note demonetisation

50 days of demonetisation: Why isn't the RBI declaring how much money has come back into banks?

Prime Minister Modi has a lot to say about demonetisation but his government is stonewalling RTI queries.


The reasons for demonetisation have never been clear. From declaring war on black money to terror funding, from fake currency to corruption, and finally becoming a cashless (or less-cash) economy, multiple reasons have been cited by senior cabinet ministers and Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

But with 50 days of demonetisation over, there is still no official transparency on how and why the decision was taken.

Denying the Right To Know

Several Right To Information applications filed with the Reserve Bank of India and the Ministry of Finance have yielded either a blank or a rejection on grounds that vary from national security to the integrity of the state. An RTI application filed by this correspondent on November 24 with the Ministry of Finance was accepted by the Department of Financial Services and transferred to the Department of Economic Affairs a day later, but is yet to elicit a response.

The lack of any transparency from the RBI and the Ministry of Finance, at a time when the government has repeatedly enforced greater transparency of citizens on how they spend money, is disturbing. Demonetisation forced people to deposit their old notes, and then imposed a restriction on how much they could withdraw on a weekly basis. Every transaction was supposed to be tracked and filed, leading to investigations by the tax authorities.

However, what actually led to a decision that sucked out 86.5% of India’s cash in a matter of hours is yet to be known, even though the RTI Act stipulates that all details must be released once decision has been taken, even if it is classified as secret.

In the RTI filed with the Ministry of Finance on November 24 by this corespondent, the following information had been sought:

  1. Please share details of all meetings held, including details of who attended them, to plan the demonetisation drive.
  2.   Please clear legible copies of the minutes of the meeting and the agenda of all meetings that were held for demonetisation.
  3.   Please share details and legible copies of all studies, representations, that were received for taking the decision in demonetisation.
  4.   Please share copies of all letters, notes shared or sent to the RBI and other banks in regard to the demonetisation.

However, more than 30 days later – the mandated period within which the reply must be accorded to the applicant – the Ministry of Finance is yet to send a response. In fact, section 4(1) (c) of the RTI Act even states that the government must pro-actively disclose “…all relevant facts while formulating important policies or announcing the decisions which affect public” while section 4 (1) (d) states that it must “…provide reasons for its administrative or quasi-judicial decisions to affected persons”.

While the RTI Act act also lays down specific clauses for denying information, it also states unambiguously under section 8 (1) (i) that the “…decisions of Council of Ministers, the reasons thereof, and the material on the basis of which the decisions were taken shall be made public after the decision has been taken, and the matter is complete, or over”. Clearly, demonetisation, while it has been touted as the “boldest decision” taken by the Bharatiya Janata Party-led National Democratic Alliance government so far, has also been one of its least transparent policies so far.

A similar RTI application file by Venkatesh Nayak of the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative with the RBI was also rejected. While Nayak has appealed the decision, former central information commissioner Shailesh Gandhi has challenged the RBI’s policy on disclosures under RTI.

An opaque decision

Writing in The Indian Express a few days ago, former Deputy Governor of the RBI, Usha Thorat was scathing in her criticism of its lack of transparency. Throat, who served with the RBI for “more than 40 years”, exhorted it to be transparent with data. She noted that RBI had stopped releasing any data after December 12 on the amount of notes returned since the drive was announced. This is problematic on several counts.

One of the key reasons for demonetisation cited by the Prime Minister in his November 8 evening address was to declare a war on black money. He would repeat this theme in Japan and during his address in Panaji, Goa on November 13. However, with over 12 lakh crore of the demonetised currency already back with RBI, nobody is sure how black money has been tackled.

If nearly all the demonetised currency does come back into the system, it will create a serious credibility crisis for the government. It may argue at a later stage that investigations into all the deposits need to be completed before judgment can be passed. But the argument will not work for many citizens who have had restricted access to their hard-earned earnings since November 8.

In his emotional Goa speech, the Prime Minister asked for 50 days before normalcy was restored. However, that claim seems to be in jeopardy as the RBI has been unable to replace the currency that was sucked out earlier.

The government and the RBI have been silent on a number of issues related to this move.

  • It has stopped revealing how much of currency has been returned to the system.
  • There is no data on how much money has been caught or detected as “black money”.
  • There is no clarity on what led to this decision – black money, fake Indian currency, corruption, and so on. Clearly, going digital and cashless was added much later as a reason.
  • How much old money has been caught while it was being laundered.
  • How much new money has been detected being hoarded after laundering the old money.    

