Stooping to surrender

Neutrality in such a context would mean that the official should by definition owe allegiance to the Constitution of India first and foremost. Other allegiances, whether to one8217;s family or cultural messiah, tribal guru or religious leader, or to any overtly stated political ideology, would tend to undercut this primary allegiance. It is difficult to owe allegiance to any one person or group and not be biased against any one of a contrary persuasion. It is this latter fact that should normally determine the kind of public face that an official chooses to maintain.

Given that civil servants routinely perform tasks involving public interaction, be it maintaining land records, collecting revenue, administering the civil supply system, running a public utility or providing and maintaining urban amenities, the quality of responses any civil servant gets depends almost entirely on this public persona. Overt neutrality and strong commitment to the Constitution and the rules of the land make a bureaucrat function much better 8212; even in the service of the political master. Moreover, the people do appreciate fairness. Witness the massive public response to the efforts made by the Election Commission of India over the last decade to enforce neutrality in the conduct of elections in India. It has made all the difference to the quality of democracy in our country. Some observers even say that the quality of elections conducted in the country today is by far the best in the world.

But if such is the case and if civil servants understand the need to owe allegiance to the Indian Constitution first and foremost, then why should so many IAS officers in recent times be making such public gestures about their personal allegiances 8212; political, religious, cultural or otherwise. The reason is that however well accepted the norm of bureaucratic neutrality might be, it has been under serious attack recently, much to the impotent rage of many senior officers. Impotent, because this is something they are helpless to do anything about as their colleagues and juniors go about enjoying goodies obtained through demonstrable servility. The most well known manifestation of this shift from neutrality and towards a 8216;committed8217; bureaucracy is the tendency to use political patronage to obtain coveted postings. There have always been officers who had political godfathers and who used these godfathers to get 8216;good8217; postings for themselves. But at one time they used to be in a minority. This is no longer the case.

Often this desire for political alignment goes to absurd lengths. In Punjab we witness the sad case of a senior policeman being persecuted by the present government since he allegedly worked almost as a political agent of the previous government. It remains a matter of wonderment as to which is more sad: his persecution or his political alignment. As the Congress lost power, the non-Congress government quickly set about teaching the erring officer a lesson. That learning episode continues to be played out in the public. The physical act of junior officers currently falling at the feet of political superiors is only a reflection of the metaphorical act in which their seniors routinely indulge.

It is the danger of relinquishing a commitment to the Constitution of India in favour of a more personalised commitment, and not corruption, which is by far the greatest malaise facing the civil service today. Corruption merely undermines the moral integrity of the individual. Abandoning of political neutrality undermines the entire structure and logic of bureaucracy. The dharma of the civil servant resides with the Constitution while that of a successful politician lies in being able to influence people and win friends. While the one succeeds in fulfilling his dharma 8212; getting others to bend to his will 8212; the other seems to be faltering.

The writer is Additional Director General, Yashwantrao Chavan Academy of Development Administration, Pune. Views are personal meeta29hotmail.com