Politicians...Organized Criminals ???

Preface 
The one constant feedback about this blog is that its posts are too long. Unfortunately the very purpose of this blog is to express my opinions on complicated issues, where brevity is a luxury I can't afford. However this particular post had become just too long and so I have decided to split it into three posts, one for each distinct era of Indian modern politics.

        There was a time when great leaders like Subash Chandra Bose were affectionately called "Netaji", but now the word has a definite negative connotation attached to it. Politicians are the favorite punching bags all over the world, but there is something more sinister happening in India. Politicians are not just ridiculed in jokes, cartoons and movies but they are openly equated with criminals in the media, social networking sites, discussions, debates and small talks in every nook and corner of this country. This tendency of slamming the whole political class has unprecedented hidden public support behind it. Recently there have even been huge apolitical agitations where such sentiments were openly expressed. Unlike others who see this as a very dangerous, destabilizing trend, I view the public expression of it, as an element of change and transformation for the  better. 

        This degradation of Indian politics did not happen overnight and nor has the situation been like this from the beginning. In fact Indian politics was perhaps the only thing that was right at the time of independence; everything else was in tatters. How ironic is it, that today Indian politicians are the biggest bottleneck to our growth, prosperity and creation of a just society. So how did it happen? What went wrong and when? What were the critical mistakes and lost opportunities? Why couldn't our society arrest the falling moral standards in politics? Also, are things currently improving or worsening in India with time? Let us try to delve into history and try to find an answer to these questions.

Mahatama Gandhi

        At the time of independence, India had some of the most honest, honorable and respected politicians. The Congress party was run by the sweat of dedicated volunteers, who did not work for money. The same was almost true (though not to the same degree) of rival political entities like BR Ambedkar, MS Golwarkar or E.V. Ramaswami. The differences were mostly ideological and not personal.

        Perhaps the seed was born in partition itself. Throughout the 1940s the Muslim league and other communal parties like RSS and Hindu Mahasabha kept gaining ground. The violence accompanied with the partition further strengthened these religious fanatics. The result being that, the Congress party was at its weakest and the popularity of Mahatama Gandhi at its lowest, at the time of the partition. The Indian state was very vulnerable during the early years, battling on a number of fronts. The first government under Nehru did the most remarkable job in strengthening the state. Defying all logic, reasoning and every contemporary prediction, the Indian state did not collapse. However in this firefighting, some of the very critical  trends and fault-lines, that appeared very early on, got ignored, leading to the present mess.

Mahatama Gandhi, Subash Chandra Bose and 
Vallabhbhai Patel in a Congress meeting. 

        Congress was never a political party before independence. It was a congregation of all great patriotic people who wanted to rid the country of the barbaric colonial rule. However there was very little unity among the top leadership on many important issues, like economic policies, governance structures, Kashmir etc. Congress had both left-winged and right-winged, liberals as well as conservatives, within its ranks. Many of the most dedicated volunteers of the Congress thought that with the achievement of independence their objective was realized and so they slowly sidelined themselves, especially now that Congress was associated with power. As expected wrong people started getting associated with Congress and a proper pruning was never done. Gandhi's early death was another big factor. His Ashrams were the factories where future leaders were born. He was not just the symbol of honesty and austerity but had the unique gift of spreading these to other people. It was entirely due to his efforts that the Congress had an army of selfless volunteers and mid-level leadership, that were its backbone. Good people were already scarce due to 1942 Quit India Movement and the communal riots (Honest courageous people are the first ones who get killed during any riots). Gandhi's death ensured that there was no replacement coming.

        Right after independence, Gandhi suggested that Congress should be disbanded. It was a very sensible and far-sighted suggestion. However not many people paid heed to the suggestion at that time, especially since there were rioting, instability and more pressing concerns all around the country. However over the years it has been proved without a doubt that not disbanding the Congress was one of the biggest mistake made, and the country suffers because of it even today.

