Skip to main content

Facilitate those who missed demonetisation bus to exchange old notes

By Venkatesh Nayak*
Print and electronic media have highlighted the plight of a young woman who approached the New Delhi office of the Reserve Bank of India to change some demonetised currency notes that she had. Apparently the security personnel did not even allow her to enter the RBI office premises. A police officer is said to have commented on the torn state of the currency notes that this daily-wager carried with her, which was why she was not allowed to enter the building. Exasperated, the woman is said to have stripped down in protest in front of her son while a bystander recorded the entire event on his mobile and circulated it in cyberspace.
According to media reports, this was not her first attempt to exchange her old notes at RBI’s Delhi office. If this version is a true record of what happened, it is extremely disturbing that the security personnel tried to usurp the role of the RBI officials who are the only competent authorities to allow or refuse demonetisation related transactions. Even if the woman had been permitted entry into the RBI’s premises, it is not unlikely that she would have been turned away again. Here is why I think so.

Government must not renege on the commitment made on 8th November, 2016

Most readers in India may remember the passionate justification that the Hon’ble Prime Minister gave in the evening of 8th November when he announced the decision to demonetise currency notes of Rs. 500 and Rs. 1,000 denomination. The entire country was thrown into a financial turmoil because more than 85% of the currency notes in circulation had suddenly stopped being legal tender, except in a small set of transactions permitted by the Government. Ever since, people have queued up before banks to deposit the demonetised notes and collect the value of the same in the small instalments that the Government had permitted.
People bore this drudgery with patience, hour after hour, day after day and week after week as the promise of dealing a death blow to black money, ending terror financing and combatting corruption – all long standing ills plaguing the formal economy- appeared truly exciting. In the process scores of citizens died on both sides of the cash counter- those eager to deposit the old notes and collect the replacement as well as bankers who facilitated this exchange. It is too early to make a sound assessment about whether this was a price worth paying.
The time limit for depositing the demonetised notes ended on 30 December, 2016. However the Gazette notification through which the demonetisation decision was announced, provided that a procedure would be laid down for depositing the demonetised notes after 30 December, 2016. The relevant para is reproduced below:
“2(ix) any person who is unable to exchange or deposit the specified bank notes in their bank accounts on or before the 30th December, 2016, shall be given an opportunity to do so at specified offices of the Reserve Bank or such other facility until a later date as may be specified by it.”
The Government seems to have created a major but clearly avoidable problem for itself while promulgating the Specified Bank Notes (Cessation of Liabilities) Ordinance on the 30th of December. While the primary purpose of the Ordinance is to bring to an end all liabilities of RBI and the Government vis-a-vis the demonetised currency notes, it also makes possession of the same in quantities beyond what is permitted by the Ordinance a crime. However Section 4 of the Ordinance provides a grace period for people who could not deposit their demonetised notes before 30th December. The FAQs put up on the RBI’s website unfortunately make it appear that this grace period is available only for people who were residing abroad. The relevant query and answer posted by RBI are reproduced below:
“3. What is the Specified Bank Notes (Cessation of Liabilities) Ordinance 2016?
The Specified Bank Notes (Cessation of Liabilities) Ordinance 2016 has been promulgated by the President of India (GoI Ordinance No. 10 of 2016 dated December 30, 2016) to provide for cessation of liabilities on the Specified Banknotes and for connected/incidental matters and comes into effect from December 31, 2016. In terms of this ordinance, with effect from December 31, 2016, the Specified Bank Notes shall cease to be the liabilities of the Reserve Bank of India and shall cease to have the guarantee of the Central Government.
A grace period has been provided during which the Specified Bank Notes can be deposited at five RBI Offices (Mumbai, New Delhi, Chennai, Kolkata, and Nagpur) in accordance with this Ordinance by Indian citizens who make a declaration that they were outside India between November 9 and December 30, 2016, subject to conditions or any class of persons for reasons that may be specified by notification by the Central Government.
The Reserve Bank, if satisfied after making the necessary verifications, that the reasons for failure to deposit the notes till December 30, 2016 are genuine, will credit the value of notes in the KYC (Know Your Customer) compliant bank account of the tenderer.
Holding the specified banknotes (SBNs) for the purpose of deposit by Resident Indian citizens who were abroad during November 9, 2016 to December 30, 2016 and Non Resident Indian citizens who were abroad during November 9, 2016 to December 30, 2016 is permissible during grace period. With effect from January 2, 2017 Resident Indian citizens who were abroad during November 9, 2016 to December 30, 2016 can avail this facility upto March 31, 2017 and Non Resident Indian citizens who were abroad during November 9, 2016 to December 30, 2016 can avail this facility upto June 30, 2017. While there is no monetary limit for exchange for the eligible Resident Indians, the limit for NRIs will be as per the relevant FEMA Regulations. In terms of Section 6 of the Ordinance, whoever knowingly or wilfully makes any false declaration shall be punishable with a fine which may extend to 50,000 INR or five times the amount of the face value of the SBNs tendered whichever is higher. Any person aggrieved by the refusal of the Reserve Bank to credit the value of notes as mentioned above may make a representation to the Central Board of the Reserve Bank within 14 days of the communication of such refusal to him/her.”

