Maritime News, Mumbai, India — The Ministry of Ports, Shipping and Waterways (MoPSW) has hailed India Maritime Week (IMW) 2025 as a resounding success — ₹12 lakh crore in investment pledges, 600 MoUs signed, 85 countries represented.
But as the celebratory headlines fade, questions of transparency, legality, and financial accountability are growing louder.
Despite the fanfare, the ministry has not disclosed the list of 600 MoUs, the companies involved, or the financial structures behind the deals. This omission, combined with silence over whether open tenders were conducted, has triggered concern among policy experts and industry observers that the event may have bypassed due process — and potentially opened the floodgates to corruption and misuse of public funds.
Behind the Numbers: Missing Details, Missing Accountability
Union Minister Sarbananda Sonowal called the ₹12 lakh crore investment figure a reflection of global confidence in India’s maritime sector. Yet the ministry has provided no verifiable data to support that claim.
Neither the list of MoUs nor any project-level documents have been made public — an absence that directly undermines the credibility of such a massive announcement.
“Without disclosure, these figures are unverifiable,” said a maritime policy researcher based in Delhi. “We’ve seen this pattern before — inflated MoUs, opaque deals, and no audit trail. Lack of transparency is not an accident; it’s a mechanism that enables corruption.”
No Tender, No Transparency
The ministry has not clarified whether competitive tendering or requests for proposals (RFPs) preceded the MoUs signed during IMW 2025.
This is significant because many of the projects announced — such as the ₹47,000 crore green ammonia plant in Tuticorin or the ₹45,000 crore green hydrogen project at Paradip Port — involve public land, infrastructure, and state-owned port authorities.
If such projects were signed through direct negotiations rather than open bidding, it could amount to a breach of India’s General Financial Rules (GFR) and Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) guidelines that govern public procurement.
A retired senior shipping ministry official told this publication:
“If these MoUs involve financial or operational commitments without tendering, they’re not just irregular — they’re potentially illegal. It would mean government assets are being committed without competition or scrutiny.”
MoUs and the Shadow of Bank-Backed Corruption
A deeper financial layer adds to the unease: MoUs are often used by private companies to secure loans from public sector banks.
Once an MoU is signed at a high-profile government event, it becomes a document of perceived credibility, even if it’s non-binding. Companies then present it to banks as evidence of “secured projects” to obtain massive loans — using public money rather than their own capital.
“These MoUs act as collateral for credibility,” said a banking analyst who has studied maritime financing. “Corporates leverage them to unlock loans from public banks, creating the illusion of private investment when, in reality, it’s taxpayers’ money funding the projects.”
In practice, this means that the ₹12 lakh crore announced during IMW 2025 may not represent private sector investment at all, but rather potential public debt exposure through bank lending.
If projects fail or remain unimplemented — as has happened in previous infrastructure summits — the losses fall squarely on public financial institutions and, ultimately, citizens.
The Nexus That Won’t Let Go
Experts point to the persistent nexus between bureaucrats, politicians, and corporate houses that dominates India’s maritime ecosystem.
The same conglomerates — Adani Ports, Jindal India Power, ACME, DP World — feature repeatedly in high-value port, logistics, and energy deals.
“The maritime sector is one of the most tightly held networks of corporate-political influence in India,” said a maritime governance expert in Mumbai. “Large companies with political proximity get preferential access, while smaller players are shut out. It’s a textbook case of crony capitalism.”
This entrenched nexus not only distorts fair competition but also creates systemic corruption channels — where bureaucratic approvals and political patronage dictate investment outcomes.
Public Event, Private Profit
Events like IMW 2025 serve as grand showcases of India’s development agenda, but the secrecy surrounding the deals raises doubts about who truly benefits.
Many observers note that the “investment” narrative masks a transfer of public wealth into private hands through opaque financial structures, subsidised loans, and discretionary land allocations.
“Every rupee of these MoUs could be public money routed through private corporations,” said an infrastructure economist. “If the ministry doesn’t disclose project financing details, it’s impossible to distinguish between genuine FDI and recycled bank credit. The line between promotion and plunder becomes dangerously thin.”
A Call for Oversight
Transparency advocates and financial watchdogs are now demanding a full public disclosure of all 600 MoUs, including:
- Names of corporate and government signatories.
- Financial sources of investment (private equity, bank credit, FDI, etc.).
- Whether tendering was conducted for each project.
- Expected implementation timelines and regulatory clearances.
They have also called for a CAG audit and parliamentary inquiry into whether public sector banks are being used to fund MoU projects under the guise of private investment.
“If these deals are clean, publish them,” said the maritime researcher. “If not, the ₹12 lakh crore headline will go down as one of the largest public money laundering exercises dressed as development.”
India’s Blue Economy: Vision or Mirage?
The government has presented India Maritime Week 2025 as a symbol of Viksit Bharat 2047 — a self-reliant, globally competitive maritime nation.
But unless the ministry releases the full details of these deals and clarifies the financing sources, that vision risks being undermined by a deep, structural problem: a system where MoUs serve not as instruments of growth, but as gateways for crony capitalism and the quiet siphoning of public funds.
As one veteran industry observer put it bluntly:
“These aren’t just MoUs — they’re IOUs written on the back of the Indian taxpayer.”
