Fighting a losing battle

Run-away corruption in a society is a complex issue that cannot be curbed by rhetoric. Few political parties have got a fix on it and not surprisingly, corruption is still not a major electoral issue in India.

Not just in India, corruption is the world’s most talked-about problem, a survey conducted by the BBC showed a few years ago. A similar survey in India conducted by a TV channel, NDTV, revealed that Indians placed corruption as a bigger problem than either unemployment or poverty. And last year, the year-old Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) stunned established political parties in the Delhi assembly election on an anti-corruption plank and received a massive mandate that helped it form the government.

What’s more, within six weeks of assuming power, the AAP government has directed a fresh criminal case to be lodged against alleged corruption in organising the Commonwealth Games in New Delhi in 2010 and the Chief Minister, Arvind Kejriwal, has lost no opportunity, even before the start of a fresh investigation, to declare that he would ensure his predecessor, Sheila Dikshit, goes to prison for corruption. He is now on a collision course with the central government for bringing in a new, state-specific law called the Jan Lokpal Bill, which is said to be more stringent than the legislation passed by parliament.

All this would normally be a pointer to corruption being a major issue in the impending general elections, due in April-May this year. However, other opinion polls and surveys also indicate that corruption is not really a major electoral issue because all political parties are perceived by the people to be equally corrupt.

All that can change if Kejriwal carries out his threat of resigning if the Jan Lokpal Bill is not allowed to be passed in the Delhi assembly. While Kejriwal is clearly itching to quit and hit the street again, both Congress and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) would like him to continue in office as long as possible, partly in the hope that contradictions within AAP would get exposed in time and partly because they would like to keep AAP bogged down in Delhi until the general elections. In the political one-upmanship being played out in Delhi, therefore, it is just possible that he would be allowed to have his way, after which the Bill would be sent to the president for his assent.

Few observers in India, however, expect corruption to be curbed by another legislation or yet another body. What the Central Vigilance Commission, the Central Bureau of Investigation and the Vigilance Bureau have failed to achieve, is unlikely to be achieved by a Lokpal or a Jan Lokpal. Because contrary to popular discourse in India today, politicians alone, or Congressmen alone for that matter, cannot be accused of corruption. Corruption is neither confined to Congress-ruled states or to the government sector. The private sector and every other section of society is also complicit in according legitimacy to corruption, which has flourished with societal support. Indeed a close aide of a powerful chief minister of a state recently confided that his leader could not afford to take a hard line against corruption because that would upset the gravy train and make powerful sections of the society hostile.

It is instructive to take a look back at Indian leaders who tried to fight institutional corruption. The first prime minister of India, Jawaharlal Nehru, threatened to string hoarders and traders engaged in illegal activities on lamp posts. But he died a deeply distressed man, his own finance minister having to step down following allegations of corruption. Socialist leaders like Karpoori Thakur in 1967 or Jaiprakash Narayan (JP) in 1974 spoke out against corruption but despite regime changes, could do little to curb it. It was then the turn of Rajiv Gandhi, who tried to take on the power brokers and it was his government that stipulated that no commission could be paid by arms dealers. Ironically, his government fell because of allegations that he received kickbacks from Swedish firm Bofors for bagging the contract to supply field guns to the Indian Army. V.P. Singh, who came to power riding on the anti-corruption bandwagon, did not last for long. Even the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance government under Atal Bihari Vajpayee was accused of telecom scams, ‘coffingate’ following Kargil and the BJP president accepting cash on camera in a Tehelka sting operation. And now Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, the “Mr Clean” of Indian politics, is on his way out with the burden of allegations that he presided over one of the most corrupt governments in India.

Corruption has actually increased in direct proportion to the size of the economy, government spending and regulations. The size of the Union budget, for example, has grown over five times during the last ten years. Budget of most states has also increased proportionately. And so has government spending on establishment as well as welfare measures. This is also the period when ambitious anti-corruption regulations, driven partly by the judiciary, were put in place. The handbook of defence procurement, for example, sets out elaborate procedures, checks and balances over two hundred pages. That, however, has not had any effect on run-away corruption. If anything, it has hampered efficiency and speedy decision-making.

Not surprisingly, most political parties have only a fuzzy idea of how to combat corruption. While some would argue that only a draconian drive like in China, a summary trial and exemplary punishment, is needed, others feel basic changes in law, blacklisting and punishing bribe givers, for example, could do the trick. And most would agree that it is a losing battle that India appears to be fighting, with or without Kejriwal.

Uttam Sengupta is a deputy editor of Outlook in New Delhi.