Corruption in India

1. Introduction

In its most general sense, corruption means the per­version or abandonment of a standard. Hence it is common to speak of language or of moral corruption. More narrowly corruption refers to the abandonment of expected standards of behaviour by those in authority for the sake of unsanctioned personal advantage.

In the business sphere, a company director is deemed to be corrupt if he sells his private property to the company at an inflated price, at the expense of the shareholders whose interest he is supposed to safeguard. Lawyers, architects and other pro­fessionals are similarly guilty of corruption if they take advantage of their clients to make undue personal gains.

2. Lok Pal Bill

In June 1969 a UN seminar held in Stockholm on "Ways of Safeguarding the Rights of Individuals against the Abuse of Administrative Power" discussed five principal means of ensuring such protection:

I. Parliamentary Commissions of Inquiry.

II. Procuracy of the Soviet Type.

II. Judicial Remedies of the English Legal system.

III. The French Counsel d'Etat.

IV. The Ombudsman of Scandanavia.

V. The following would be the main features of the institution of Lok Pal and Lok Ayukt:

VI. They should be demonstrably independent and impartial.

VII. Their investigations and proceedings should be conducted in private and be informed in character.

VIII. Their appointment should, as far as possible, be non-political.

IX. Their status should compare with the highest judicial functionaries in the country.

X. They should deal with matters in the discretionary field involving acts of injustice, corruption or favouritism.

XI. Their proceeding should not be subject to judicial interference and they should have the maximum latitude and power in obtaining information rel­evant to their duties.

XII. They should not look forward to any benefit or pecuniary advantage from the executive Govern­ment.

The Lok Pal would have the same status as the Chief Justice of India and be appointed by the President on the Prime Minister's advice after consultation with the Chief Justice of India and the Leader of the Opposition.

The entire edifice of the Lok Pal can be brought down by a mere ordinance, as the Press Council was in 1975 during the Emergency.

The National Front Government introduced the Lok Pal Bill, 1989 in the Lok Sabha on December 29, 1989 within days of assuming office. It lapsed with the dissolution of the Lok Sabha in 1991. The four Bills of 1971, 1977, 1985 and 1989 varied greatly in their ambit and scope.

(The 1971 Bill was similar to the one of 1968). To give an overview at the onset, the 1971 and 1985 Bills excluded the Prime Minister from their purview while the 1977 and 1989 Bills did not.

While the 1989 Bill contain improvements on earlier Bills, its jurisdiction Clause was the narrowest.

On August 3, 1995, the former Minister of State for Personnel Affairs, Mrs. Margaret Alva, informed the Rajya Sabha that the Government had already circulated the two Draft Bills on Lok Pal of 1985 and 1989 to all political parties seeking their views.

3. Central Vigilance Commission

On the Santhanam Committee's recommendation a Central Vigilance Commissioner was set up by the govern­ment by an executive decision embodied in a resolution in the Ministry of Home Affairs dated 11 February 1964. The process and functions of the CVC, as detailed in the resolution include the following:

(i) To undertake an inquiry into any transaction in which a public servant is alleged to have acted for an improper purpose, or

(ii) To cause an inquiry to be made into

(a) Any complaint that a public servant had ex­ercised his powers for improper or corrupt purposes.

(b) Any complaint of corruption, misconduct, lack of integrity or malpractices on the part of a public servant including members of the All India Services even if such members are for the time being serving in connection with the affairs of a State government.

(iii) To call for reports, returns and Statements from all ministries, departments, or corporate Central undertakings so as to enable it to exercise general checks and supervision over the vigilance and anti- corruption work in the ministries, departments, undertakings.

(iv) To take over under its direct control, such com­plaints, information or cases as it may consider necessary for further action which may be either:

(a) To ask the CBI to register case and investigate it, or

(b) To entrust the complaint, information or case for inquiry—

(1) To the CBI, or

(2) To the ministry, department, or undertak­ing concerned.

The resolution further provides that:

‘’1. The CVC—

(a) will be appointed by the President by under his hand and seal;

(b) will not be removed or suspended from office except in the manner provided for the removal or suspen­sion of the Chairman or a member of the UPSC;

(c) will hold office for a term of 6 years or till he attains the age of 65, whichever is earlier and

(d) on ceasing to hold the office of the CVC, shall not accept any further employment under the Union or State government or accept any political public office.

