Since the Supreme Court struck down their protective provision, bureaucrats have been arguing that they are afraid of CBI inquiries and hence, not taking important decisions. This is hampering governance processes

One advantage for bureaucrats, who run into Ministers every day, is that they can brainwash even the most intelligent of political leaders to their own benefit. This is how the bureaucracy had managed to provide themselves with a protective shield since 1988, in the form of a single directive. It even upturned the 1997 judgement of the apex court in the Jain Hawala case as a result of which this provision was re-introduced in 2004 through the Central Vigilance Commission Act. This, in turn, has allowed a section of bureaucrats to loot the national exchequer freely.

No wonder, India remains one of the most corrupt nations in the world. A Transparency International survey has shown that India is more corrupt than three of its BRICS peers — China, South Africa and Brazil. According to the list, India has scored 36 points on a scale of 0-100, where 0 means that a country is perceived as highly corrupt and 100 means it is perceived as very clean.

The nation’s money has been looted by a vast majority of bureaucrats — some of them work for State Governments, others with the Union Government and some at Public Sector Units. India has about 1.93 crore babus as compared to some 5,100 lawmakers. 

Bureaucrats say that they are afraid of the Central Bureau of Investigation. Yet, the CBI is a small organisation with a sanctioned strength of just 6,500 officials. The actual number of employees is lower at about 5,300. Out of this, less than 25 per cent are actual investigating officials.

Moreover, inspite of the orders of the Supreme Court, the Government (read bureaucrats) has been sitting on the cases of public servants for years, ostensibly to protect them. In this past year alone, 15 cases of corruption in higher offices have been pending with the Union Government as the CBI is yet to receive permission to investigate them under Section 6A of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act. This piece of legislation is one of the biggest impediments to checking corruption within the Government.

It is not always the politicians, but the bureaucrats, who come to the rescue of the corrupt. Now, since the Supreme Court has struck down the protective provision, bureaucrats are arguing that they are afraid of CBI inquiries and hence, not taking any important decisions which, in turn, is hampering governance processes. One wonders why the worthies don’t just leave Government service to make room for those who are willing to take decisions and can work for the country.

In India, the Government often works at cross-purposes. Those who have seen Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minister on television know how well the stories portrayed on screen resonate with audiences here.

Bureaucrats are paid to work and work honestly. If only they had stood up for the  right     things, and not become pliable, many scams like Bofors, Commonwealth Games, ‘Coalgate’, 2G Spectrum and ‘Railgate’ could have been avoided. But for most high-ranking bureaucrats, the safety and security of their job, the post retirement sinecure comes first — let the rules, laws and even the country be damned.

For instance, Indian Administrative Service officers have ensured that no other Service or even PSU employees have access to senior posts which put them close to the Ministers, even though, theoretically, all Secretary-level jobs are open to all the Services in India.

Only Rajiv Gandhi, as Prime Minister, had brought about half a dozen people from the private sector into the Government. After that, the bureaucracy made sure that the idea of picking the best, from outside their empire, was scrapped. 

Now, the Supreme Court has brought relief to the CBI and discomfort to the corrupt, as it has taken away the shield that protected top bureaucrats from being investigated in corruption cases without prior approval (mostly of their fellow bureaucrats, but nominally the Ministers).

Bureaucrats are mistaken if they think that they can get around the present Prime Minister and make him do their bidding. Besides, if a person has nothing to hide, why should he or she be afraid of any inquiryIJ

As it is, the laws are tilted in favour of the accused and are not designed to protect the victims. In fact, the boot should be on the other leg. Corrupt bureaucrats should be called upon to prove that whatever assets they have are not disproportionate to their known means of income.

It is time to remind the Government that bureaucrats tried to smuggle in a retired Secretary as a member of the lokpal even. The Supreme Court had to point out, as to why people dealing with the corruption have not been added to the ombudsman’s council.

Article 311 of the Constitution of India unfairly protects employees of the Union and State Governments. This needs to be abolished, as it is irrelevant and unjust. It has also spawned a culture where there is no fear of loss of job, irrespective of professional performance.

Instead of pampering its employees, who are called public servants, the Government should make the bureaucracy accountable. This will lead to greater efficiency. Fix a time limit for the disposal of files, ensure that babus go to the fields to check the progress of the schemes that have been launched by their Ministers.

Secretaries to the Government and heads of Departments should be held accountable for any malfeasance under their watch. They should also be punished and dismissed for poor supervision.

Post-retirement jobs for retired bureaucrats should be banned. Such jobs are now doled out on the basis of how much the babu had managed to please his political boss while in office.

India is full of experts. At least 50 per cent of top jobs should be reserved for people from outside the bureaucracy.

Also, the Government must consider retiring bureaucrats after 20 years of service. Instead, age of entry into the ‘superior services’ has been raised to nearly 35 to 37 years. The Prime Minister should follow the yardstick he has used while selecting his Council Of Minister, for bureaucrats we well.

There is much dead wood in all wings of the Government, and steps should be taken to weed out at least some of them every year. Reducing the number of redundant staff members will mean less corruption and allow for a  better watch on a bloated bureaucracy.