Opinion The man and the machine

Whether CVC or CAG,the authority and will of the civil servant in the post matters.

tsrsubramanian

January 28, 2011 02:40 AM IST First published on: Jan 28, 2011 at 02:40 AM IST

The CVC (Central Vigilance Commissioner) and the CAG (Comptroller and Auditor General) have been in the news lately,though for different reasons. (Curiously,both are senior IAS officers,from the Kerala cadre.) What role have these and some other constitutional or statutory bodies played in governance?

It would be recalled that the Election Commission,in the pre-Seshan era,functioned as a mild,government affiliated body meekly overseeing a corrupt electoral process,where the government agents and local goons were able to terrorise whole neighbourhoods and distort the electoral process. During his civil service period,T. N. Seshan was known to be a highly loyal civil servant. However,once he became a constitutional authority,he tore off his whiskers,and shook up the system single-handedly,exercising his constitutional powers to clean up the electoral process,much like Thomas Becket stood up during the time of Henry II. It is true that the electoral process still reeks of money power,but at least he largely eliminated muscle power. Indeed,we now need Seshan in a new avatar to clean up the use of black money in our electoral system.

Most chiefs of such regulatory agencies,chosen from among retiring or retired civil servants,are unable to visualise themselves as representing a major public need to keep watch and control the government; they continue to perform as meek,unobtrusive and obedient file pushers,toeing the governments line and not wanting to displease the masters; they forget that they no longer work for the government,but their new masters are the people of India,who have charged them with the responsibility of oversight on government; and given them enormous powers to do so.

Sadly,the Peter Principle overtakes them. The Central Vigilance Commission,for example,has functioned hitherto as an adjunct office of the government,and over the past 60 years or so has a near-zero record of uncovering major malfeasance or thuggery indulged in by government servants. I have known many CVCs,and they are generally honest and decent human beings; sadly they never realised their capacity to reform the system,to root out corruption the specific job assigned to them statutorily.

It is wrong to pillory P .J. Thomas at this juncture it is not Thomas who appointed himself as CVC; it is the government which committed the blunder. Thomas is,and will continue to be,innocent until and unless he is found guilty. The tragedy is not on this point; the potential for far-reaching damage lies in the manner in which the selection committee functioned,with the PM and a minister outvoting a dissenting member representing the opposition as if the appointment was for a political job,using voting power as the instrument.

Clearly,the intention of setting up the committee was to find consensus in each case,not to function through brute majority. It is unconscionable and indefensible if one member from a panel proposed by government is chosen,overruling the objections of the opposition representative,when she offered to support any of the other two members on the same government panel. Such a farcical selection process has not been condemned adequately in future,this should never happen. I sympathise with Thomas for landing in a situation for which he was not responsible. In any case,the institution of the Vigilance Commission has been in the limelight for totally the wrong reason generally it has been a very passive,docile agency.

Then there is the CBI,which is often in the news mostly not for bringing culprits to book,but for allowing blatant,major criminal acts to be covered up,and for allowing large-scale national looters to escape. It is unfortunate that this agency has been used as the handmaiden of the party in power,forced to look the other way when people with influence are involved; and now and then to deliberately rope in the innocent with a false charge. It is imperative that the CBI should be made autonomous,and brought outside the purview of government control. No institution in India is ever able to govern itself; and a suitable independent,credible,oversight machinery for the CBI is also an equal imperative.

It may be pertinent to mention the admirable role played by the Union Public Service Commission over the past six decades. Not one voice has been raised against the UPSC for using influence in selection for the all-India services. This is a great achievement,considering that service commissions in many states have sullied themselves with blatant examples of corruption and nepotism. Clearly,the corroding influence of politics has not penetrated this institution. It is another thing that these bright young officers,over time,are exposed to our political system,and an unconscionably large proportion compromise their intellectual,moral and financial integrity sooner or later.

It is in this context that the achievement of the CAG needs to be evaluated. Current incumbent Vinod Rais report,complete with facts,figures and logic,has handed over a case,ready for crossing the ts and dotting the is,to the prosecuting agency. I had a nodding acquaintance with Rai as a young officer in the commerce ministry in the early 1980s. He came through even then as serious,motivated and dedicated he clearly has preserved these wonderful qualities.

I have had occasion to mention to many previous CAGs that they were too soft,too polite,too friendly,too pusillanimous and by implication,not discharging the constitutional responsibilities cast on them. At last we have one CAG who is interpreting his post in the manner it ought to be. He may fail,given the prevailing atmosphere; at least he would have tried. We need such examples so that outstanding civil servants,with the courage of their conviction,can still influence the course of governance in these difficult times.

The writer is a former cabinet secretary