What is wrong with the RBI’s FAQ when read with the Ordinance?

Section 4(1) of the Ordinance is crystal clear in its scope and application and is reproduced below:
“Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 3, the following persons holding specified bank notes on or before the 8th day of November, 2016 shall be entitled to tender within the grace period with such declarations or statements, at such offices of the Reserve Bank or in such other manner as may be specified by it, namely:
(i) a citizen of India who makes a declaration that he was outside India between the 9th November, 2016 to 30th December, 2016 subject to such conditions as may be specified, by notification by the Central Government; or
(ii) such class of persons and for such reasons as may be specified, by notification, by the Central Government.”
However, a second notification issued by the Department of Economic Affairs on 30th December permits the grace period for depositing the demonetised notes only for Indian citizens who had gone abroad or for Non Resident Indians (NRIs). The relevant para is reproduced below:
“E).—In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 2, read with clause (i) of sub-section (1) of section 4, of the Specified Bank Notes (Cessation of Liabilities) Ordinance, 2016 (Ord. 10 of 2016), the Central Government hereby specifies, in respect of a citizen of India, referred to in clause (i) of sub-section (1) of section 4 of the said Ordinance:
(a) who is a resident in India, the period ending on the 31st day of March, 2017; and
(b) who is not resident in India, the period ending on the 30th day of June, 2017, as the grace period for the purposes of the said Ordinance:”
So this second notification is designed to cater to the interests of only the rich and the affluent- those who had the means to travel abroad or NRIs who live abroad. As explained above, Section 4(1) of the Ordinance empowers the Government to notify other classes of citizens also who can avail the grace period for exchanging the demonetised notes. The Government has simply not issued any specification about this second category of citizens, till date. While the Ordinance permits a way for citizens living in India who missed the 30 December deadline, to exchange their demonetised notes the Government has simply not chosen to enforce this provision.
In my humble opinion, this amounts to reneging on the promise that the Hon’ble Prime Minister made on 8th November and the commitment made in the Government’s notification of that date. Is this a an administrative delay or an administrative lapse or put bluntly, skulduggery, readers may decide for themselves.

Turning the hardship principle on its head

Given the noble objectives behind the demonetisation exercise, according to the official version dished out, the principle ought to have been maximum pain for those whom the exercise targetted, namely the black money hoarders, the corrupt and those financing terror and minimum hardship for the law abiding. Instead, in actual experience the exercise is turning out to be maximum pain for the honest, sincere and law abiding citizens who have only their hard earned savings to live on, as shown by the story of the daily-wager woman who protested outside the RBI office in Delhi.
Further, as such exchange facility is permitted only in the offices of RBI at New Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai, Kolkata and Nagpur, even the rich and the affluent belonging to other citizens and towns will have to spend extra money to go to these places. It is interesting that the remaining 26 offices of RBI covering other States have not been opened up. Maharashtra seems to be prized with two locations for this exchange facility.
Many lay readers think that that currency notes are government property. In my humble opinion, this impression is completely wrong. The RBI may print currency notes under a statute but that is only coloured paper with a promise to honour it. The actual value of the currency notes arises from the transactions that people enter into every day. The value of each currency note resides in these transactions. The currency notes only facilitate the procedure for transfer of value from one person to another in a lawful manner.
Those amongst readers who are students of history will remember that the first coins were minted in India not by the State or by kings, but by srenis and negamas (which in modern parlance may be called trading guilds or chambers of commerce). The State stepped in only as a regulator of the financial transactions in order to protect the meek from the greedy. It is high time citizens realise this truth and shed the mai-baap sarkar mentality which is anathema to a functional democracy.
It is advisable for the Government to take immediate steps to:
1) notify criteria that will facilitate all honest and law-abiding citizens who missed the demonetisation bus to exchange their old currency notes; and
2) open up more centres across the country to facilitate this exchange up to 30 June, 2017 as has been permitted for NRIs.
Anything less will be a violation of Article 14 of the Constitution where every person (and not just a citizen) is guaranteed equality before the law and equal treatment by the law. It will also be a violation of the promise – sab ka saath, sab ka vikas – which the National Democratic Alliance made during the 2014 general elections.