Jawaharlal Nehru

        The Congress was now in power and instead of discussion, it was the time of implementation of ideas. The government had to choose a particular path on economic policy, centralization, foreign policy and everything else. It was purely Nehru's ideas that got preference over everything else. Gandhi's economic ideas got sidelined stating that they were impractical. His vision of a thousand village republics was replaced by a very centralized power structure at the center and the states. Nehru's left-winged policies, his love of centralization and nationalization, became the official policy of the Congress and the Government. Anyone who did not agree was slowly sidelined. The differences between Nehru and Patel were all too apparent. Unfortunately Sardar Patel died even before the first election. After the death of Sardar Patel, there was none in the Congress who matched the stature of Nehru or had a reasonable chance of success in opposing him.

        A division of old Congress into two equal sized parties capable of forming a strong government and opposition respectively, would have been the ideal solution but that never materialized. Of course a lot of people broke away from the Congress to make separate parties but they were neither united nor any match to Nehru. Neither did any such division had the sanction of someone like Gandhi.

J B Kripalani
(Kisan Mazdoor Praja Party)

        All those opposing Congress were either those who wanted similar things like Congress, in greater degree, like the Socialist Party, Kisan Mazdoor Praja Party and Communist Party or fanatic communal elements wanting to convert India into "Hindu Pakistan" or parties catering to only certain sections of the society. Naturally Nehru prevailed over all of them with a thumping majority. But what made his victory even more astounding was the tag of "Congress" and the goodwill due to Gandhi's association. For the next three elections the same trend continued. Without any credible opposition and the absolute guarantee of being in power, irrespective of personal performance, degraded the Congress Party greatly.

Swatantra Party 

C Rajagopalachari
(Swatantra Party)

        Swatantra party was the only party which should have been the alternate to the Congress party. It was a right winged party opposed to the Nehruvian socialist outlook of the Congress Party. It advocated free enterprise and free trade and opposed the licence-permit raj. Despite initial success and the party becoming the main opposition party in the mid-60s, this grand endeavor failed miserably. The basic reason was again the fact that the grassroot strength of the Congress was immense and it was almost impossible to get over that, especially in a country which had idolized Gandhi and Congress for more than thirty years. 

        Letter exchanges between Jayaprakash Narayanan and Nehru right after the second general elections are a very interesting read. Narayan suggested that Nehru should function as a “national rather than a party leader”; that, even while he ran the government, he should “encourage the growth of an Opposition”, so as to “soundly lay the foundations of parliamentary democracy” in India. Nehru's reply is very interesting -

Jayaprakash Narayanan
(Socialist Party)

“So far as I understand parliamentary democracy, it means that every opportunity should be given for an opposition to function, to express its views by word or writing, to contest elections in fair conditions, and to try to convert the people to its views. The moment an opposition is given some kind of a protected position, it becomes rather a bogus opposition and cannot even carry weight with the people. I am not aware of any pattern of parliamentary democracy in which it has ever been suggested that the opposition should be encouraged, except in the ways I have mentioned above."

Unfortunately Nehru couldn't understand that JP was asking Nehru to become another Gandhi and not just an effective Prime Minister. He wanted Nehru to leave behind a working two-party parliamentary democracy.

Purushottam Das Tandon

        One of the major reasons of the moral decline of the Congress Party was the emergence of personality cult and hero worship in the Congress party. Nehru was almost completely responsible for it. Unlike in pre-independence era, when there was true internal democracy in the Congress, Nehru made sure that people opposing him, like Dr. Rajendra Prasad, Rajagopalachari, Purushottam Das Tandon and other were slowly sidelined. It became a sort of an unwritten norm for the leader of the government to also be the party president or at the least, have a pliable candidate in the post. 

Krishna Menon

        The socialistic policies of Nehru created far too much centralization and concentration of power. The license-permit-raj became the breeding ground of corruption. Running any political entity requires a lot of money. Before independence the party had ample resources from voluntary donations, but later the finances started drying off and election campaign just got costlier and costlier. Jawaharlal Nehru, though honest personally, started turning a blind eye to the corruption in the party. The most brazen example was the staunch defense of Krishna Menon by Nehru.

