One factor that the
intellectuals suggesting these solutions do not take into account is the
massive bureaucracy of India numbering over eight million altogether.
Whatever the policy—people oriented or transnational subservient—there is
no escaping this indispensable instrument of the state. Therefore, it is
the gestalt of the bureaucracy which ought to form an integral part of any
holistic strategy for meeting the challenges, both internal and external.
The mindset of the bureaucrat has to be studied in the perspective of the
bureaucracy existing within a series of Chinese boxes. The immediate box
is that of the bureaucratic ethos which itself exists within the box of
the governmental environment. This, however, is placed within the larger
box of the socio-economic-politico-cultural environment of India. Again,
the individual bureaucrat is himself enclosed within yet another box: the
particular socio-economic and cultural matrix of which he is a product and
which exists at the core of his thinking and feeling. The incredible
complexity of these multiple layers of the bureaucrat’s make-up has to be
analyzed and understood if an effective intervention for change is to be
made.
In a society still polarized between Haves and Have-littles or Have-nots,
where the crucial decisions regarding allocation of scarce resources are
taken by the Haves and are implemented by a government machinery drawn
largely from the same class, how can we expect that commitment to the
Directive Principles of State Policy of a Welfare State will be a value
close to the heart of the executive drawn from the exploiting class?
Rabindranath Tagore, whom Mahatma Gandhi regarded as the conscience of the
nation, was unerring in his bald statement of why the administration had
lost credibility:
“It is the mission of
civilization to bring unity among people and establish peace and harmony.
But in unfortunate India the social fabric is being rent into shreds by
unseemly bursts of hooliganism daily growing in intensity right under the
very aegis of ‘law and order’. In India so long as no personal injury is
inflicted upon any member of the ruling race, this barbarism seems to be
assured of perpetuity, making us ashamed to live under such an
administration…That I consider a truly civilized administration which
impartially serves the common interest of the people. It is the absence of
this concept of impartial service in the cause of the general weal which
is the evil plaguing our country.”
The tragedy is that Tagore was
indicting the colonial administration, but his words hold brutally true
for Indian administration fifty years later. The Cultural Script of
this executive arm of the state is yet to be analyzed and taken as a
determinant while framing public policy. Despite the unexceptionable,
indeed most admirable, ETIQUETTE (belief-system) of the Constitution, and
the plethora of legislation constituting the TECHNICALITIES for
implementing this ETIQUETTE, it is the feeling level, the CHARACTER
component of the Script, that is really the problem. The majority of the
bureaucracy has its roots in the Haves, but is supposed, by the diktat of
the Welfare State, not only to serve the interests of the Have-nots but to
do so actually at the expense of the Haves. The psychological tensions
this creates have been exposed time and again in the passivity of the
administration in the face of atrocities on the underprivileged
perpetrated by their traditional exploiters. Because of the class
affiliations of the administration, the ETIQUETTE is effectively sabotaged
by the CHARACTER that turns the TECHNICALITIES into red-tape and
corruption, so that the benefits meant for the Have-nots find their
“proper place” in the pockets of the Haves. Increasingly bureaucrats are
resigning and joining political parties to share in the spoils.
Another manifestation of this is the active connivance of the executive
in sabotaging legislation against black money, dowry, immoral traffic in
women, child labor, atrocities on underprivileged sections of the
community, bonded labor. All the excellent laws remain ineffective paper
tigers in the face of the all-pervasive rent-seeking behavior of the
administration. This has been definitively documented in the Vohra
Committee Report and in recent books by T.N. Seshan, former Chief Election
Commissioner and Cabinet Secretary, retired Foreign Secretary J.N.Dixit
and Madhav Godbole ex-Union Home Secretary. Seshan states:
“We have the largest number of
laws covering and uncovering almost every aspect of human life. But the
inside out of Indian democracy today is that law is obeyed more in
circumvention and defiance than in effect…All that we built to enshrine
freedom has been eroded by a plethora of decrees, laws, rules, ordinances
which serve a few; it serves the State, but not the citizens. Today it has
become desperately difficult for the citizens to defend themselves against
the onslaught of laws, rules and ordinances, and against the overpowering
destruction of individual freedom and dignity…there is palsy at the centre
and paralysis at the periphery…We have practiced socialistic principles
for 46 years or more. At the end of it, today, 20% of India’s population
takes 25% of its gross national income and 40% of the population takes 2%
of the national income.”
In 1997 the Supreme Court of
India felt impelled to pronounce on the normative functions that the
bureaucracy needs must perform:
“Every public servant is a
trustee of the society and in all facets of public administration, every
public servant has to exhibit honesty, integrity, sincerity and
faithfulness in implementation of the political, social, economic and
constitutional policies to integrate the nation, to achieve excellence and
efficiency in the public administration. A public servant entrusted with
duty and power to implement constitutional policy under Article 16(4),
16(4A), 15(4), 335 and all interrelated directive principles, should
exhibit transparency in implementation and be accountable for due
effectuation of constitutional goals.”
Unfortunately, the feeling
(CHARACTER) level sabotages this Welfare State belief- structure
(ETIQUETTE) that has been sought to be superimposed without transforming
the deeply entrenched class and community prejudices. As one of the
framers of our Constitution, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, wrote:
“Constitutional morality is not
a natural sentiment. It has to be cultivated. We must realize that our
people have yet to learn it. Democracy in India is only top-dressing on an
Indian soil which is essentially undemocratic.”
Hence, those prejudices
skillfully weave a nexus with the exploitative and consumerist
technologies stemming from globalization that threatens to swamp
indigenous development. The solitary bureaucrat who refuses to fall in
line is thrown out by the system or sent into orbit on the peripheries.
Honest officers get no support from colleagues when victimized, for the
gangrene of ‘everyone for himself’ has spread throughout the
administrative system. While most look the other way and pretend
nothing has happened, or deprecate the tactlessness and impracticality of
the unfortunate man of integrity, a different type of reaction is seen in
the attempts by some maverick officers to form a party of their own
seeking to reform the polity, thus displaying a completely altered
perception of the role of the civil servant in society. The solitary
attempt to bring to bear peer-group pressure on corrupt civil servants has
recently been tried by young members of the Uttar Pradesh Indian
Administrative Service Association. Quite expectedly, their seniors
ensured that the plan to publicize the names of the three most corrupt
officials through a secret ballot remained a non-starter.
Even the Public Service Commissions that have been always beyond question
in their impartial screening of candidates for government service are now
under a serious cloud with the removal of the Punjab PSC Chairman, R.P.S.
Sidhu, for selling government jobs to amass a huge illegal fortune. The
government cancelled appointment of 639 people to various posts made
during the tenure of Sidhu and ordered review of 3,466 appointments to
various posts, including Punjab Civil Service (PCS) judicial and
executive, Deputy Superintendents of Police and Tehsildars. The Supreme
Court Chief Justice has taken action against three judges of the Punjab
High Court for their involvement in this scandal. An even more disturbing
development is the arrest of Union Public Service Commission Member and
former Chairman of the Maharashtra PSC, S.D. Karnik, for similar
corruption.
On the golden jubilee of the
India’s independence a “retreat” was held for Indian Administrative
Service officers of the 1961 batch in Mussoorie, 6-7 November 1997 which
culminated in a resolution that was circulated to all state governments by
the Cabinet Secretary, Government of India for the information of all IAS
officers. This stated, inter alia:
“Our system of government
depends heavily on the integrity, professionalism and dedication of our
public service....Within the public service performance must be made to
count, leadership and teamwork improved, and a culture of continuous
improvement promoted. The older values of probity and political
independence now need to be combined with the newer qualities of
leadership, excellence, openness, productivity and dynamism. The excessive
concern with procedures must be replaced by a focus on results. The
boundary between policy making and implementation, now blurred, must be
clearly demarcated and a new and constructive partnership established in
the larger national interest between the political leadership and the
civil servant, based on mutual respect. Only in this way can
accountability be made a real feature of administration. All who form part
of the process of governance need to be infused with the idea of serving
the people and responding to their needs in a timely and effective
manner.…Citizens must be enabled to organize and express their needs, and
the public service to respond to them.…On the 50th anniversary of our
nation’s freedom, we are conscious how far we are from attaining justice,
equity and order. We ask the public service of our country: to rededicate
itself to the blossoming of the genius of our nation consistent with its
spirit of harmony, tolerance and respect for diversity; to protect,
preserve and respect our oneness with the environment; to strengthen the
civilized uniqueness of our country. To these ends, we call for a new and
vibrant partnership between all the instruments of governance and the
people they seek to serve. Each of us, in our own little way, must
consecrate himself to the sacred endeavor which will make these goals a
Reality.”
The concerns of Responsiveness,
Commitment, Awareness and Accountability espoused by the National Training
Policy document formulated by the Government of India for its bureaucracy
and stressed in this “Mussoorie Resolution” cannot be met if character is
flawed, integrity questionable and probity not beyond doubt. In the
absence of role models, new entrants to the bureaucracy face a prospect
that is daunting indeed. Here the challenge to academia is to produce
case-studies and innovative training methodology concentrating on human
and humane values instead of merely on skills. Such training needs must
draw its sustenance from indigenous roots in order to produce sustainable
results. The language used in the “Mussoorie Resolution” is significant.
It speaks of the need for the bureaucracy to “consecrate” itself to the
“sacred endeavor” of serving the people. Training of the bureaucracy
cannot afford to remain value-neutral and concentrate on developing skills
alone where it is acknowledged that rent-seeking behavior has to be
checked. No training system can produce a lasting impression on trainees
if they have to revert to an environment that is corrupt, exploitative and
cannibalistic. Where, if one does not connive in extracting the maximum
personal benefit from people and organizations and share it with
superiors, the system spits one out as tactless, indiscreet, abrasive,
eccentric, idealistic. To quote Seshan once again:
“Today each Indian civil
servant, from the Chief Secretary down to the thanedar, if he wants to be
honest, his back is broken repeatedly…A civil servant learnt from being a
person who sat up, or stood up for the truth, to be first a collaborative,
then to be a collusive committed and finally to being an accomplice kind
of civil servant…When a good civil servant was there, nobody stood up to
support him. When a bad civil servant was there, there was hardly anybody
who stood up to say, ‘this fellow is a rascal, throw him out.’…I am
talking of the old people, what were they doing when this was being done?
Of course, when the officers found confrontation not very successful, they
became collusionists, and they are fully committed to it.”
A little before the
articulation of the Mussoorie Resolution, on 7 May 1997 a committee of
five judges (three from the Supreme Court and two from the High Courts)
felt it incumbent to adopt unanimously a 16 point “Code of Conduct for
Judges” that restated the existing values of judicial life to reaffirm the
faith of the people in the judicial system of the country.
Unfortunately, this, too, remains a pious wish, more honored in the
breach, which is why Justice P.B. Sawant went on record saying that unless
matters are taken in hand, “Face law will continue to prevail over case
law.” The former Chief Justice of India, E.S. Venkataramaiah lamented,
“Judiciary in India has deteriorated in standards because some of the
judges are willing to be influenced by lavish parties and whisky bottles.”
The National Commission to review the working of the Constitution has
recorded “public concern over judges not observing working hours, being
away from court work even without seeking leave, unduly delaying
judgements and otherwise conducting themselves in an un-judge like manner”
and that the unseemly conduct of some judges “calls for a disciplinary
system so as to preserve the fair name of the judiciary.” The state of
affairs is such that neither the bureaucracy nor the judiciary can be left
to regulate themselves. Even when Justice V. Ramaswami of the Supreme
Court was found guilty by a committee of three, the motion for his removal
in the Lok Sabha failed because of political reasons. The nature of the
action taken by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court against corrupt
practices by 3 Judges of the Punjab High Court has raised controversy over
its inadequacy.
The question remains unanswered: “Who
will judge, who will punish the judges?” How will accountability of the
three pillars of the Constitution be ensured? “Ethical”, “moral”,
“spiritual” are words that can no longer be shied away from. After all, by
no stretch of logic can the Directive Principles of State Policy be
regarded as value-neutral, economic issues. The concerns are profoundly
moral, ethical and spiritual.
A survey of values was carried
out of two batches of new recruits to the West Bengal Civil Service
(Executive) Cadre by the Management Centre of Human Values, I.I.M.
Calcutta in 1994. These were compared with the results of similar surveys
for over 400 managers in the corporate sector. The thought-provoking
findings are:
Relationships with superiors
and subordinates are worse in the civil service.
90% believe that decisions are
value-neutral, against 10% in the corporate world.
95% believe that man is just a
bundle of needs. In the corporate sector the percentage is 65%.
50% believe that social systems
must change first before any individual transformation based upon values
can occur.
70% believe that management and
public administration philosophy and practice are universal and need no
input from one’s own cultural heritage. Here they are almost on par with
the corporate sector where 80% hold similar views.
75% believe that an outward
looking, externally alive temperament is the primary foundation for
decision making, while in the corporate sector only 15% hold that view.
75% reject the view that
excellence in professional management need not be bothered about moral
issues, while 96% of the corporate managers feel the same.
70% feel that traditional
family values are irrelevant today, while among the corporate sector only
23% hold that view.
80% are of the view that to the
extent one works selflessly, one adopts an enrichening and healthy
psychological approach to work-life, while 100% of the corporate sector
believe this.
60% believe that human/ethical
values are time and place specific like social customs and rituals, while
only 27% of corporate managers hold that view.
60% reject the view that
offering all work to the Divine is the most effective approach to a strong
work ethic. Among corporate managers, only 23% are of the same opinion.
A survey of CEOs in Indian and
multinational companies was carried out in 1995 by Business Today. The
responses reveal the following:
Corporate ethical standards are
between average and very low in India than global ethical standards.
This is because of the weak
legal system that fails to check cheating of both the government and the
employees.
The blame for this is
attributed to systematic corruption, licence raj, poor law implementation,
high taxes and archaic business laws.
Dr. G.P. Rao’s study of 396
practitioners in management and leaders in 1995-96 revealed that the most
desirable values to be inculcated in industrial organizations are:
devotion to duty, Creativity, Result-orientation, material comforts,
verifying before trusting, developing employees, sharing resources,
Fairness, self-control and Humaneness. Another study by him of 280 senior
executives of 16 organizations spread over India in 1999-2001 has
identified ten most important values: fairness, creativity, discipline,
devotion to duty, customer orientation, self-control, results and
cooperation. It is significant that three values are common in both
studies. However, Dr. Rao also found that in actual practice 8 values that
did not appear in the desirable list were in operation: controlling
others, acquiring resources, profits, conformity, prosperity, one’s own
interest, competition and current employee performance. Thus the gap
between what was perceived as ideal and the practiced reality is quite
large, denoting awareness unaccompanied by action.
This is the profile that has to
be the determinant for designing the intervention strategy for bringing
about the change of behavior, attitude and values in education in general
and particularly in business schools and administrative training
institutes. The whole question, therefore, reverts to the need for
building up a system of values that liberates the individual--whether
bureaucrat or corporate executive--from the cage of his inherited, taught
and learnt dis-values while simultaneously enabling him to facilitate
others to free themselves from structures that bind down and deprive, a
process that Paulo Freire terms praxis. Dr. Rao spells out the three steps
of the institution building process required as diagnosis of suitable
values, discovery of the extent to which these are practiced and
development of the desired practice carried out through introspection and
feedback based upon experiential learning.