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

Comments

TRENDING

Mental health: We talk of poverty figures, but not increase in suicides since 2014

By IMPRI Team Highlighting  the issue of mental health and addressing the challenges involved, # IMPRI Gender Impact Studies Center (GISC) , IMPRI Impact and Policy Research Institute, New Delhi organized a panel discussion on Institutional Support for Mental Health and Wellbeing under the #WebPolicyTalk series The State of Gender Equality – #GenderGaps . The discussion was chaired by Prof Vibhuti Patel, Visiting Professor, IMPRI and Former Professor, Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS), Mumbai . The distinguished panel included – Prof Anuradha Sovani, Former Professor and Head, Department of Psychology, and Former Dean, Faculty of Humanities at SNDT Women’s University, Mumbai and National Core Committee member and Ethics Committee Chairperson, Association of Adolescent and Child Care India ; Dr Soumitra Pathare, Director, Centre for Mental Health Law & Policy at Indian Law Society, Pune ; Dr Swati Rane, Founder CEO at SevaShakti Healthcare Consultancy, Mumbai and Founder V

How India, Bangladesh perceive, manage Sunderbans amidst climate change

By IMRPI Team The effects of climate change have been evident, and there have been a lot of debates around the changes to be made locally to help and save the earth. In this light, the nations met at the COP 26 conference recently. To discuss this further, the Center for Environment, Climate Change and Sustainable Development (CECCSD) , IMPRI Impact and Policy Research Institute, New Delhi , organized a panel discussion on “COP 26 and Locally Led Adaptations in India and Bangladesh Sunderbans” under the #WebPolicyTalk series- The State of the Environment – #PlanetTalks . The talk was chaired by Dr Jayanta Basu, Director, Non-profit EnGIO, Faculty at Calcutta University and an Environmental Journalist, The Telegraph , ABP . The Moderator of the event, Dr Simi Mehta, CEO and Editorial Director, IMPRI , started the discussion by stressing the talk on the living conditions of people living in the Sunderbans Delta from both the countries, i.e. India and Bangladesh. According to the report

NEP: Education must shift away from knowledge, move to teaching students

Dr Anjusha Gawande* The Education sector in the globe is changing dramatically. Many manual jobs may be captured over by machines as a consequence of multiple spectacular advances in science and technology, including the machine learning, and artificial intelligence. A professional workforce, particularly one that includes mathematics, computer science, and data science, as well as multidisciplinary competencies in the sciences, social sciences, and humanities, will be in incredibly popular. As a result, education must shift away from knowledge and toward teaching students, how to be creative and transdisciplinary, and how to innovate, adapt, and process information differently in innovative and rapidly changing sectors. The education development agenda at the global level is represented in Goal 4 (SDG4) of India's 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, which was adopted in 2015. Ministry of Education has announced the National Education Policy 2020 (NEP 2020) on 29.07.2020. In J

Dishonesty, corruption, manipulation and sustainable growth of mediocrity

By Arup Mitra* The theory of mediocrity would suggest that the meritorious who are always small in number as a nature’s gift will be dominated by a vast number of mediocre as the latter cannot withstand the inferiority they suffer from. By subjugating the merit, they derive a pleasure of having established their superiority. Such processes are functional in all spheres in life though the field of art is the worst sufferer. An artist mind is most sensitive and those who are meritorious in this lot possess exceptionally different traits. This makes them more vulnerable and, on the other hand, it paves the path of the mediocre to cast their shadows all around. Unjust and strong criticisms are sufficient to detract many. In developing countries, the modes of subjugation are many. Individuals do not hesitate to take recourse to criminal means as the subconscious prevalent with vengeance, accesses easily the outlets for execution. The lack of civility and the power of money form a unique com

Migrant problem during Covid and the role of equality for cohesive development

By IMPRI Team  The covid-19 pandemic has deepened the pre-existing inequalities across socio-economic groups, the distressing images of migrants’ exposure remained attached in our minds but not a lot has changed in terms of data collection and policy making since then to understand the role of equality for cohesive development. Cohesive development also means that human beings should respect the boundaries of nature which they cross at their own peril and the peril of other living beings on earth. In lieu to this, The State of Development Discourses – #CohesiveDevelopment, #IMPRI Center for Human Dignity and Development (CHDD) , #IMPRI Impact and Policy Research Institute , New Delhi organized #WebPolicyTalk with Prof Amiya Kumar Bagchi, on The Role of Equality for Cohesive Development. The session is inaugurated by Ms Mahima Kapoor, researcher and assistant editor at IMPRI. Ms Mahima Kapoor extended her gratitude to the speaker, moderator and the discussant. The moderator for the eve

