The cases in corruption have seen a rising trend in India thanks to many new legislations and policies to curb the menace. It is right time for budding lawyers to look at this as an emerging area of practice? Read on to know more…
In India concerns regarding the political, bureaucratic, corporate and individual corruption are all time high following the recently concluded 12-day fast undertaken by Anna Hazare to pressurize the Parliament in general and the government in particular to pass the “Janlokpal”, which team Anna believes will reduce the corruption in the country by 60 per cent at least. The concerns among the public are not unfound, as the country stands at 87 out of the 178 countries in Transparency International Perception Index in a survey published by Transparency International. India’s ignoble reputation as one of the top corrupt nations in the world is further strengthened by, though unconfirmed, yet credible, report that at US $ 1456 billion India tops the list for the black money in the entire world and that India has more black money than the rest of the world combined.
Rampant corruption implies that there are corrupt people, corrupt practices and corrupt system. After independence, the Indian economy was under the socialist influence which ensured controlled, protected, public ownership- based, over regulated economy in an overarching License Raj regime. This created a very fertile ground for corruption to grow and also encouraged bureaucrats to indulge in corrupt activities with a ‘sovereign immunity’. The outcome was development of a strong nexus between the politicians and bureaucrats at one hand and the contractors, real estate developers, suppliers of goods, materials, equipment and machineries, suppliers of medicine for the government hospitals, income tax assesses ,illegal miners and lease holders, on the other. This precipitous fall in general standards of governance and social life could not be arrested by our esteemed Judiciary, which is considered as the bulwark of the nation’s integrity, especially because the lower Judiciary failed in this task miserably. This failure was supplemented and complimented by the ineffectiveness of the anti corruption mechanism like lack of higher transparency and accountability, effective supervision and control, proper rules and regulations, coupled with the high level of tolerance in the society towards corruption and a strong public resistance.
It is well recognized across the world that the debilitating effects of corruption permeate through all aspects of public life. Surveys and studies conducted across the world have shown that corruption not only stifles growth, but it also perpetuates inequalities, deepens poverty, causes human suffering, dilutes the fight against terrorism and organized crime, and tarnishes a country’s image globally. The impact of corruption is multi fold, encompassing political costs, economic costs, social costs, environmental costs and issues of national security. Higher level political corruption results in weakened public trust in political institutions, reduced political participation, perversion of the electoral process, restricted political choices available to citizens and loss of legitimacy of the democratic system. Further corruption reduces economic efficiency by misallocation of resources in favour of rent seeking activities, increasing the cost of public transactions, acting as anadditional tax on business thereby reducing investment, reducing genuine businesscompetition. Corruption distorts the value systems and wrongly attaches elevated statusto occupations that have rent seeking opportunities. This results in a disillusioned public, a weak civil society, which attracts unscrupulous leaders to political life. Eventually, there is arisk that demanding and paying bribes could become the norm. Environment also suffers as environmental degradation is an indirect but serious consequence of corrupt systems. Many times environmentally devastating projects are given preference in funding,because they are easy targets for siphoning off public money into private pockets. The soft area where the corruption has hit intoday’s highly terror-attack prone global environment is security agencies. This can lead to a threat to our national security, including thorough distortion of procurement, recruitment of ineligible persons, providing an easy route for smuggling of weapons and terrorist elements into thecountry and money laundering.
Do we have sufficient laws to deal with corruption in India?
A proper implementation of the existing laws will be able to counter the problem of corruption to some extent. We are one of the most legislated countries in the world. We have laws on every subject including corruption. However, there is definitely some scope to improve the present legal structure. Here are some suggestions in this regard to check corruption at its source and destination.
• Enactment of strong Lokpal legislation. Such legislation will be able to check corruption at its source, that means it will punish those found guilty of indulging in corruption.
• Checking black money through international treaties with nations that are known as safe heavens for storing black money. It is our experience that wealth accumulated through corruption rises from bottom to top and gets transported to such countries. That way we will be able to check the black money accumulated through corruption.
The question is that will such measures be able to get us rid of corruption? We have to go to the reason as to why people are corrupt in our country. Is corruption in our genes? Is there something racial about corruption? For that it is worthwhile to peep into the status of corruption in other societies and countries. Of course we rank pretty high on the scale of corruption; we are one of the most corrupt countries in the world. A peep in the worldwide corruption index shows that it is the poor countries where the repulsive malady of corruption is most dominant. It appears that there is little racial about corruption, it is more to do with the economic prosperity of the nation. It is the richest countries of the world like, Sweden, Switzerland, Germany, Canada, etc. where corruption is the least. So, in order to get rid of corruption we must be able to erect an economic order of prosperity. Here one may argue that in our society even the rich officials and politicians are corrupt. But it is not individual richness that matters much; it is the richness of the community which is important. That does not mean that we must wait for the country to become prosperous before we enact and enforce anticorruption laws. Anti-corruption laws must go hand in hand with our effort to become rich as a nation. Then we shall be able to defeat the monster of corruption.
There are three main authorities involved in inquiring, investigating and prosecuting corruption cases. They are Central Vigilance Commission (CVC), the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the state Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB). Cases related to money laundering by public servants are investigated and prosecuted by the Directorate of Enforcement and the Financial Intelligence Unit, which are under the Ministry of Finance.
The CBI and state ACBs investigate cases related to corruption under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The CBI’s jurisdiction is the central government and Union Territories while the state ACBs investigates cases within the states. States can refercases to the CBI.