Vinobha Bave
(spiritual successor of
Mahatma Gandhi)

        One of the reasons why Congress was able to maintain such high moral status prior to independence was its participation and leadership in social work and cultural reforms. However over the years the social work became less and less important and the complete Congress machinery was dedicated for just campaigning and winning elections. The major social works done during this period were led by the Gandhians like Vinobha Bave (Bhoodan movement) and were completely apolitical. Social reforms meet a lot of resistance from the society initially, whereas the benefits are long term. Unfortunately it goes against short term goal of gathering votes and the Congress continued making that mistake. The goal of winning elections at any cost led to a development of appeasement policy and vote bank politics by the Congress.

        Instead of fighting the caste system, party tickets were given on the basis of caste considerations. Behind the smokes screen of reservation, the more crucial programs of untouchability  removal and efforts to annihilate caste were abandoned completely. No effort was made to reform the Muslim community, to liberalize the Muslim civil code or to introduce the Uniform Civil Code. Ironically these appeasement policies had the most harmful effect on these respective communities themselves. This growing timidness of Congress cost the nation dearly. 

K. Kamraj

        In 1963 K. Kamraj came up with a plan to revamp the Congress from the 'lure for power' that had in-gripped it. He proposed that all senior Congress leaders should resign from their posts and devote all their energy to the re-vitalization of the Congress. Six Union Ministers and six State Chief Ministers resigned from their posts. However it was too little too late. Moreover with the death of Nehru shortly afterward, the plan was quickly abandoned.

Lal Bahadur Shastri

        Nehru was succeeded by Lal Bahadur Shastri, arguably the best Prime Minister India ever had. Shastriji was no match for the intellectual prowess of Nehru. He was neither a great/original thinker nor an excellent orator or writer. However he was a true Gandhian, possessing great strength of character and will-power. He was instrumental in ushering both the green revolution as well as the white revolution in the country besides winning the war of 1965. When the country faced a food shortage, he gave the call to all Indians to observe weekly fast and convert all available land for agricultural activities. Lakhs of Indians followed suit and in my own family, our garden was converted into a potato field. Today we can't even imagine any politician having the moral authority to give such a call.

        However Shastriji died just too early to be able to change much in the system. With him ended the first era of Indian politics. After him, things went downhill pretty rapidly. The seeds for the same had already been sown in the first era and the stage was all set for Indira Gandhi, to destroy the Gandhian moral legacy in India politics completely and forever. I will continue with the second era of Indian politics in the next post. 

(to be continued....)

JanLokPal Bill: The missing “magic wand” to end corruption

Anna Haza

Our Prime Minister has said that there is no magic wand to end corruption in this country. Corruption is systemic, all-pervasive and deep-rooted in the mindset of Indians. It’s a cultural problem and no single bill or law can curb corruption significantly. The above statement finds resonance with a lot of intellectual persons, thinkers, columnists and common people too. However I beg to differ, from the majority, on this. After a deep study of the Jan Lokpal bill, and the manner in which corruption works in this country, I have come to the conclusion that, not only is there a magic wand to end corruption, but that this wand is none other than the Jan LokPal bill. In the rest of this post, I would only try to justify my above statement.

The first thing that we have to understand is the way in which corruption happens in this country, how the black money is channelized, and who all fall in its path. Lets us first understand the basic infrastructure of corruption in India. In India, the one of the major root cause of corruption is the nexus between the politicians and the bureaucracy. Leaving aside the corruption of MP/MLA fund and other such petty corruptions, politicians rarely ever commit corruption directly. However they are the biggest beneficiary of corruption, and in certain cases that money constitutes a significant portion of their party funds.

All major corruptions, small and big, are actually done by the bureaucracy. Whether it is the corruption in making passport/ration card, or the CWG scam, it’s the bureaucracy which actually does the corruption. Without the cooperation of the bureaucracy, corruption is impossible. But bureaucracy alone has its limitations. It itself cannot spread corruption as far, wide and deep as it is today. Bureaucracy works under the government (political system) which has direct control over the transfer, promotion etc. of the bureaucrats. More importantly, the government has control over the various investigating agencies currently functional. If these agencies like CBI are allowed to work independently, it would be very difficult for the bureaucrats to hide the paper trail of their blatant corruptions. Hence we can safely say that bureaucrats badly need the help of the ruling politicians, to give them the one thing that they need the most – protection against prosecution for their wrong doings, and they are ready to pay for it. Only the politicians can give the bureaucrats the zero risk environment needed for the unabated corruption. And only bureaucracy can give the much required money to the ruling politicians. Hence we see that that as far as corruption is concerned, the legislative and the bureaucracy, which are meant to be separate, are more like conjoint twins. This nexus between them is mutually beneficial to both at the cost of the common people. The system works so beautifully that it quickly corrupts the honest people in the system or else marginalizes them. Since votes in this country as mostly on castes, religion etc. the politicians also don’t suffer an electoral backlash because of it. This system works so well that now we have almost accepted corruption as the way of life. Indians freely give bribes to get their work done and in most cases, there are fixed corruption rates and no haggling as well.

