"NACS has distinguished corruption between petty and grand corruption. I believe that we should not use such terms for corruption. Corruption is corruption. Moreover using the term ‘grand’ for corruption gives respectability to corruption and glorifies corruption. I am sure that is not the intention of NACS.
It will be better to define corruption based on the methodology, as ‘unorganized corruption’ and ‘organized corruption’. Unorganized corruption will include petty corruption. Political and administrative corruption will come under organized corruption. Whereas people involved in unorganized corruption are exposed, caught and punished, the people involved in organized corruption may be exposed, may also be caught but hardly punished. The corruption loop in unorganized corruption is very short mostly revolving around the accused person, but in organized corruption the corruption loop is very large and includes the top and even the investigating and prosecuting persons or agencies.
Presently, the will is lacking to attack organized corruption. Under public and media pressure, organized corruption is sometimes investigated but every attempt is made to dilute it or give the accused persons a clean chit. I have taken up the ‘issue of attacking organized corruption’ with successive CVCs but did not get any response.
To quote from draft NACS – “Acceptance of bribe by the top management makes the subordinates follow the leader”. This in reality is happening in majority of organizations. Top management in such organizations provides total protection to corrupt subordinates, and CVOs posted in that organization also form a link in organized corruption chain (OCC).
The two main causes of administrative corruption as identified by draft NACS are: (a) inability of the civil servants to resist extraneous influences; and (b) active collusion. The active collusion of top with CVO also ensures the protection of CVC, which intentionally or un-intentionally becomes a link in OCC.
A citizen (includes a whistleblower) sends complaints about corruption to CVO but the complaints are not acknowledged and registered if these are against a person or persons belonging to OCC. Frustrated citizen complains to CVC. CVC after a long time sends a stock reply – “Your complaint has been duly examined in the commission and having regard to the nature of issues raised therein, the same has been forwarded to (Name) CVO of (Name) the organization for necessary action. As such, while no further report is required to be sent to the commission, the authorities concerned are required to look into and take such action as deemed fit.”
CVC sends back the complaint to the same CVO who had not taken any action earlier. Why would he take action now when he is not even asked to inform CVC about the action he has taken on the complaint? The result – nothing happens to the accused person(s) being the part of OCC, but the person who had made the complaint is made to suffer.
This is essential that CVC should put its own house in order and make its CVOs accountable. CVO is the most important link in fighting corruption, but it is also the weakest link. Most of the CVOs come on deputation to avoid out-of-station transfer. This they manage through any means. They willingly join the OCC and become an important link in shielding person(s) belonging to OCC.
My comments are based on my personal experience over a long period of time. NACS should incorporate a strategy for fighting Organized Corruption at an appropriate place."
No comments:
Post a Comment