Grumblings over failure to prove criminality must lead to institutional overhaul

First Eye News Update on politics over 2G

Red faces in the governing establishment after acquittal of all accused in the 2G case is not what people expected to see after the massive 2014 mandate for change. Besides rejecting criminality, the judgment is an indictment of every institution and individuals within them who were influenced by public perception and resorted to knee-jerk measures. The judgment points to a bureaucracy which worked at cross-purposes and covered tracks, revealing the soft underbelly of India’s supposed ‘steel frame’. Similarly, CAG which obsessed about revenue loss without benefit of watching the policy play out, has taken a credibility hit.

Some may console themselves that criminality was not conclusively rejected but prosecution failed to marshal evidence to prove it. This will not suffice if our objective is to design fail-safe systems. It is time to restart the discourse on CBI autonomy, professionalism, and building expertise in probing graft cases. Political control of CBI contributes to perceptions of witch hunt and ends up politicising corruption investigations, even as it short-circuits cultivation of professional expertise.

This has been Vijay Mallya’s defence in London against extradition, and it is likely to be successful. CBI’s failure to secure prosecution sanction for Congress leader Ashok Chavan on a mere technicality reveals its fallen stature. There is much populist rhetoric on fighting corruption, but no tangible systemic benefit yet even as it constrains the government into draconian and quixotic measures like demonetisation. The strong public perception that UPA was corrupt, reinforced by policies that encouraged rent-seeking behaviour, only saw disruptions in Parliament and no real debate on weakening institutions. This undermined credibility of the political class as a whole.

Now Congress is alleging a Rafale deal scam, heralding another vicious season of allegations. Two successive governments have dithered on a sharp definition of corruption in Prevention of Corruption Act that will not incriminate genuine policy decisions. The 2G verdict reveals remarkable coyness among bureaucrats to make clear file notings. We can only conjecture whether this is due to insecurity, mistrust or lack of domain knowledge. Seeing corruption everywhere makes it difficult to tackle corruption anywhere. Prosecution of corruption must be evidence-based rather than hysteria-based, for which it is imperative to cultivate professionalism among investigating agencies even as politics has to be less polarising and partisan. Otherwise, it is difficult to perceive any light coming out of all the corruption heat.