Innocent until proven guilty: Why the bureaucracy cannot speak up
Ipaidabribe.com spokesperson and ex-bureaucrat, TR Raghunandan believes that we should not tar everyone with the same brush and assume that all government servants are corrupt. In this post, he explains why the bureaucracy cannot defend itself and why we should not make sweeping statements or generalizations.
It is fashionable to bash bureaucrats these days. In the debate on the Lokpal Bill, many allegations are hurled both ways as politicians and ministers on the one hand and civil society representatives on the other trade charge and call each other names. Caught in the crossfire are the members of the permanent civil services, who at all levels, are governed by conduct rules that direct them to keep their mouth shut.
Under the conduct rules of the All India Civil services, the IAS, IPS and the Foreign Service as well as of the Central Services, such as the Audits and Accounts, Civil Accounts, Income Tax and Central Excise and Customs services, officials are not allowed in normal circumstances to speak to the press, even if it is to clear their names or defend themselves when undergoing a trial by the media.
As a former civil servant, I recoiled inwardly when I heard that a respected member of the Civil Society Group that is spearheading the Jan Lokpal movement claimed in a public meeting that 99 percent of bureaucrats are corrupt. True, he was playing to the gallery at that meeting and his statement drew raucous applause at the moment. Still, one wished that he could have risen above the name calling, and spoken about the substantive issues that plague the enactment of this elusive law.
Even though bureaucrats cannot speak of their good work in public or defend themselves against such extreme and unwarranted observations, in private circles, there is plenty of disappointment against bureaucrat bashing. During the height of the victory of civil society following Anna Hazare’s fast, one member of my online group comprising of former colleagues, wrote the following:
“Dear Anna,
Congratulations on your "victory". But you are encouraging anarchy. Your "victory" was achieved through blackmail. This is no different. Your movement was peaceful with an unquestionably noble end. But your means have subverted the democratic and legal process.
You cannot go and assume every politician or bureaucrat is corrupt. They too are Indians and are from the same stock as you. And if you believe they are bad, go and defeat them/ encourage your supporters to have their children appear for the civil services exam and get in to the IAS and other civil services through merit! Our elections are free and fair. The civil services exam is fair. The majority of the urban supporters in Jantar Mantar do not even vote!
This is no victory. For every taker of a bribe, there is inevitably (not always) a more than willing giver. The root problem is our national character, or lack of it. We sell our votes, our testimony (on oath!), our conscience, our principles but do not hesitate to criticise the government, the politicians, bureaucracy for corruption and inefficiency. We behave like animals on the road but talk about civil society.
We have no work ethics ? our productivity is among the lowest. It would have indeed been fitting if you had begun and ended your fast with a pledge by you and all the millions you have galvanized swearing by all that is precious to them that they would NEVER give or take a bribe, that they would pay all their taxes, no under/over invoicing, not evading a traffic challan, not tampering with the water and electricity meters to avoid paying the full bill... the list is endless. In essence, that they would themselves be good citizens and bring up their children to be good citizens too. Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country.
Jai Hind.”
The truth, as always, lies somewhere in between the extreme view that nearly all of the government is corrupt and my friend’s view point that the problem is our national character alone. For instance, there is plenty of evidence to show that elections might not be fair, particularly if electoral rolls are grievously inaccurate. Similarly, if national character was the central problem, then we would not have had remarkable success in reducing corruption through changes in systems, such as in case of the income tax refunds, railway ticketing and a host of other services that are now available over the counter without corruption.
The other danger in blaming corruption - or any other wide ranging problem - on national character is that the latter - if indeed there is something that can be identified as ‘national character’ – can transport itself rapidly. For instance, mention Japan today and the vision that arises is of a nation of polite, hard-working, dignified, disciplined and patriotic people. Yet, seventy years ago, any reference to Japan would have invoked visions of a cruel and heartless people, driven by imperialist ambitions, who were not above violating the basic rules -- treatment of prisoners taken in battle or of killing civilians in regions won in battle.
There is no doubt that one of the significant reasons why India is progressing, is because there are large numbers of honest bureaucrats, who go about their work diligently and honestly, but are constrained not to speak about the changes they have brought about only because they are trained to be self-effacing.
ipaidabribe.com believes that we should celebrate such honesty too, and allow readers to view the other side of the picture as well.
Watch this space for more information and opportunities to meet honest officials face to face.