The second major reason for the rising corruption is the lack of accountability of bureaucrats at any level for their decisions in a court of law, and the hence the great difficulty in proving corruption of the bureaucrat. Corruption complaints are almost like one man’s word against another’s, with no authentic proof. Hence it is almost impossible to proof corruption in a court of law. Also with the multiplicity of laws in our current system, it is very easy for a bureaucrat, to harass an honest citizen, who refuses to pay bribes. And even if such a person goes to the court, all that is accomplished by the multiple years spent in court is that the genuine grievance of that citizen is resolved. But still there is still no punishment for the bureaucrat who subjected him to all this trouble, as we have no such fixed accountability. The entire work is spread over many other bureaucrats with no one having any accountability for the entire work or part of the work. Hence there is no effective deterrent for the bureaucrat, as he will most certainly get away from the court of law without any punishment. This has given rise to what we can call the “culture of corruption” in our country where no work gets done without giving bribes.

Now the question arises, how can there be a magical solution to this problem, if corruption is so deep-rooted in our system and in our mindsets. But even before answering that question, let’s first shatter another common myth regarding the normal human behavior. Although most Indians start taking bribe as soon as they get the first chance and have no moral hesitation in giving one, to suit their selfish needs; this is not uncommon or strange or different from anyone else. Indians are not genetically/culturally more inclined towards corruption as compared to citizens of countries having the less corruption. There is nothing drastically wrong with us as a race. There is something wrong with the system and not within every individual. Let me explain this statement further.

In every society there are three types of people. First are those who are always on the right path, no matter what cost, what all sacrifices are required for it. These are people with a very strong moral fiber, who are very rare to find. It is impossible to convert the entire society into these types of people. Second are those who are born crooks. They will keep on trying, to find ways, of making easy money. They would be frequently successful, even in the countries having the best laws. No law can ever keep their behavior in check. But they again constitute a very small minority of the entire population. The third type is the most important type as approx 90% people belong to this category. These people have an inherent urge to be good and honest but have no real moral fiber in them. But their most significant quality is that, they do exactly the same as what everyone else, around them, does. They are pure copycats. For example - if no one in the office takes bribes, they won’t even try to start the bribing process. Also if everyone else in their vicinity is taking bribes, they too will become an integral part of the system sooner or later. More importantly, their behavior is not permanent and can change very quickly and drastically. It is this third type of people which determines the collective behavior of the society.

Now let us focus on how the Jan LokPal bill will be effective in curbing corruption and will be the “missing magic wand”, as was the bold claim made earlier by me. JanLokPal tries to curb both types of corruption. The first type of corruption is where both bribe takers and givers are equally guilty, and are involved in a mutually beneficial relationship, Eg. the 2G scam, CWG scam and all other major scams and the corruption that takes place in government contracts etc. The second type of corruption can be called “forced corruption” or an “extra tax” on the people, where the bribe giver is forced to give a bribe just to get his genuine requirements met. He is not asking for any favor but still has to pay money, otherwise he would be harassed and his important work will not get done. It is this form of corruption that a common man mostly faces, and the beauty of JanLokPal is that it would be most successful in curbing this second type of corruption.

