Kochi: CPM Ernakulam district secretary S Satheesh on Friday announced that the party would launch both legal and political action against the state government’s decision to close the probe by the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) into the alleged ‘Punarjani’ foreign fund case involving Chief Minister VD Satheesan, calling the move an “abuse of power” and a departure from established legal procedures.
Addressing the media in Kochi, Satheesh alleged that the Home Minister Ramesh Chennithala had bypassed the normal process by announcing a clean chit even before the Vigilance report was placed before the court.
“Very clear evidence is present right in front of us that he went abroad and intervened to collect money abroad. However, within 70 days of coming into power, what we see is the Home Minister announcing that a clean chit has been given by setting aside the previous Vigilance report,” Satheesh said.
He claimed that, until now, VACB reports had always reached the public domain only after being submitted before the court.
“Whenever Vigilance reports came out, the people of Kerala came to know about them through news reports stating that the concerned officials had submitted them before the court. But here, the Home Minister himself announced a clean chit. This is wrong, it is an abuse of power, and it is something Kerala cannot accept,” he said.
The controversy pertains to the ‘Punarjani Project’, a post-flood rehabilitation initiative launched by Satheesan in his constituency, Paravur, after the 2018 Kerala floods. Satheesan, who was then MLA, had been accused of travelling to the United Kingdom in 2019 and soliciting around ₹1.27 crore in foreign contributions without obtaining the mandatory permissions from the central government or the Legislative Assembly Secretariat, allegedly violating provisions of the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA).
However, the state government decided to close the Vigilance case after accepting a report by Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) Director Manoj Abraham. Announcing the decision on Thursday, Chennithala said the probe had found no evidence linking Satheesan to any financial irregularities, maintaining that the funds were directly transferred to the FCRA-registered account of the Ernakulam-based Manappat Foundation and that the Chief Minister neither handled nor utilised the money.
Rejecting the government’s stand, Satheesh alleged that the decision to close the case ignored clear evidence that Satheesan had directly appealed for donations abroad.
“It is unheard of for the Home Minister himself to directly issue a clean chit by altering a prior Vigilance report. Normally, Vigilance reports are submitted to the court. Throwing all those procedures to the wind, this extraordinary announcement was made despite clear evidence remaining regarding the collection of funds from abroad,” he said.
The CPM leader also questioned the implementation of the ‘Punarjani’ project, alleging that only 19 houses were built instead of the claimed 219 under the initiative and that even those were completed through other agencies. He also challenged the UDF to make the addresses of the 219 houses, constructed through ‘Punarjani’, public.
“Attempts were made to affix the ‘Punarjani’ label on those who had received houses through the Rebuild Kerala initiative and other institutions. Furthermore, there is no proper transparency regarding the funds collected by the Congress and Satheesan for the Wayanad rehabilitation fund. This approach makes it clear that natural disasters are being converted into a means for extortion,” he alleged.
Satheesh further claimed that the government’s decision to close the Vigilance case reflected concerns over the possibility of a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe, which, according to him, had been recommended before the change in government.
He said the CPM would challenge the decision legally while simultaneously launching state-wide public protests, alleging that the government’s action had undermined due process and accountability in the handling of the case.
