3

This question is regarding an earlier question: Why is "PMO Cares" in India not under Right to Information?

The accepted answer was that since PM cares fund is not itself a government entity, Right to Information (RTI) would not apply.

established, constituted, owned, controlled or substantially financed by funds provided directly or indirectly—

(i) by the Central Government or the Union territory administration, the Central Government;

(ii) by the State Government, the State Government;

So my question is why is this fund publicized with Prime Minister photo and Government of India Emblem.

1 Answer 1

8

According to the The State Emblem Of India (Prohibition Of Improper Use) Act of 2005, private citizens and companies are prohibited from using India's state emblem "without the previous permission of the Central Government or of such officer of that Government as may be authorised by it in this behalf" (section 3). The implication is that someone within the government of India authorized PMO Cares to use the emblem; possibly the Prime Minister himself (since his picture also appears).

This is not itself an unusual step. Many nations legislate restricted emblems that designate state approval for private enterprises, usually to mark a product as safe, tested, and approved. It's a bit unusual to see the state emblem itself used in this way — I can't think of another case off hand where a national seal is used in a non-governmental capacity by a non-governmental agency — but that's as may be.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .