Home arrow Archives arrow Political Diary arrow Political Diary 2008 arrow CBI: In The Dock:AUTONOMY A BIG JOKE?, by Poonam I Kaushish,21 March 2008
 
Home
News and Features
INFA Digest
Parliament Spotlight
Dossiers
Publications
Journalism Awards
Archives
RSS
 
 
 
 
 
 
CBI: In The Dock:AUTONOMY A BIG JOKE?, by Poonam I Kaushish,21 March 2008 Print E-mail

POLITICAL DIARY

NEW DELHI, 21 March  2008

CBI: In The Dock

AUTONOMY A BIG JOKE?

By Poonam I Kaushish

Is the law finally catching up with our polity? Or, is it our netagan’s penchant to anoint themselves as the law that is proving to be its nemesis? And, has the Central Bureau of Investigation’s fatal attraction for political cover-ups and clean chits made it into the Central Bureau of convenience, connivance and corruption, with the devil taking the hindmost!

Call it coincidence or what you may, but last week the much-derided system indeed did catch up with our political masters. In a totally unexpected development, India’s best known secret was unwrapped as never before. Namely, that even our netagan are fed up with the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and want its image makeover along with sweeping changes.

Importantly, a Parliamentary Standing Committee report on the “Working of the Central Bureau of Investigation,” has recommended that the CBI be made into an ``enforcement agency” and be given an “independent and autonomous’’ status to prevent political interference in its functioning. It also mooted that it be granted power to investigate and prosecute through a separate statute called the Central Bureau of Intelligence and Investigation Act. And be given the same status as the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in the US to allow it to independently take up cases of high-tech crime..

Appreciating the image of the CBI in the country as a premier investigating agency, the committee was, however, severely critical of its internal composition. The report called the deputation of IPS officers to the CBI an “avoidable luxury’’ and recommended an increase in direct recruitment. Adding, “Officers without sufficient experience of service and knowledge” are inducted on deputation for complicated jobs in CBI but were not the “decision making class’’ within the agency. No matter their professional competence and expertise in niche areas such as corruption cases, securities and finance transactions, defence purchase related transactions, etc

Significantly, our Right Honourables confessed candidly that granting sanction for prosecution was one of the “bottlenecks” in providing autonomy to the CBI. Pertinently, it cited many instances where prosecution sanction was denied bringing the CBI into “disrepute’’. And even where sanction had been granted, invariably courts pulled up the agency for slip-shod handling of the case (the Rs.5,000-crore bank scandal, sugar, UTI), lack of evidence and unavailability of witnesses or just glossing over vital leads (infamous hawala case) et al. Surmising, that it was time that the CBI make sure that the prosecution was foolproof, or else the judiciary would step in.

Further, it recommended strengthening the CBI in terms of resources and legal mandate. Pointing out the CBI’s failure to get conviction in cases with international ramifications, it favoured that a separate international crimes division be carved out to specifically deal with Interpol, extradition and international crimes. It is another matter that it was the Congress-led UPA Government in connivance with the CBI that ‘intentionally’ bungled and made an international mess of its case in La Affaire Quottrocchhi of the Bofors gun scam and got egg on its face. First the Government advised the UK Government to “defreeze” the Italian businessman’s accounts. And, when he was finally arrested in Argentina, the CBI failed to extradite and the Argentinian Court let him go scot free.

Besides, the Committee asserted that certain acts like terrorism, human trafficking, smuggling and black marketing should be labeled as federal crimes and should be taken up directly by the CBI. On terrorism, it recommended the setting up of a separate anti-terrorism division in the CBI to work solely with the aim of preventing terrorist activities. “The Central government should be given adequate powers to take prompt and effective action on the intelligence available to them in place of the current system where the home ministry merely hands over intelligence inputs to the State Governments.”

Calling for an end to infinite debating, the Committee emphasized that the time was ripe to implement these suggestions. However, this is easier said than done. The moot point is: Who will cast the first stone and translate words into action? Who will give the CBI its much-needed autonomy? Is our polity ready to call a spade a spade and bell the big fat cat of corruption?

Alas, as oft happens, this all-important report has been lost in the mountain of diatribe and gabble churned out during the Budget session of Parliament. Like the first report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee of the Home Ministry in 1994 did. Forget some remorse, all continue in legitimizing crime and corruption. Who has the time for introspection on what and where things went wrong and correct the course? Such is the nasha of power that all conveniently choose to merrily make political capital.

Worse, against the backdrop of there being as many an as 1,300 cases pending against MPs and MLAs in various courts. These include cases being investigated by CBI against Railway Minister Lalu Yadav, who is being tried in relation with the fodder scam, and those against current and former UP chief ministers Mayawati and Mulayam Singh respectively in the disproportionate assets cases. What to say of Maya bhenji’s Taj corridor scam and the over hundreds of crores received as gifts from her poor Dalit swayam sevaks, who go hungry to pave their messiah’s path with gold. Not only that. Five ‘tainted’ ministers continue to adorn the Treasury Benches. Justified by our honest Prime Minister as “the compulsions of coalition politics.”

Is the CBI more sinned against than sinning?  Are politicians the main culprit?  Is the pot calling the kettle black?  The truth is mid-way.  Both work in tandem in furthering their own interest. Consequently, the system becomes self-perpetuating. Over the years, the threatened political elite have given more and more powers to the CBI to get their way and have their say.  Therein, sullying the agency’s reputation, replete with its “failure” to back up charges with required evidence.  Worse, the CBI seems to have adopted a brazenly opportunistic policy of playing safe with Governments of the day and its willingness and commitment to serve the national cause by putting self before the country.

As the Committee has rightly pointed out, at the crux is the issue: Who should control the CBI?  Needless to say, a Catch-22 question for our power-greedy polity to honestly answer and for us to stupidly expect. Witness the sweet irony.  When Vajpayee was the Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha in the late 1990’s he had demanded an independent CBI and even promised one if he came to power. But Vajpayee the Prime Minister not only conveniently forgot his promise but continued to retain the CBI under his charge, just as his predecessors had done. Beginning with Indira Gandhi, who concentrated all instruments of effective power in her own hands.

Manmohan Singh too is happily following the tradition. Over the past year he has talked ad nauseum of weeding out corruption, but is mum on making the CBI an autonomous and indeed, an independent agency. According to two former CBI directors, Joginder Singh and Kartikaiyan there is no such thing as autonomy. This is a fallacy. For two reasons -- the agency administratively comes directly under the Prime Minister. Two, officers are dependent on their political bosses for their careers ---postings, transfers and seniority. If they perform well they are adequately rewarded in various ways, including extensions and even berths in prestigious and statutory bodies.   

Of course, the CBI can be set right.  However, this requires clear and firm political will.  The foremost corrective (from which others will flow) is to ensure that the appointment of the CBI Director is truly above board and is based on his genuine expertise, integrity, competence and commitment. He should have no political affiliations, lest he is dubbed as the Prime Minister’s hatchet man. His impeccable record of absolute honesty would go a long way in establishing the utility and credibility of the agency down the rank and file.  This would ensure an impartial, just and unbiased assessment of all important cases.  And, bring in the much-needed accountability to inspire confidence among the disgusted public.

At the end of the day, are we going to mortgage our conscience to corrupt and tainted leaders? The powers-that-be must desist from playing further havoc. A question that needs to be urgently answered is: Will the CBI be guided by the law of the land? Who will cast the first stone?  Kiska danda, kiski laathi aur kiski bhains? Enough is enough! ---- INFA

(Copyright  India News and Feature Alliance)   

 

 

 

< Previous   Next >
 
   
     
 
 
  Mambo powered by Best-IT