TOI : Tryst with Sleaze : Sept 28, 2007
Tryst with Sleaze
We are becoming less corrupt, but not quickly enough
How corrupt are we? A little less this year than last, according to the
latest corruption perception index released by Transparency International.
India’s rank has been improving since 2004, and currently we are better
placed than all our neighbours except Bhutan. The TI index is based on
perceptions of the business community regarding corruption in a country.
Since 2004, India’s rating has been improving but only gradually. But why
are we only the 72nd least corrupt country in the world? Our integrity score
on a scale of 10 is a low 3.5 compared to 9.4 for Denmark, Finland and New
Zealand, the least corrupt nations in the world. It is not a coincidence
that the least corrupt countries have high degrees of economic freedom.
One reason why India lags behind these countries is, in fact, the high
degree of state interference in business. Reforms have been gradual and
continue to be resisted by politicians. That has to change and change fast.
Institutional reforms and competition in sectors that were until recently
the monopoly of the government have doubtless reduced corruption.
Competition from private players has limited the opportunities for babus to
extract bribes. The Right to Information Act has the potential to radically
alter the way bureaucracy functions. But, there is resistance to it from all
quarters of the government. Various agencies have sought exemption from the
RTI Act under some pretext or the other, whereas the rest want to subvert
its provisions. The Representation of the People Act and a vigilant media
have helped to curtail political corruption to an extent. Similarly, bodies
like SEBI have instituted corporate governance practices to check
malpractices in the stock market. An Act to protect whistle-blowers has been
talked about but is far from becoming law. It is a must if we are to take
forward the fight against corruption.
However, a big problem is the ponderous, lethargic and somewhat opaque
judiciary. It has stayed away from the general tide towards transparency and
accountability. The judiciary has resisted efforts by respected justices and
others to make the functioning of courts more transparent. The Nachiappan
committee set up by Parliament has suggested an independent body with
representation from the legislature, the executive and the bar to have a say
in appointments to courts and matters related to judicial misconduct. This
is a welcome suggestion.
The huge backlog of cases – in the Supreme Court, high courts and
district and subordinate courts – has slowed down the judicial process. This
prompts people to avoid legitimate means of redress and abets corruption. It
erodes the credibility of the institution. Judges should facilitate steps to
rectify the situation and ensure that the judiciary is not only accountable
but also seen to be above suspicion. Legal reforms that will cleanse the
judiciary of black sheep are urgently needed if we are to seriously fight
corruption.
Publication:Times Of India Mumbai; Date:Sep 28, 2007; Section:Editorial;
Page Number:18