Chief Minister Mufti Sayeed came out with his ambitious plan of rooting out corruption from the State administrative machinery. The State has become notorious for its usual as well as novel ways of corruption at various levels of the administration. He is not the first Chief Minister to announce various administrative measures his Government proposes to take to curb the hydra-headed practice of corruption among the State functionaries. Prior to him, almost all chief ministers have been telling people that their Governments are committed to giving the people a clean and just administration in which corrupt practices would have no place. However, some departments like the Revenue, Police and Social Welfare have earned the sobriquet of most corrupt departments. A Government that fails to curb corruption loses its trust among the people. This is what we have seen in the case of the previous coalition Government in the State.
The CM has spelt nearly a dozen administrative measures that he thinks would go a long way in curbing corruption. The taste of pudding is in eating. People will not go by high-sounding words and promises but by the net results of Government’s determination to nip the evil in the bud. There is inherent contradiction in Governments and regimes promising to introduce one or the other measure leading to eradication of corruption. Let us take one example. The previous Government announced the setting up of Vigilance Commission with great fanfare promising that this overarching body would have powers to bring even top bureaucrats to book. In somewhat “more loyal than the king” fashion, the then State Government claimed it had acted faster on the wicket than any other state in the country and that J&K would be cleansed of corrupt practices in administrative sphere. A very promising gesture indeed it was and people believed in what the Government pronounced. However, when the question of practical implementation of the new idea came up, the Vigilance Commission clamoured for every bit of infrastructure like accommodation, staff, furniture, office accessories, mobility, legal support etc. The Commission had to run from pillar to post to cobble together the minimal profile of the organization. Even now after three years of its existence, the Commission is grappling with unavoidable infrastructural support. Inception of Vigilance Commission as J&K Government’s “more loyal than the king” organization was destined to prove damp squid till the Governor during his short rule, called all investigating agencies to tie up their investigation and deliver the goods.
We appreciate various administrative measures that the CM said are under consideration. There are no two opinions that implementation of the contemplated measures will bring about sea change in containing corruption. However, the manner in which we expected the CM to divulge his plan of tightening the noose of tainted officials is not that encouraging. We have dealt with this matter many times in the past. We have always maintained that miscreants have stakes and are subverting accountability from inside and outside. Hundreds of cases of alleged corruption are pending for investigation and further action with the departments, the law enforcing agencies and the judiciary. Some of these cases are a decade old and in some cases, the culprits have retired taking all pensioner benefits and no accountability at all. Some of the indicted officials have won promotions and some others managed their transfer to lucrative places and posts. The tendency of protecting the alleged corrupt functionaries is much more entrenched than what meets the eye. Bureaucracy has forged rules and mechanisms that encapsulate them from the reach of vigilance agencies. When senior functionaries avoid submitting their APRs and Income Tax Returns, the juniors take the cue and take shelter behind the defiance of their seniors.
Chief Minister’s slew of measures is almost part of the service rules and standing practices of administrative function. The question is of implementing these in letter and in spirit. We do not mean that the Government should become punitive and faultfinding instrument. We know that human beings are fallible. However, that does not give license to the Government to be mute spectator when the time comes for accountability. The Government is answerable to the people through their representatives. Members of the Assembly may be convinced that the Chief Minister has proposed good and effective measures for eradication of corruption. More important than that is that they should ensure the Government has implemented these measures and they have become result oriented. This is to say that the Government should not run away with mere promises: it has to prove its efficacy in providing good governance to the people of the State. The civil society must cooperate with the Government once it finds that it is determined and decisive to do the job.
As of now, the anti-corruption initiatives of the Government are far from satisfactory. Administration needs to do lot of homework before we are in a position to say that it is taking right step in right direction. About 384 FIRs of corruption, embezzlement and financial irregularities are pending with premier investigating agencies of the State. Over 500 accused officers remain unpunished. Why are not the Government and law enforcing agencies pursuing these hundreds of cases of corruption and bringing them to their logical conclusion? Unwillingness or incapability of Vigilance Organization and other investigating agencies creates many doubts of existence of nexus of sorts among the functionaries. Government must try to dispel the spreading doubt among the people. That is possible only by expeditiously pursuing the court cases and bringing the culprit to justice.
In these columns, we have often drawn the attention of the State authorities to the very crucial issue of it failing to implement some of the vital centrally sponsored developmental schemes. The observation is that in most cases centrally sponsored projects have been left unattended or half attended and in many cases funds lapsed owing to non- implementation of the scheme. We are happy to know that, finally, the Chief Minister has realized that there is some serious phenomenon at work and slackness in implementing centrally sponsored schemes in the State is not related only to one or the other scheme. There is overall apathy towards completion of Centrally sponsored project within the period. More often than not, the State Government excuses itself saying conditions in the State are different and hence the conditionality controlling the centrally sponsored schemes need modification. However, it seldom proposes modifications. The Chief Minister has said that he would constitute a special team to survey the progress or no progress of such schemes in the State.
Follow our WhatsApp channel