Politicians had many objections to Anna Hazare's Jan Lokpal Bill in
the winter session of the Parliament and the government has promised
to bring it to the parliament after evolving a consensus among the
political parties. Some of the issues raised by them are: the
exclusion of the Prime Minister from the jurisdiction of Lokpal;
reservation for SC/ST/OBCs and minorities; the institution of Lokpal
to be a constitutional authority; the CBI should not be under the
Lokpal. With so many contentious issues, building a consensus on
Lokpal was impossible within a short time. The idea mooted by the
First Administrative Commission some 42 years ago, will take some more
time to fructify.
Since politicians have reservations for the institution of Lokpal, the
activist of civil society have to come with other options which
politicians can not oppose. One such option is to have a special bench
of the courts exclusively for corruption cases.
Instead of a Lokpal, there could be a special bench of two judges to
adjudicate only on corruption cases at the district level as well as
at the state and central levels. No politician can take any objection
to this. This will take care of the suggestions/objections raised by
the politicians. The Courts are part of the constitution and their
jurisdiction is well-defined. CBI and other anti-corruption wings
could assist the courts in the investigation of the cases. All
citizens including the ministers, chief ministers and the prime
minister automatically come under the jurisdiction of these courts.
These special courts could be mandated to expedite all corruption
cases including those of public servants – politicians and
bureaucrats.
Sources of corruption: Discretionary powers and delay of approvals.
What we need is not just punishing the wrong doers but we need good
governance measures which eliminate the scope for corruption which is
imbedded in discretionary powers given to the ministers and the
bureaucrats. Another avenue of corruption is the absence of time-limit
for the disposal of files pertaining to permission / approvals by the
administration.
Two recent cases clearly illustrate the misuse of discretionary
powers. A recent headline in a newspaper sums up the arbitrary nature
of 'discretion' in a few words: "Meant for 'distressed, Orissa plot
quota goes to babus, judges, journalists". Then there is the famous
case of a former chief minister of Maharashtra giving away government
land for a film institute at his 'discretion' which has been struck
down by the Bombay High Court as illegal.
Earlier the same CM had asked a police officer not to proceed against
a money lender who had taken over a farmer's land. It is an illegal
order and obeying such an order is also illegal. This episode reveals
three basic problems of India: (a) pathetic state of the farmers as
they have to depend on money lenders as banks do not provide
sufficient loans; (b) a CM issues an illegal order on the phone as it
does not create a record; (c) since the police officer noted down the
order in his daily book and presented at the court, he was saved. The
Supreme Court fined the CM Rs.10 lakhs but it was paid by the
Maharashtra state government (that is the people of Maharashtra), not
by the former CM. Later, there was a directive to police officers not
to note down oral orders which was withdrawn after it was revealed by
the newspapers.
The discretionary powers may be necessary for the ministers to help
people in distress. However, these powers should have proper
guidelines to be followed strictly to prevent misuse. Secondly, if the
bureaucrats do not carry out the illegal orders of the ministers, half
the scams would not happen. They should not carry out any illegal
order as they are public servants, not the servant of the person who
happens to be a minister.
The bureaucrats usually collude with the ministers as their promotion
and the confidential report (CR) are in hands of the minister. This
unholy nexus between the politicians and the bureaucrats has to be
broken for good governance. The functional autonomy of the bureaucracy
with accountability and the supervision by a committee of the
legislature would reduce misuse of power. The bureaucrats including
the police should be accountable to the legislature. The rule of law,
not men, should be supreme.
Another avenue of corruption is delay in granting permits, permissions
and approvals by the ministers and the bureaucrats. Speed-money which
expedites approvals is another name for corruption. It is reported
that builders have to get about 40 clearances and no objection
certificates from many agencies and it takes two/three years to obtain
them. A Mckinsy report states that the cost of approvals is about 40%
of the sale value.
A time-frame for all approvals would go a long way in bringing down
corruption in many fields. Madhya Pradesh Public Services Guarantee
Act 2010 has set time limit to many government services to the people.
Bihar has followed suit. Similar legislation should be enacted in all
other states as well and the centre. Peoples' movement on this issue
is necessary, if other governments do not do so on their own.
A definition of Good Governance.
Mahatma Gandhi always spoke about Ram Raj or Suraj (good governance)
where every citizen is treated with dignity and assured of justice.
Kautilya, the author of Arthashstra, and who was instrumental in
enthroning Chandragupta Maurya, states that "in the happiness of the
subjects lies the happiness of the king and in what is beneficial to
the subjects, his own benefit. What is dear to him is not beneficial
to the king, but what is dear to the subjects is beneficial (to him)."
United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific
(ESCAP) has summarized the chief characteristics of good governance
for the 21st century and they are: participatory and
consensus-oriented; accountable; transparent; responsive; effective
and efficient; equitable and inclusive; and follow the rule of law,
not of men. If we use the above criteria, we can easily find out how
far we are away from good governance.
