The timing of the Manmohan Singh government’s clumsy suggestion to make the CAG a multi-member body is doubtless suspect. The Congress’s sudden talk of restructuring the CAG, does raise a couple of pertinent questions: what’s the government’s real intention? Is it to democratise the CAG functioning or to clip the wings of its chief, determined to expose financial bungling? Nobody can deny that the present CAG, Vinod Rai, has shaken up the inert political and bureaucratic establishment, fuelling a public debate over government’s policy transaction.

With the CAG highlighting several cases of financial irregularities ranging from 2G spectrum licensing to coal bock allocations, the general refrain is that it was a move to clip the wings of a constitutional body. However, the Shunglu Committee’s recommendations, which predated the CAG controversy, appear to be fair.

Since its inception, the CAG is one constitution body that has escaped broad-basing of its selection process and terms of service. This, despite the fact, that the mandate of the CAG—to audit the accounts of the Union and State governments—is getting increasingly complex and controversial. In such a situation, three heads could prove to be more efficient than one, boosting transparency in government accounting. The argument that a multi-member CAG would dilute its efficiency does not appear to be convincing.

Officers such a former chief election commissioners T N Seshan and J M Lyngdoh credited with electoral reforms—have to work within a consultative framework with other election commissioners. Notably, the BJP too has favoured broad-basing the selection process of the CAG—who is currently appointed by the government—with leaders like L K Advani calling for a collegium system. A multi-member CAG is a logical part of the same reform.

The government, as of now, has dropped the idea of turning the CAG into a multi-member body, agreeing with the federal auditor that the existing structure with a singular head is fine. Significantly, the important recommendation of the committee, headed by V K Shunglu, who was himself the CAG in April 2011 by when the auditor, with its reports on the 2G scam and the Commonwealth game scandal had turned into a source of embarrassment to the government.

Soon, the cabinet secretariat wrote to the CAG seeking its recommendations for restructuring the auditor. According to well-informed sources in the CAG, the April 23, 2011 note came as a surprise to CAG, Vinod Rai, and his colleagues, who had assumed that government had given up the idea of expanding the auditor into a multi-member body.

In reply to cabinet secretariat, Rai stressed, saying while CAG may have a single head, it was not monocracy and actually functioned as a multi-member collegium. “The CAG is assisted by a multi-member collegium of five deputy CAGs who scrutinise and finalise the audit reports before these are approved and signed by the CAG.”

“The government has agreed to the CAG’s proposal as recently as 2008 for five deputy CAGs so as to ensure that the department is adequately equipped and is professionally qualified to handle the diverse range of audit issues needing in depth consideration and examination,” Rai said in the letter to the cabinet secretariat.

Highly placed sources in the government acknowledged that there was a re-think after the government agreed with the CAG’s position that the auditor in its current form did not function as a monocracy. However, they justified the relook saying that it was provoked by CAG’s crossing the Lakshman rekha. “They failed to get even their 2G math right,” the sources said.

The CAG is an authority, established by the Constitution of India, who audits all receipts and expenditure of government of India, including those of bodies and authorities substantially financed by the government. The CAG is also the external auditor of Accounts Committees, which are special committees in Parliament and state legislatures. The CAG is also head of India Audit and Accounts Department, which has over 58,000 employees across the country.

The office of CAG has been given utmost importance by the founding fathers of the Constitution. As per the Constitution, retired CAG cannot take up any position or post under government of India or any other private body. His removal procedure is similar to that of the removal of a Judge of the Supreme Court. (IPA Service)