The CVC is a statutory body that supervises corruption cases in government departments. The CBI is under its supervision. The CVC can refer cases either to the Central Vigilance Officer (CVO) in each department or to the CBI. The CVC or the CVO recommends the action to be taken against a public servant but the decision to take any disciplinary action against a civil servant rests on the department authority.
Prosecution can be initiated by an investigating agency only after it has the prior sanction of the central or state government. Government appointed prosecutors undertake the prosecution proceeding in the courts. All cases under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 are tried by Special Judges who are appointed by the central or state government.
There are various bodies in place for implementing anticorruption policies and raising awareness on corruption issues. At the federal level, key institutions include the Supreme Court, the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC), the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), the Office of the Controller & Auditor General (C&AG), and the Chief Information Commission (CIC).
The Supreme Court has taken a stronger stance against corruption in recent years. It has challenged the powers of states in several instances. For example, in 2007 in Uttar Pradesh, it challenged the state governor’s powers to pardon politically connected individuals based on arbitrary considerations. In other instances, judges have taken on a stronger role in responding to public interest litigation (PILs) over official corruption and environmental issues. In December 2006, in a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court ruled that prosecutors do not need prior permission to begin proceedings against politicians addressing corruption in the police by mandating the establishment of a police commission to look into these matters and has ruled that corrupt officers can be prosecuted without government consent.
The Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) is an independent watchdog agency established in 1964. The CVC has the power to undertake inquiries or investigations of transactions involving certain categories of public servants. It also has supervisory powers over the Central Bureau of Investigations. The CVC can investigate complaints against high level public officials at the central level, in cases where they are suspected of having committed an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The CVC is mandated to investigate public sector corruption at the federal level and not at the state level.
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) is the prime investigating agency of the central government and is generally referred to as a credible and respected institution in the country. It is placed under the Ministry of Personnel, Pensions & Grievances and consists of three divisions: the Anticorruption Division, the Special Crimes Division and the Economic Offences Division. These units have the power to investigate cases of alleged corruption in all branches of the central government, but need the permission of state governments to investigate cases at the state level. The Supreme Court and High Courts can instruct the CBI to conduct investigations.
The Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) CAG in a Constitutional body which is completely independent of the executive and well-staffed, with offices of Accountant Generals (AG) in all states. The CAG has produced several reports on state departments such as railways, telecommunications, public sector enterprise, and tax administration. These reports have revealed many financial irregularities, suggesting a lack of monitoring of public expenses, poor targeting and corrupt practices in many branches of government. However, since the CAG has no authority to ensure compliance with its recommendations, the government often fails to implement the reports’ proposals.
The Chief Information Commission (CIC) It was established in 2005 and came into operation in 2006. It has delivered decisions instructing government, courts, universities, police, and ministries on how to share information of public interest. State information commissions have also been opened, thus giving practical shape to the 2005 Right to Information (RTI)
E-Governance It has considerably increased the speed of government services in a number of areas and reduced opportunities for bribery. A wide range of public services have been digitized such as obtaining licenses, paying taxes and clearing goods. The National Portal of India was subsequently created and lists all the services that have been digitized.
The Society of Indian Law Firms and the Menon Institute of Legal Advocacy Training have honoured Professor (Dr.) Ranbir Singh with the most prestigious “Professor N.R. MadhavaMenon Best Law Teacher Award” for the year 2011 for his outstanding services to legal education.
Professor Ranbir Singh’s credentials as an able educational administrator, dynamic institution builder and popular law teacher got acknowledged with his ten year long tenure as Founding Vice-Chancellor of NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad. If NALSAR is rated as one of the best law schools in the country today, a large part of the credit goes to the untiring efforts and self-evasive leadership of Dr. Singh. His colleagues say, Dr Singh has a peculiar knack of solving even difficult problems without displeasing anybody or upsetting established procedures. Naturally, he was the most sought after law teacher when the Delhi Government and the Delhi High Court wanted to set up a law university in the national capital. Even while involved in a number of assignments within the country and outside, Ranbir Singh enjoys his interaction with students and finds time to teach every fresh batch of students admitted to the law school. Dr Singh is the President Elect of the prestigious Shastri Indo-Canadian Institute and a long time collaborator with the British Council in its initiatives in higher education. The Government appointed him as a Member (Parttime) of the Law Commission of India and sought his services to launch the “Rajiv Gandhi Advocates’ Training Scheme” of the Ministry of Law and Justice. With amiable manners and pleasant disposition, Dr. Singh has endeared himself to a wide circle of friends and well wishers even outside legal education and the legal profession.
Despite these emerging trends, the institutional anticorruption framework generally suffers from a lack of coordination, and overlapping and conflicting mandatesbetweeninstitutions addressing corruption. Key institutions often lack the staff and resources to fulfill their mandateadequately and struggle to protect themselves from political interference. Often, they primarily focus on investigating alleged cases of corruption at the expenseof preventive activities. Influential politicians and seniorofficials are rarely convicted for corruption, erodingpublic confidence in the political will to effectively tackle corruption. Further ,the inordinate delays in the courts of law, ineffective penal provisions and asset recovery and the fact that the private sector still remains not properly regulated gives rise to a situation which requires the budding lawyers to take up this area of practice as a challenging and rewarding one.
www.grandmasters.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.rcls.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.itlegalsummit.com | 8 Years & Counting
www.bfls.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.maels.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.plcs.co.in | 8 Years & Counting
Copyright © 2020 Lex Witness - India's 1st Magazine on Legal & Corporate Affairs Rights of Admission Reserved