This is hardly the time for concentrating on imparting training in more
skills and technologies in the context of economic liberalization for
worshipping Mammon. That is precisely the trap into which the slogan of
economic liberalization has precipitated us. In terms of skill, it is the
wheeler-dealer Harshad Mehta who would be the role-model! As Seshan
lectures, “You may have extremely good skills but you are extremely poor
in fundamental values…Is this achievement (of changing into an achieving
society) going to be based on amoral values?” No amount of drawing
up of charters, codes of conduct for politicians, bureaucrats and public
servants in general is going to resolve the problem for, as Nirmal Verma,
renowned novelist, writes:
“A moral act cannot be enforced
by the law, it is performed according to the dictates of one’s conscience.
Good traffic laws cannot prevent a truck driver from ruthlessly mowing
down schoolchildren walking on the road. Nor do good conservation laws
stop an indifferent forest inspector from turning the green meadows into a
desert. It is because of the death of this conscience, the absence of the
spirit of svadharma that even after 50 years of Independence we
have not been able to overcome our short-term political interests to
arrive at a consensus on such crucial issues as basic forms of education,
public health and urban sanitation, environmental and ecological
protection and preservation of the distinctive features of our traditional
centers of culture.”
The failure of civil society is
not a realization peculiar to India. In the context of the wave of
scandals swamping corporate America in 2002, President Bush made the
classic rebound response by proposing to double the prison term for such
fraud. But, at the same time, there is an awareness that more laws against
crime does not mean less crime. A hundred years ago in the USA there were
just a few statutes dealing with fraud while today there are more than
300. This ought to have resulted in a high level of corporate honesty, but
exactly the opposite has occurred possibly “because we’ve turned what used
to be moral questions into legal technicalities. In today’s world,
executives are more likely to ask what they can get away with legally than
to worry about what’s fair and honest.” Consequently, corporate wrongdoers
invest considerable time and energy in creative ways to skirt the law and
honest executives emulate them instead of concentrating on being guided by
their conscience.
“That is the natural
consequence”, write Skeel and Stuntz, professors of law, “of relying too
much on criminal law and too little on civil regulation and, especially,
moral norms…As more criminal laws cover technical violations…the result
may be to trivialize corporate crime and undermine the public’s respect
for law generally. We risk robbing ‘wrong’ of its bite…We may wind up with
tougher penalties. But we won’t get more honest corporate behavior.”
This is not unique to the USA.
In China, with the number of crimes punishable by death rising from 21 two
decades ago to nearly 70 today, since 1990 some 20,000 people have been
executed. The crime rate keeps increasing as the death sentences go up.
T.N.Seshan provides a grim overview to supplement this, reviewing the
status in terms of the Preamble to the Indian Constitution:
“Social, economic and political
justice has been hogged by the privileged few. Liberty of thought,
expression, faith and worship, which was supposed to widen the spiritual
and intellectual horizons of the human soul, has become the most handy
instrument of exploitation of human personality. Equality of status and
opportunity is buried under the garbage heap of dishonesty and corruption.
And fraternity, assuring the dignity of the individual and the integrity
of the nation, has become a commercial exhibition reserved only for the
Republic Day.
“Today we are the tenth largest
industrialized nation of the world…whose prowess as the third largest bank
of techno-economic manpower is unquestioned.
“But the dignity of the individual, the inner strength of human character
and the courage to accept and do only that which a man in his conscience
believes to be correct, that self-respecting mettle which is nurtured only
by true education and persistent exercise and ‘maketh a nation great and
strong’ in the true sense is as deplorable today in the age of supersonic
aircraft as it was in the age of the bullock-cart.”
Boloji.com is owned and managed by
Boloji Media Inc Privacy Policy |
Disclaimer No part of this Internet site may
be reproduced without prior written permission of the copyright holder.
