Clarifies 2012 MoU with IFES Had No Financial Involvement
Former Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) S.Y. Quraishi has dismissed reports alleging that the Election Commission of India (ECI) signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) in 2012 with a U.S. agency to receive $21 million for increasing voter turnout in India. In a statement, Quraishi asserted that the claims had “not an iota of fact.”
He clarified that the MoU was signed with the International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES) in 2012, during his tenure as CEC, and was similar to agreements the ECI had with various other election management bodies worldwide. The primary purpose of these MoUs, he explained, was to facilitate training for foreign officials at the India International Institute of Democracy and Election Management (IIIDEM), ECI’s training and resource center.
“No Financing or Promise of Finance Involved”
Quraishi categorically stated that there was no financial aspect linked to the MoU. “There was no financing or even promise of finance involved in the MoU, forget X or Y amount,” he asserted. He further clarified that the agreement explicitly stated—at two different places—that neither party would bear any financial or legal obligation, leaving no room for ambiguity.
BJP Alleges “External Interference” in India’s Electoral Process
Reacting to a post by DOGE on social media, BJP leader Amit Malviya termed the reported funding an act of “external interference” in India’s electoral process. Questioning who the real beneficiary was, Malviya stated, “$21M for voter turnout? This definitely is external interference in India’s electoral process. Who gains from this? Not the ruling party for sure!”
He further alleged that the now-cancelled program was indicative of the previous Congress-led UPA government’s actions, suggesting that it had enabled foreign influence over Indian institutions.
Quraishi Labels Reports “False and Malicious”
Refuting these allegations, Quraishi reiterated that the MoU did not involve any financial transaction and called the reports “completely false and malicious.” He emphasized that the ECI has historically maintained its independence and that the allegations were an attempt to mislead the public regarding the nature of international collaborations undertaken by India’s election body.