Parallel govts: How unity of various streams of freedom movements took shape in India

By Bharat Dogra  In one of the most inspiring examples of highly courageous spontaneous actions based on the unity of people, parallel governments were formed by freedom fighters in several parts of India in the course of the Quit India Movement in 1942. Although generally four such leading efforts have been identified in Satara (Maharashtra), Talcher (Odisha), Tamluk (West Bengal) and Ballia (Uttar Pradesh), there were some other smaller efforts as well such as those in Bhagalpur (Bihar) and Gurpal (Balasore, Odisha). It is very interesting to see in most of these efforts (also very significant for understanding the freedom movement) that there was constant merging of the various streams of the freedom movement, with more militant activities openly taking place with the help of quickly mobilized militias and this being combined with various constructive programs emphasized by Mahatma Gandhi such as anti-liquor efforts and anti-untouchability movements. In addition we see actions in

West Bengal police inaction in immoral trafficking case of a Muslim woman

Kirity Roy, Secretary, Banglar Manabadhikar Suraksha Mancha (MASUM) writes to the Chairman, National Human Rights Commission, on Muslim woman victim trafficking, police inaction, and need immediate rescue: I am writing to inform you about a case of illegal trafficking and profuse police inaction regarding the same of a marginalized Muslim teenager named Anima Khatun (name changed), daughter of Mr. Osman Ali. The victim and her husband had been residents of the village Daribas, under Dinhata police station Cooch Behar district since their marriage in 2014. Six months following their marriage, Anima Khatun along with her husband, sister-in-law, sister-in-law's husband as well as her in-laws shifted to Delhi in search of work. They stayed there for 2 years after which they all came back to their native village. They stayed at their native residence for about one month and then they went back to Delhi. In Delhi, Anima was in touch with her family till the next six months, after which t

Impact of climate change on Gujarat pastoralists' traditional livelihood

By Varsha Bhagat-Ganguly, Karen Pinerio* We are sharing a study[1] based learning on climate resilience and adaptation strategies of pastoralists of Kachchh district, Gujarat. There are two objectives of the study: (i) to examine the impact of climate on traditional livelihood of pastoralists of Gujarat state; and (ii) to explore and document the adaptation strategies of pastoralists in mitigating climate adversities, with a focus on the role of women in it. In order to meet these objectives, the research inquiries focused on how pastoralists perceive climate change, how climate change has impacted their traditional livelihood, i.e., pastoralism in drylands (Kr├Ątli 2015), and how these pastoral families have evolved adaptation strategies that address climate change (CC)/ variabilities, i.e., traditional livelihood of pastoralists of Kachchh district, Gujarat state. Pastoralism is more than 5,000 years old land-use strategy in India; it is practised by nomadic (their entire livelihood r

Bangladesh sets shining example of communal peace, harmony in South Asia

By Dr. Abantika Kumari Bangladesh is made up of 160 million people who are multi-religious, multi-ethnic, and multi-lingual. The Constitution of Bangladesh guarantees all citizens the freedom to freely and peacefully practice their chosen religions. Religious minorities make up roughly 12% of Bangladesh's present population, according to conservative estimates . Hindus account for 10% of the population, Buddhists for 1%, Christians at 0.50 percent, and ethnic minorities for less than 1%. As an example of how people of different religions can live together, cooperate together, and simply be together, Bangladesh is regarded. Bangladesh is a country that values religious liberty, harmony, and tolerance. Bangladesh's population is made up of a diverse spectrum of religious groupings and ethnic groups. Such communities and groups live in harmony, putting aside their differences and learning to embrace and respect the diverse and diversified culture that has contributed to Bangladesh

Political leaders' actions are causing decontextualisation of democracy

By Harasankar Adhikari In India, does democracy become a matter of prescription, i.e., to follow the footpath left? Isn't it, in some ways, the adoption of certain prescribed procedures and mechanisms, such as timely election and populist schemes for the poor, etc.? In some cases, acts of government and governance turn democracy into a myth. It is full of political party-based agendas. This continuous hegemonic practise creates a conditional situation for the people of India. People elect their representatives who are not their representatives. They are only representatives of a particular political party that nominated them in the election. Democratic decentralisation of power is undoubtedly a unique step towards the grass roots. But a Panchayat member has no free will to act without the party’s instruction and approval. Michael Saward, a political philosopher, defines democracy as a matter of correspondence in state-society relationships. But India’s parliamentary democracy is un