DD may stand for Den of Delinquents

While a DDG of the AIR has been under scrutiny for signing a software deal for a daily slot at six times the normal price, the Doordarshan DDG came in the CBI net due to alleged favours shown to a Calcutta-based production house for sponsored programs.

In the first case, the CBI has completed its preliminary investigation and in the second, the Government has been asked to give the sanction for prosecution.

Internal vigilance reports show that complaints of corruption and graft have been piling up in Mandi House. “Most of the complaints are lying unattended,” admits a report prepared by the vigilance department, which puts the number of complaints received in the last six years at 663.

Interestingly, while the report lists seven corruption-prone areas — including marketing of commercials, booking of casual artists, purchase of equipment and award of contracts — it acknowledges the fact that the vigilance machinery has all but collapsed.

It states: “The number of CBI cases in 1986 was only 3, which has gone up to 52 (in 1999). With increase of workload many fold, the staff is under tremendous pressure which affects the quality of output/performance in terms of examination/ finalisation of cases, resulting in undue delay and rampant corruption…At the moment, 389 complaints are lying unattended and 174 cases have not been pursued for a long time.”

In the case of the AIR, a total number of 21 complaints have been registered by the police or the CBI and in 29 cases, disciplinary action was initiated in the last five years. And as a confidential letter sent to all AIR stations in September last year makes apparent, the broadcaster also found similar areas which are described as “corruption prone.”

Besides the purchase of equipment and booking of casual artists, purchase of stores and hiring of transport are the areas listed in the AIR memo titled “focal points of corruption.”

While the AIR now officially acknowledges the “dilatory” tactics adopted by the “delinquent” officials, in DD, vigilance bosses have suggested that an incentive of monetary payments be given to motivate officials in the vigilance set-up. “Preliminary investigations are accepted by officers with great reluctance,” admits a vigilance circular, “investigation work is also not done properly by them and consequently, PE (preliminary Enquiry) reports submitted by them are not helpful to the authorities in taking a firm view about the alleged misconduct of indicted officials.”

It is in the light of such observations as well as some scathing indictment by the Parliament’s (8th) Standing Committee on Communications that a suggestion had recently been made by Mandi House bosses that the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) conduct a special audit on all the purchase and software scams in the Prasar Bharati set-up.

Officials say that the CAG has expressed its reluctance to conduct the audit. Reason: The CAG has reported that little action has been taken in DD and AIR on its earlier audit observations and that the Prasar Bharti should first set its own house in order before asking for a special audit.