The Anatomy, Physiology and Remedial measures

(An English Machine translation of an article on corruption originally published in marathi daily Mharashtra Times on 11/2/2024)

The Transparency International, a distinguished NGO headquartered in Berlin, Germany, founded three decades ago and operational globally in the realm of corruption, has recently published the 2023 “Corruption Perception Index” for 180 nations, as is customary each year. This index is meticulously computed to assign zero points to the most corrupt country, with a pinnacle of 100 points reserved for the paragon of probity. Subsequently, the nations are arranged in a descending order from the most scrupulous to the most tainted. In this hierarchical array, Denmark has ascended to the zenith as the most virtuous nation globally, securing an impressive 90 points. Trailing closely behind are Finland, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore, Sweden, and Switzerland. Conversely, Somalia has earned the ignominious distinction of being the foremost purveyor of corruption on a global scale, registering a mere 11 points. Venezuela, Syria, and South Sudan find themselves ensnared in the same web of corruption with a score of 13 points. India, unfortunately, languishes at a lowly 93rd position in the roster of virtuous nations, amassing a modest 39 points. Alas, the data gleaned from this investigation suggests a disconcerting truth – India, having descended eight places from its 2022 standing, is grappling with an unabating surge in corruption.

Corruption, an affliction experienced daily by the citizens of India, assumes a more disquieting dimension when subjected to the scrutiny of an international organization. This is particularly distressing for a country boasting the world’s oldest culture and the grandeur of being the largest democracy. Elucidating the nature of corruption is unnecessary, as readers can draw upon personal experiences or observe the prevailing circumstances. The question that begs consideration is why a nation rooted in ancient principles of truth, honesty, and spirituality finds itself mired in the morass of corruption. Who bears the culpability for this lamentable state of affairs? Even if the eradication of corruption proves elusive, why cannot a culture of integrity akin to that of Denmark, Finland, New Zealand, and Norway be instilled?

Corruption, a multifaceted malady, finds its genesis in the various facets of human morality. Immorality, a pernicious element in human nature, serves as the bedrock of corruption.

While Transparency International’s index encompasses diverse aspects of corruption, its primary focus is on financial malfeasance, particularly within the ambit of government administration. The private sector is not exempt from this blight, but its roots can be traced back to governmental corruption. A discourse on corruption, against the backdrop of this index, warrants attention.

At the global level, the United Nations (UNO) has deemed corruption a “pernicious plague,” recognizing it as an imminent threat to society and democracy. Consequently, member nations are enjoined to formulate policies, enact laws, and establish judicial systems to thwart corruption, punish transgressors, and extirpate this malevolent influence. In the Indian context, the Prevention of Corruption Act of 1988, applicable to all public servants, encompasses government entities, the judiciary, public representatives, statutory public undertakings, co-operative society officers, and government companies. This legislation categorizes the acceptance of illicit remuneration by public servants as corruption, prescribing exhaustive measures for investigating and penalizing the guilty. Each state maintains an Anti-Corruption Bureau(ACB) and at the central government level, the Vigilance Commission, Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), and special courts have been instituted. Independent bodies like Lokayukta and Lokpal serve as additional bulwarks against corruption. Despite these legal provisions, India’s descent in global rankings is perplexing, a trend corroborated by the 2023 report from the National Crime Records Bureau, revealing a 10.5 percent surge in corruption cases in 2022.

Corruption, an entrenched social malaise, is attributable to myriad factors, including governance, administration, investigative mechanisms, judicial processes, societal apathy, electoral processes, and legal anomalies. The epicenter of corruption lies in the electoral process, where escalating campaign costs engender a symbiotic relationship between politicians and vested interests. Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel laureate in Economics, posits that contemporary democracy has devolved into a system democracy is no more a system “of the people, by the people and for the people”, but it has become a “system of the one percent, by the one percent and for the one percent”, the one percent being super rich people who have captured democracy as their slave. And , therefore, curtailing spending in elections emerges as a pivotal step toward ameliorating corruption in the country.

Identifying the principal contributor to corruption within the country prompts contemplation on whether it emanates from the administration or the bureaucracy. In a democratic system, periodic elections underscore the impermanence of elected representatives, necessitating a system of checks and balances between them and the bureaucracy. Constitutional safeguards, encapsulated in Part 14, forestall bureaucratic malfeasance and foster a harmonious coexistence with elected officials. The bureaucracy, empowered by its constitutional mandate, bears a solemn responsibility to combat corruption.

Corruption within the administrative echelons operates on two planes: personal corruption and collusion in others’ malfeasance within the government system. The former encompasses illicit financial gains for expediting assigned tasks (speed money), engaging in unlawful activities, or accepting remuneration to overlook ongoing transgressions (bribes). To curb such malpractices, Rules of Conduct, such as the 1968 Rules for All India Services, mandate public servants to discharge their duties with integrity. The bureaucracy, comprising the Indian Administrative Service and the Indian Police Service, is constitutionally obligated to ensure not only their own incorruptibility but also that of the entire system under their purview. Corresponding provisions exist in Maharashtra’s conduct Rules of 1979 for the State Government bureaucracy. Failure to adhere to these rules renders officers and employees liable to punishment. Article 166 of the Constitution stipulates the appointment of secretaries at the helm of each government department, charged with the statutory duty of ensuring a corruption-free environment within their purview.

I have my personal hypothesis regarding corruption as follows. There is an inverse relationship between enforcement and corruption in governance. Rigorous implementation of laws, rules, policies, and schemes correlates with diminished corruption levels, while lax enforcement precipitates heightened corruption. Supervision and reviews by superiors, coupled with periodic reviews of implementation, form integral components of governance. My personal experience in various governmental roles underscores the efficacy of swift disciplinary action in fostering a culture of administrative integrity and diminishing corruption.

Common perception of corruption often pertains to monetary bribes paid to expedite bureaucratic processes. However, this constitutes merely the tip of the iceberg. The more insidious form of corruption involves bestowing substantial financial advantages during policymaking, building permits, tenders, and privatization. This multi-faceted corruption, obscured from public scrutiny, places an onerous burden on the populace. Despite the existence of laws such as the Right to Information and Service Guarantee Act, the 2023 report from the National Crime Records Bureau reveals a disconcerting 10.5 percent uptick in corruption cases in 2022.

Addressing corruption demands an examination of administrative and political collusion. While political leadership is often held accountable, effective intervention necessitates a collective resolve among administrative officers and a robust statutary framework. Succumbing to political pressures and engaging in illicit practices only exacerbates corruption, underscoring the need for bureaucratic autonomy.

Enhancing transparency in administration emerges as a potent antidote to corruption. Provisions such as the Right to Information, while ostensibly effective, are undermined by a culture of denial rather than information dissemination. Public access can be increased to government transactions, facilitated by computerization and network connectivity since it could significantly curtail corruption. However, the inertia of administrative mentality poses a formidable obstacle. A transformative administrative culture, underpinned by effective governance, could manifest tangible change within months, heralding an era where India rivals or surpasses Denmark in integrity. All it requires is the collective will to effect this transformation.