneer.com/331243/Hazare-has-given-voice-to-the-masses.html
4.: under "Events", the earliest
reference is to a press conference on Oct 29, 2010 -
http://www.indiaagainstcorruption.org/events.php
5.: http://www.indiaagainstcorruption.org/index.php
- no, it wasn't there on April 10, 2011 and was put up as on April 13, 2011,
quite obviously - and this bears repeating - not on its own initiative as
responsible accounting but in response to public pressure.
6.: HDFC Bank is a "scheduled commercial
bank" and the "Jammu & Kashmir Bank is the only Bank in the
country with majority ownership vested with a state government - the Government
of Jammu & Kashmir" - http://www.jkbank.net/history.php . What are
these banks doing, donating depositor money to an anti-government movement?
Moreover, is the Carmel Convent School donation from its own coffers or, as
is usually the case, were its students coerced into collecting chanda?
7.: http://indiaagainstcorruption.org/docs/IAC%20Account%20for%20website.xls
8.: http://www.hindu.com/2011/04/18/stories/2011041863401200.htm
9.: not at http://www.pcrf.in/activities.html
nor even at
http://www.lokrajandolan.org/corruption.html
10.: http://www.hindu.com/2011/04/16/stories/2011041662461600.htm
11.: http://www.scribd.com/doc/32699610/Report-of-JUSTICE-P-B-SAWANT-COMMISSION-OF-INQUIRY,
pp.286-7.
12.: "It is not wrong to say that we
are engaging in terrorism on principles" -
http://www.dailypioneer.com/332327/Will-accept-Parliament-decision-to-reject-Lokpal-Bill-Hazare.html
13.: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N._Santosh_Hegde
, as on April 18, 2011.
14.: http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/opinion/columns/b-s-raghavan/article1696901.ece?homepage=true
15.: BS Raghavan, webgroup email, April 18,
2011 (emphasis added, quoted with his permission).
The author is a retired civil servant and
co-editor of "NGOs, Activists & Foreign Funds: Anti-Nation Industry"
(Chennai: Vigil Public Opinion Forum, 2007)