NEW DELHI: The 2G judgment is a scathing indictment of a system that fails on the basic principles of transparency and fair play. For howlong can governments - central and in states - not pay heed?
There was jubilation in the Congress as the trial court dismissed Subramanian Swamy's plea to implicate Union home minister P Chidambaram in the 2G case. But for a nation on the edge after a year of scams and anti-corruption crusades, the battle for good governance is not over. In fact, it has received a fillip with the Supreme Court ordering wholesale cancellation of the licences issued by former telecom minister A Raja in a corruption scandal of momentous proportions.
All of Union telecom minister Kapil Sibal's chutzpah, as he sprang to defend Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Chidambaram, could not take the sting out of the Supreme Court's 2G judgment. While it undoubtedly paved the way for the relief granted to Chidambaram by the trial court, the judgment is also a scathing indictment of a system that fails on basic principles of transparency and fair play in decisionmaking processes. By scrapping the licences, the court has signalled zero tolerance of corruption and made it incumbent on the government to clean up its act, not just in the telecom sector but in all sectors that involve the management of natural resources. For the first time, the doctrine of public interest has been spelt out clearly and held up as the single most important parameter for framing policies and awarding contracts and licences. It is as much a message for the UPA government at the Centre as it is for others of different political hues across the country.
Public policy analysts point out that the fundamental issue in the quest for corruption-free governance is the manner in which governments exercise the vast discretionary powers they have at their disposal for allocation of contracts and licences. "This is the method through which money is made,'' says economist Bibek Debroy of the Centre for Policy Research. "The critical issue facing us today is: how do you reduce discretion? In the transition period from licence-permit raj to a liberalized regime, discretion doesn't go down. There will always be some loophole to exploit, however transparent the processes are. I am afraid there are no simple answers to this question.''
Former chief economic advisor to the government Nitin Desai, on the other hand, feels that the SC judgment will help to disband the last remnants of the licence-permit raj because it takes away the government's discretionary powers by upholding the auction method. "The government can no longer handpick the winners,'' he says. "It has to follow the auction method or lay down proper procedures for allocation of licences. I see it as a judgment against crony capitalism.''
It may be useful to recall that when Congress president Sonia Gandhi unveiled her action plan to tackle corruption at the 2010 party meet in Burari, she had stressed the need to scrap the government's discretionary powers. Although the Manmohan Singh government briefly flirted with the idea, nothing came of it.
Debroy says that while it is important to reduce discretion, it is equally important to strengthen anti-corruption mechanisms, investigative agencies and regulators to craft a transparent and fair system of governance. "How can these bodies function independently as long as their budgets are controlled by the executive?'' he asks. "Appointments, dismissals, resources are all decided by the government of the day.''
Significantly, many of these issues were raised by Team Anna during their campaign for a Jan Lokpal bill. While the bill itself is destined to be stillborn and Team Anna seems to have run out of steam, the SC order may fill the void. At the very least, it has the potential to change the matrix of public discourse from which ideas may emerge for improved governance. There is little doubt that political parties are not immune to the very visible public angst over misgovernance and corruption. And some of them are indeed reading the SC judgment carefully to understand its ramifications.
BJP spokesman Ravi Shankar Prasad, for instance, acknowledges that the judgment has brought into sharp focus issues that impinge on governance. "The credibility, honesty and transparency of the decision-making process has come under the scanner,'' he says. "There is recognition that decisions must be based on known principles of fair play and transparency. The judgement also recognizes the growing urge of civil society that governance must be set in order. I am sure the political class will learn a lesson on the pain of invalidation of their decisions if they digress.''
The CPM's Nilotpal Basu believes there will be "far-reaching'' consequences. "The judgment is a serious indictment of neoliberalism,'' he says. '' Political parties must read the signals. They should use this opportunity to create platforms for public discussion and reinforce awareness among people for the protection of their rights and resources.''
There is, however, another issue that seems to have been overlooked in the hype over good governance and transparency of the decision-making process. This is the issue of collective responsibility and accountability. In a coalition system, it is becoming increasingly difficult to fix responsibility and the SC was careful not to go into this area. However, many believe that this needs to be addressed, especially since coalitions seem to be the order of the day, at least at the Centre. Debroy, for instance, points out that it has been a big issue since 2004 when the UPA government came to power.
"Our system works on the principle of collective responsibility of the cabinet. But the way things have worked since 2004, the functioning of the cabinet and the Prime Minister's Office has been diluted by setting up groups of ministers (GOM) to take decisions on every issue,'' he points out. The GOM system was first started by the NDA coalition government but the UPA turned it into a fine art with over 50 such groups in its first term. By making Raja solely accountable for the 2G scam, a basic tenet of the cabinet system has been overturned.