What has added to the confusion is a statement from Economic Affairs secretary Shaktikanta Das that RBI might have made mistakes in the counting of the currency returned to it since November 8. In a press interaction on December 15, Das told journalists that there could have been “double counting” of the returned cash, leading to higher figures.

On December 12, the RBI had said 12.44 lakh crore had returned to the banks. Since then, there has been no official update from the RBI, but a report published in The Times of India on December 28, citing unnamed government sources, pegged the amount of cash back in the banks at 90% of the demonetised currency.

What’s wrong with cash

In a piece authored by Minister of External Affairs, M J Akbar asserted “while all cash transactions are not corrupt”, all corruption is “in cash”. However, no big ticket corruption is known to have been conducted in cash transactions. Be it the Bofors pay offs or the recent AgustaWestland case, there was no cash element to the bribes and all were allegedly paid off in foreign currency in bank accounts held abroad.

While assertions have been made that cash is bad, there is no official data on how much of corruption is actually in cash. This is key to the rationale for the decision to demonetise, and in the absence of this data, it will blunt the claims made by the government significantly.

Already, international media, economists and experts have been caustic about the move. The Economist has argued that demonetisation will “probably make limited strides in shrinking the black economy”. Economist and Nobel laureate Paul Krugman has also expressed doubts about the gains from the move, saying it might only force the corrupt to be more careful.

A March 2013 McKinsey report on payments had argued that the high use of cash leads to an expanding “shadow economy”, and pegged it at 26% of the GDP. However, with high denomination notes of Rs 2000 and Rs 500 coming back into circulation, there are doubts about the move’s efficacy in tackling the shadow economy.

Clearly, the lack of transparency, confusing data and the refusal to share official records on the demonetisation decision only add to the suspicions about the government’s real intentions. With the 50 days that Prime Minister Modi had asked for coming to an end, people are looking at uncertain gains, if any. With the next salary circle after demonetisation just a few days away, citizens are running out of patience.

We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content BY 

India’s urban water crisis calls for an integrated approach

We need solutions that address different aspects of the water eco-system and involve the collective participation of citizens and other stake-holders.

According to a UN report, around 1.2 billion people, or almost one fifth of the world’s population, live in areas where water is physically scarce and another 1.6 billion people, or nearly one quarter of the world’s population, face economic water shortage. They lack basic access to water. The criticality of the water situation across the world has in fact given rise to speculations over water wars becoming a distinct possibility in the future. In India the problem is compounded, given the rising population and urbanization. The Asian Development Bank has forecast that by 2030, India will have a water deficit of 50%.

Water challenges in urban India

For urban India, the situation is critical. In 2015, about 377 million Indians lived in urban areas and by 2030, the urban population is expected to rise to 590 million. Already, according to the National Sample Survey, only 47% of urban households have individual water connections and about 40% to 50% of water is reportedly lost in distribution systems due to various reasons. Further, as per the 2011 census, only 32.7% of urban Indian households are connected to a piped sewerage system.

Any comprehensive solution to address the water problem in urban India needs to take into account the specific challenges around water management and distribution:

Pressure on water sources: Rising demand on water means rising pressure on water sources, especially in cities. In a city like Mumbai for example, 3,750 Million Litres per Day (MLD) of water, including water for commercial and industrial use, is available, whereas 4,500 MLD is needed. The primary sources of water for cities like Mumbai are lakes created by dams across rivers near the city. Distributing the available water means providing 386,971 connections to the city’s roughly 13 million residents. When distribution becomes challenging, the workaround is to tap ground water. According to a study by the Centre for Science and Environment, 48% of urban water supply in India comes from ground water. Ground water exploitation for commercial and domestic use in most cities is leading to reduction in ground water level.

Distribution and water loss issues: Distribution challenges, such as water loss due to theft, pilferage, leaky pipes and faulty meter readings, result in unequal and unregulated distribution of water. In New Delhi, for example, water distribution loss was reported to be about 40% as per a study. In Mumbai, where most residents get only 2-5 hours of water supply per day, the non-revenue water loss is about 27% of the overall water supply. This strains the municipal body’s budget and impacts the improvement of distribution infrastructure. Factors such as difficult terrain and legal issues over buildings also affect water supply to many parts. According to a study, only 5% of piped water reaches slum areas in 42 Indian cities, including New Delhi. A 2011 study also found that 95% of households in slum areas in Mumbai’s Kaula Bunder district, in some seasons, use less than the WHO-recommended minimum of 50 litres per capita per day.