The Jan LokPal strikes at very critical links in the chain of corruption. It basically takes the anti-corruption wing of the CBI or any other investigating agency out of the preview of the government into the direct hands of an independent agency. Hence now the politicians can no longer give foolproof guarantee to the bureaucrats, from prosecution against corruption. They can still control the transfer and promotion of the bureaucrats and the bureaucracy is still under them, but a now a crucial power is missing. With the Damocles sword of LokPal hanging over their heads, the bureaucracy would not be able to indulge in rampant and blatant corruption. Majority of the bureaucrats will never have the confidence that, they would be able to hide all evidences of their corruption. They cannot be sure that nothing would ever come out against them, even by an independent and comprehensive investigation. The fear of losing their jobs would give them the courage to defy the politicians, as they know that in any investigation it would only be their neck that would be on the line. Hence the LokPal can actually break the nexus between the politicians and the bureaucrats. Also even a single conviction would have a big ripple effect on the bureaucracy, further breaking the existing nexus between the two. Actually it is very risky in this system, to do corruption, until the bureaucracy, politicians and LokPal all come together. However by making the working of LokPal so much transparent, the chances of LokPal becoming corrupt are less. There are many provisions in the bill to ensure that this is a very rare case.

The Jan Lokpal bill also addresses the other major reason for corruption – Lack of accountability of bureaucrats for their actions. The Jan LokPal bill mandates all the government offices to declare a “Citizens Charter”, where they would have to declare that they will do the X work of the X person in X days by an X bureaucrat. JanLokPal further states that if that work is not done in that much time, without any genuine reason, it would be deemed that it was not done in anticipation of a bribe. No one has to proof anything. Also the blame lies squarely on the bureaucrat mentioned in the Citizens Charter and he would personally face punishment in the court of law. There is also a provision of an immediate fine on that officer based on the delay he caused that would be given to the aggrieved person. This will act as the strongest deterrent possible for any corrupt bureaucrat.

Shehla Masood
(RTI Activist)

With the multiplicity of complex laws in our current system, the bureaucrat still has the power to harass an honest citizen who refuses to pay bribes, and cause a limited delay in his work, giving fictitious reasons. However the society always has people of type 1, who are willing to fight for what they think is correct and moral, though they are a very small minority of the population. After the JanLokPal bill gets passed they would become the drivers of change in the society. They would not only be able to get their work done, without paying bribe, but would also get punishment for the corrupt officials. This would strike fear among the rest of them and they would be hesitant in asking for bribes to the rest of them. This fear factor, coupled with the fact, that if any person can get his work done without giving bribe he will not pay a bribe, will go a long way in curbing the “culture of corruption” in the country.

Coupled with the other features of the JanLokPal bill, it is quite clear that it is incompatible with the current corrupt system. It would create huge imbalance in the system. An honest LokPal has the potential to change the entire system. The speed of this change would also be absolutely amazing. As soon as few people start getting punished, a systemic change would take place. The 90% type three people will change their behavior overnight. That would result in the system being fundamentally changed. This in turn, will lead to a lot of changes such as the laws would be made simpler as complex laws would now be against the bureaucracy itself. Also a lot of restructuring would happen in bureaucracy to ensure accountability in the system. The greatest change would be in the politics in the country. They would have to create more genuine and legitimate sources to fund the elections expenses, like in other countries. Sure there would be a lot of anarchy and witch hunting initially, but eventually things would settle down for the better.

Anna Hazarre had said that he is confident that JanLokPal bill would be able to reduce corruption to the extent of 50-60 percent. I believe that this is a very modest claim and the actual reduction would be much higher, though it is true that corruption can never be completely removed from the society. JanLokPal can actually change the system where corruption is not the norm but something which is controlled and checked.
 

To say that corruption can only go away whenever one stops giving bribe is stupid and impractical. Campaigns like “No to bribe” etc never achieve much because the majority of the people do not have a strong moral fiber and this fundamental fact cannot be changed. The other idea to curb corruption is through more reforms, i.e. making government controls less and less, reducing the number of check posts of corruption. This no doubt is a great and practical idea and can indeed reduce corruption. The country most certainly requires such reforms. However the government’s role cannot be completely done away with. We cannot have everything deregulated and hence places where corruption can exist will still continue to be substantial. Hence we can say that other than a strong anti-corruption law, there is no other way of curbing corruption in this country. JanLokPal is the magic wand that will curb corruption in this country. It is the need of the hour and now a popular demand.