Monday, June 19, 2006

By Gyan Pathak

Maladministration is a 'wishing-tree' for those who are at the helm of affairs in public administration in India. There are many products of this tree, one of which is corruption, the amount of which is estimated around Rs 50,000 crore, around 20 percent of the total revenue. This is a well known figure published in government publications including the magazine published by BPRD ( a publication of the Ministry of Home, Government of India). Their self-interest in keeping this tree alive is obvious.

However, there is another point of view, which tells us about the ill-effects of this corruption that reduces the rate of growth of India by anything between 3 and 5 percent of the GDP. That is why people are not only against this corruption but also against maladministration. According to a UN report, a country can enhance its earnings by up to 400 percent just by stopping corruption.

It is precisely due to this reason that the people are against those who are at the helm of affairs of administration of this country who have always been trying to project corruption as the disease, while in reality it is only one of the symptoms of the disease called maladministration. They know, they can appease common man just by beating about the bush. Nipping the leaves of corruption does not kill the tree of maladministration, and therefore, there is always hope for them of sprouting up another leaf of corruption. They know if the very tree is destroyed, they cannot take benefit from the corruption and maladministration.

Thus, whatever our governments have done are nothing but eye-wash. The tree is meticulously being kept alive, the disease is being nurtured while symptom is being treated. We do have CVC, CBI, and other Vigilance mechanism in State police departments, however, no one have jurisdiction over maladministration. We do have lokayukta's in many states, but most of them lack proper empowerment in terms of legislation, manpower and other facilities like infrastructure and independent investigating capacities. Lok Pal Bill at the Central level has been scuttled for decades.

Administrative reform is the key for solution of this problem, however, it has never been attempted seriously. Our governments did, of course, appoint committees and commissions to study the malaise, but their recommendations have never been implemented in the right direction. We implemented the steps that indirectly inflated the disease.

For example, there have been several studies in the past on civil service reforms. Before Independence, there were the Royal Commission on Public Service, popularly known as the Islington Commission (1912-15) and the Royal Commission on superior civil service, popularly known as the Lee Commission (1923-24). After independence, the important Committees on civil service reforms included the Secretariat Re-organization Committee under the chairmanship of Sir Girijashankar Vajpayee (1947); the Committee on Reorganization of Government of India, headed by Shri Gopalaswami Aiyangar, the Report on Public Administration (1951) by Shri A.D. Gorwala and the reports of 1953 and 1956 by Paul Appleby. The Commission on Administrative Reforms marked an important chapter in the field of civil service reforms. Apart from these, Central Pay Commissions have also made useful recommendations, the last Pay Commission being the Fifth Central Pay Commission (1997). Mention may also be made of the Expenditure Reforms Commission (2001) under the Chairmanship of Shri K.P. Geethakrishnan and the National Commission to Review Working of the Constitution headed by Justice M.N. Venkatachaliah, former Chief Justice of India. The Cabinet Secretariat has also initiated some studies in the recent years on civil service reforms and also set up committees of senior civil servants to consider reforms in governance.
Even the last Central Pay Commission had recommended (i) integrity in public service and removal from service of corrupt officials; (ii) the need for public friendly administration; (iii) constitution of a high level panel comprising Comptroller & Auditor General, Central Vigilance Commissioner and the Cabinet Secretary to ensure clean and accountable govt.; and (iv) formulation of a policy of transfer for civil servants. In 2003, the Surinder Nath Committee submitted a comprehensive report to Government of India on the system of performance appraisal, promotion, empanelment and placement for the All India Services and the higher civil services of the Union Government. The Committee headed by Shri B.N. Yugandhar has also submitted its report on building up of skills and competencies by providing training to All India Services Officers at different stages of their service careers. It's shocking that these two reports are yet currently under examination of the Government even after the laps of many years.
Another Committee on Civil Service Reforms had submitted it report in July 2004, on which the Congress led Left supported UPA government is pretty sitting over.
Public perception
The Committee on Civil Service Reforms, in fact, not only covered the higher civil services but also deliberated upon the basic structure of the government machinery. It summed up the public perception which suggests that the civil service in India, by and large, has lost its neutral and anonymous character and even though there are still some upright civil servants, they are getting marginalized in the process of governance, and corrupt practices have increasingly become prevalent. It says, a majority of civil servants are arrogant. They are not perceived as people-friendly and by and large they have lost touch with ground realities. There is a sharp decline in their field visits and inspections of field programmers. Civil servants in the States have almost given up the earlier practice of sustained tours of remote areas and night halts in those areas which are so essential to understand and redress problems of the poor and the weaker sections of the community. There is 'groupies' among higher civil servants and increasingly they have been divided along sectarian lines - an extremely unfortunate development. Some civil servants develop an unhealthy nexus with power brokers and do not hesitate to resort to questionable means to get good postings in India or abroad.
It is painful to know while going through the report that most of the civil servants fail to achieve results because they are not given targets of performance or the infrastructural support to achieve them. Most Departments/Ministries have no mission or vision statements. A reality check is essential through which performance of every Department and Ministry should be reviewed and the correctives applied. Without performance targets, the civil service degenerates into a closed priesthood with no accountability.
Who would implement Chief Ministers' recommendation
It is worth mentionable that a Conference of Chief Ministers of States was held on May 24, 1997 on improving performance and integrity of the public service. The Chief Ministers' Conference noted that a People friendly and effective administration depends on cleansing of civil services at all levels, adherence to ethical standards, commitment to basic principles of the Constitution, and a clear understanding of the relationship between the politicians and the civil servants. Elimination of corruption in the public service requires prevention, surveillance and deterrent prosecution. Nexus among politicians, civil servants and criminals should be ruthlessly dealt with. Politicization of the civil services should be curbed to minimize the impact not only on the morale and motivation of the civil service, but on the sustained flow of responsive services to the public and efficient execution of schemes.
They emphasized that the existing rules and regulations should be amended within six months to enable exemplary prosecution and removal of corrupt officials, and weeding out staff of doubtful integrity. At the same time, a suitable mechanism should be worked out to reward employees who do good work.
The conference noted that the area of discretion of officials should be reduced to the minimum along with steps to prevent their arbitrary use. There should be a close networking of various agencies like Lokayukta, CBI, vigilance machinery, income tax authorities, Enforcement Directorate and the Comptroller and Auditor General of India. Despite these observations nothing much has been done.
Right to information vs Official secret act
Right to Information Act 2002 was implemented last year. However, people are facing many hurdles while trying to get any information from any office in this country. There are large scale allegations from the people that they are not getting the information they want to get. Even the Office of the Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had issued some direction to the officials not to give certain type of information to any person. It seems that the executive orders are more powerful than the provisions of the Act itself that was passed by the Parliament. It reveals the dichotomy of our leadership and the governments who do not act according to their words. The Official secret act is still in operation despite the recommendations of several committees in the past that it should be reviewed and amended to make the administration citizen friendly. Information are being held back by officials in the name of official secrets.
In this backdrop, can we hope for a sensitive and corruption free administration? The answer is in negative unless we do something for removal of the disease called maladministration. (EOM)