Administrative Reform Commissions.
The earliest effort to provide good governance was made by the
Government of India way back in the 'sixties. Indian government had
constituted the first Administrative Reform Commission (ARC) in 1966
under the Chairmanship of Shri Murarji Desai, and later the
chairmanship was given to Shri K.Hanumanthaiah, after Desai became the
Deputy Prime Minister. The mandate of ARC was to suggest reforms in
the administrative set up of the governments both at the centre and in
the states to promote highest standards of efficiency and integrity in
public services and making the administration a fit instrument for
social and economic policies of the government. It submitted 20
reports with 537 major recommendations including one on Lokpal to the
government.
The second ARC was constituted in 2005 under the chairmanship of Shri
Veerappa Moily, who resigned in April 1,2009, and it was later chaired
by Shri V.Ramachandran.
It had similar mandate such as organizational structure of
administration at all levels and how to make it more effective,
strengthening financial management, local self-government/Panchayati
Raj institutions, participative public service delivery,
citizen-centric administration, promoting e-governance and federal
policy.
Some recommendations.
One of the important reports of the second ARC is the report on
Citizen Centric Administration – The Heart of Governance, was
submitted in 2009. It has many observations and suggestions. It starts
with an observation by the American theologist, Reinhold Niebuhr:
Man's capacity for justice makes democracy possible, but man's
inclination to injustice makes democracy necessary." How true!
The report mentions re-engineering processes to make governance
'citizen centric'; right to information; citizens' charter;
independent evaluation of government services; grievance redressal
mechanism; citizens' active participation and pubic-private
partnerships.
The Report proclaims that the government organizations exist 'not to
rule but to serve'. It suggests each government organization spell out
the services and the specific standards/norms for the service. It
recommends e-governance in all government services.
It advocates single-window clearances; social audit of all programmes;
active involvement of citizens in all programmes in planning,
implementing and monitoring; drawing Citizen's Charter in consultation
with civil society; firm commitments, process and structure to meet
the commitments; redressal mechanism in case of default; periodic
evaluation and bench-mark using end-user feedback; holding offices
accountable. It suggests that all government departments and
organizations to have facility to for the registration of complaints,
time schedule for response and resolution, and monitoring the process
and evaluation.
These reports and recommendations were handed over to the government
in 2009. Among the recommendations, only the Right to Information has
been enacted and it has proved to be a boon to the citizens of the
country. It was won after a long battle and it has enabled the civil
society activists to unearth scams and wrong-doings by the public
servants – the bureaucrats and the politicians.
Some Good Governance initiatives.
Some state governments have taken initiatives to provide good
governance through welfare schemes.
One of the earliest was in Tamilnadu by M.G.Ramachandran. He started
the mid-day meal scheme which not merely increased the attendance to
the school thereby increasing the literacy but provided nutrition to
the poor children. This has been adopted by many other states now.
Maharashtra government started the famous Employment Guarantee Scheme
(EGS) for the landless labourers especially during the drought years.
Now this scheme has been extended to all the states by the Central
Government's Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (
MGNREGA) which provides 100 days of work for a member of the family.
Two state governments – Gujarat and Chhattisgarh – have stream-lined
the Public Distribution System (PDS) and put a stop to pilferage and
corruption. While Gujarat government has computerized with bar-coded
coupon system for PDS delivery, the Chhatisgarh government has used
global positioning system (GPS) to ensure the delivery of food-grains
to fair price shops (FPS) which are manned by the panchayats.
The Madhya Pradesh Public Services Act 2010 ensures time-bound
delivery of government services with penalties for delayed delivery by
the government servants. 'MPOnline', a joint venture portal provides
130 services such as birth certificates, enrollment and examination
forms. " Ladli Lakshmi" scheme to promote education of girls and '
Kanyadan', a mass marriage programme, are some of other initiatives by
Madhya Pradesh.
Bihar has introduced many welfare schemes such as bicycles to girls
who finish secondary education; monitoring construction of bridges
using mobile inspector software; confiscating the property of corrupt
officials and establishing schools in those building and many others.
Gujarat has instituted grievance redressal system called " Swagat
Online" wherein the Chief Minister himself hears the complaints and
takes action against erring officials on every fourth Thursday of the
month.
Andhra government has been a pioneer in encouraging Self-Help Groups
(SHP) which promotes small enterprises by women. It has also initiated
Indiramma housing programme for the weaker sections of the people.
Kerala government has 'Kudumbasree' programme to encourage
entrepreneurship through self-help groups.
These and other similar programmes by various governments would make
our democracy for the people, not just by the people and of the
people. Swaraj ( self-rule) becomes meaningful when it is also Suraj (
good governance). Good governance will come only when people demand it
through the ballot-box. If citizens vote on the basis of caste and
religion, we will not get good governance.
February 29,2010.
*****
******
