As the days pass, more details surrounding the Cockroach Party’s agitation are coming under scrutiny. Questions are being raised about possible links stretching from Dubai to the UAE, the United States and Canada. At the centre of the controversy is Dubai-based Malayali businessman Mohammad Shaji Madathil, who came into the spotlight after sponsoring an all-expenses-paid trip for 23 of his employees to travel to Delhi’s Jantar Mantar and participate in the Cockroach Party protest.
Abreco Freight Mohammad Shaji Madathil’s decision to sponsor an all-expenses-paid trip for 23 of his employees—including flights, accommodation, food and other expenses—goes far beyond ordinary support for a protest. It raises important questions. Why would a businessman running a company in Dubai spend substantial sums of money to send his employees to participate in a political agitation against the Central Government? The scale of the sponsorship, its timing, and the organised nature of the mobilisation have intensified scrutiny over who financed the exercise and what the real objective behind the so-called student movement was.
Shaji Madathil, who is also known as Shaji Nilambur, is the owner and chief executive officer of Abreco Freight, a company within the Abreco Group that has business activities in both the United Arab Emirates and Kerala.
Complaint from his native town to Home Ministry
The controversy has now taken a fresh turn after a complaint was filed with the Ministry of Home Affairs against Mohammad Shaji Madathil. The complaint alleges that he used resources from offshore financial institutions to finance activities said to be against India’s national interests. It has sought a comprehensive investigation by multiple central agencies, including the National Investigation Agency (NIA), the Enforcement Directorate (ED), the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO), and the Intelligence Bureau (IB), to examine the allegations.
This foreign-backed employee mobilization drew sharp backlash from government supporters and political observers concerned about foreign interference and national security.
The petition highlights parallels to previous foreign-linked funding patterns observed during earlier agitations, such as the anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) demonstrations
It also suggests possible connections between the financial support and external Islamic finance organisations, which raises doubts about where the capital originally came from when it was used to organise and transport the workers across international borders.
Mohammad Shaji Madathil’s corporate and financial background
People point to previous legal matters in Dubai concerning cheques and doubt if his business record in fact shows that he has the means to finance such foreign political activities without receiving external support.
It should be noted that arranging international travel and accommodation for dozens of staff members is indicative of an organized effort rather than something done spontaneously by each individual.
While supporters frame the sponsorship as a employer goodwill gesture toward staff wishing to participate in a cause they backed, key questions remain unresolved regarding the full scope of the enterprise
Did Mohammad Shaji Sponsor Only 23 Employees, or Were There More?
Reports suggest that the 23 employees may not have been the only individuals whose participation in the CJP’s NEET protest was sponsored. This raises further questions: Were others—including individuals from Kerala, public figures, or other participants—also provided financial or logistical support? The protest witnessed the presence of several prominent personalities, making the source and extent of any sponsorship an important area for further scrutiny.
India has seen this before. The anti-CAA protests of 2019-20 were also framed as organic and grassroots, until foreign remittances, shell donations and coordinated funding trails began surfacing in agency investigations months later. Every time this happens, the same defence is offered in real time: these are just concerned citizens, just an employer’s goodwill, nothing to see. And every time, it takes an investigation, not a press statement, to establish what was actually going on. That is precisely why complaints like the one against Madathil should be probed thoroughly rather than dismissed as political mischief-making, regardless of how the story is eventually resolved.