2. The CVC will be attached to the Ministry of Home Affairs, but in the exercise of its power and function, it will not be subordinate to any ministry or department and will have the same measure of independence and autonomy as the UPSC.

3. The CVO in ministries and departments will be appointed in consultation with the CVC, and no person whose appointment as CVO is objected to by the CVC will be so appointed.

4. The CVC will have the power to assess the work of the CVOs and VOs and the assessment will be recorded in the character rolls of the officer."

Central Vigilance Commissioner Displays list of Cor­rupt Officers on Website

The Central Vigilance Commissioner Nagrajan Vittal has created a sensation by listing the names of 88 corrupt IAS officers and 21 corrupt IPS officers. Vittal locates five key players in the Indian corruption scene: the corrupt politician (neta), the corrupt bureaucrat (babu), the corrupt businessman (lala), the corrupt NGO (Jhola) and criminal (dada).

He has conceived a 13 point action plan which he feels would block corruption. Among the 13 point action plan include mobilization of youth to fight corruption, making of CVC Bill into a Law, equal treatment of demand and supply sides of corruption, using e-governance and IT to check corruption, removal of absolute Laws through Sunset principles, removal of Laws that promote corruption, inac­tion of corrupt public servants Act, implementation of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1998 etc.

Sanction for prosecution/departmental action against officers found guilty of corruption still subsists under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA) and Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Act (Cr PC) although the "single directive" that required investigative agencies to obtain departmental sanction even to begin investigation against corrupt officials has been done away within the new CVC Act.

4. Legislation against Corruption

The Prevention of Corruption Act came into force in September 1988. It consolidated the Provision of Corruption Act, 1947, some sections of the Indian Penal Code, the Criminal Procedure Code, the Criminal Law Act, 1952. The sole idea was to bring all relevant provisions in single Act.

The 1988 Act enlarged the scope? Of 'public servant' and included a large member of employees within its ambit.

5. Various Commissions on Corruption of Politicians and Public Companies

In the last forty years (i.e. between 1955 and 1997) more than two dozen the Government of India to inquire into the. charges of corruption against politicians and public companies.

Some of them were:

(i) Das Commission against Sardar Pratap Singh Kairon, Chief Minister of Punjab (1963)

(ii) Ayangar Commission against Bakshi Gulam Mohammad, Chief Minister of Jammu and Kash­mir (1965).

(iii) Khanna Commission against Biju Patnaik, Chief Minister of Orissa (1967).

(iv) Kapur Commission against Dayanand Bandodkar, Chief Minister of Goa (1968).

(v) Mudhokar Commission against V.K. Mahtab, Chief Minister of Assam. (1968).

(vi) Sarkaria Commission against M. Karunanidhi, Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu (1976).

(vii) Grover Commission against Dev Raj Urs. Chief Minister of Karnataka (1977).

(viii) Vimada Lai Commission against Vengala Rao, Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh (1977).

(ix) Gurdev Singh Commission against Zail Singh, Chief Minister of Punjab (1979).

(x) Chagla Commission (1956) against Union Finance Minister T.T. Krishnamachari.

(xi) Aivar Commission (1967) against five ministers of Bihar.

(xii) Madholkar Commission (1968) against 13 minis­ters of Bihar.

(xiii) Reddy Commission (1977) against contracts en­tered by former Union Defence Minister Bansilal.

(xiv) Vaidyalingan Commission (19791 on charges of corruption and wielding extra-Constitutional au­thority to interfere in government affairs against Kanti Desai, son of Morarii Desai and Gayatri .

(xv) Kailasam Sadasivan and Ray Commissions (1981) against spirit scandals of Kerala and Tamil Nadu.

(xvi) Shankranand Committee (1990) on corruption charges in Bofors deal.

(xvii) Jankiraman Committee (1992) on Security Scam.

Vohra 'Committee was set in July 1993 to study corruption in India by taking stock of the links between Government functionaries and political personalities and crime syndicates and mafia organisations. The Committee submitted its report in October, 1993, where it stated that "network of the mafia is virtually running a parallel government pushing the State apparatus into irrelevance".