Water pollution and contamination: In India, almost 400,000 children die every year of diarrhea, primarily due to contaminated water. According to a 2017 report, 630 million people in the South East Asian countries, including India, use faeces-contaminated drinking water source, becoming susceptible to a range of diseases. Industrial waste is also a major cause for water contamination, particularly antibiotic ingredients released into rivers and soils by pharma companies. A Guardian report talks about pollution from drug companies, particularly those in India and China, resulting in the creation of drug-resistant superbugs. The report cites a study which indicates that by 2050, the total death toll worldwide due to infection by drug resistant bacteria could reach 10 million people.

A holistic approach to tackling water challenges

Addressing these challenges and improving access to clean water for all needs a combination of short-term and medium-term solutions. It also means involving the community and various stakeholders in implementing the solutions. This is the crux of the recommendations put forth by BASF.

The proposed solutions, based on a study of water issues in cities such as Mumbai, take into account different aspects of water management and distribution. Backed by a close understanding of the cost implications, they can make a difference in tackling urban water challenges. These solutions include:

Recycling and harvesting: Raw sewage water which is dumped into oceans damages the coastal eco-system. Instead, this could be used as a cheaper alternative to fresh water for industrial purposes. According to a 2011 World Bank report, 13% of total freshwater withdrawal in India is for industrial use. What’s more, the industrial demand for water is expected to grow at a rate of 4.2% per year till 2025. Much of this demand can be met by recycling and treating sewage water. In Mumbai for example, 3000 MLD of sewage water is released, almost 80% of fresh water availability. This can be purified and utilized for industrial needs. An example of recycled sewage water being used for industrial purpose is the 30 MLD waste water treatment facility at Gandhinagar and Anjar in Gujarat set up by Welspun India Ltd.

Another example is the proposal by Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation (NMMC) to recycle and reclaim sewage water treated at its existing facilities to meet the secondary purposes of both industries and residential complexes. In fact, residential complexes can similarly recycle and re-use their waste water for secondary purposes such as gardening.

Also, alternative rain water harvesting methods such as harvesting rain water from concrete surfaces using porous concrete can be used to supplement roof-top rain water harvesting, to help replenish ground water.

Community initiatives to supplement regular water supply: Initiatives such as community water storage and decentralized treatment facilities, including elevated water towers or reservoirs and water ATMs, based on a realistic understanding of the costs involved, can help support the city’s water distribution. Water towers or elevated reservoirs with onsite filters can also help optimize the space available for water distribution in congested cities. Water ATMs, which are automated water dispensing units that can be accessed with a smart card or an app, can ensure metered supply of safe water.

Testing and purification: With water contamination being a big challenge, the adoption of affordable and reliable multi-household water filter systems which are electricity free and easy to use can help, to some extent, access to safe drinking water at a domestic level. Also, the use of household water testing kits and the installation of water quality sensors on pipes, that send out alerts on water contamination, can create awareness of water contamination and drive suitable preventive steps.

Public awareness and use of technology: Public awareness campaigns, tax incentives for water conservation and the use of technology interfaces can also go a long way in addressing the water problem. For example, measures such as water credits can be introduced with tax benefits as incentives for efficient use and recycling of water. Similarly, government water apps, like that of the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, can be used to spread tips on water saving, report leakage or send updates on water quality.

Collaborative approach: Finally, a collaborative approach like the adoption of a public-private partnership model for water projects can help. There are already examples of best practices here. For example, in Netherlands, water companies are incorporated as private companies, with the local and national governments being majority shareholders. Involving citizens through social business models for decentralized water supply, treatment or storage installations like water ATMs, as also the appointment of water guardians who can report on various aspects of water supply and usage can help in efficient water management. Grass-root level organizations could be partnered with for programmes to spread awareness on water safety and conservation.

For BASF, the proposed solutions are an extension of their close engagement with developing water management and water treatment solutions. The products developed specially for waste and drinking water treatment, such as Zetag® ULTRA and Magnafloc® LT, focus on ensuring sustainability, efficiency and cost effectiveness in the water and sludge treatment process.

BASF is also associated with operations of Reliance Industries’ desalination plant at Jamnagar in Gujarat.The thermal plant is designed to deliver up to 170,000 cubic meters of processed water per day. The use of inge® ultrafiltration technologies allows a continuous delivery of pre-filtered water at a consistent high-quality level, while the dosage of the Sokalan® PM 15 I protects the desalination plant from scaling. This combination of BASF’s expertise minimizes the energy footprint of the plant and secures water supply independently of the seasonal fluctuations. To know more about BASF’s range of sustainable solutions and innovative chemical products for the water industry, see here.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of BASF and not by the Scroll editorial team.