Vittal statistics

Raises awareness, but will it curb corruption?

The chief vigilance commissioner N Vittal’s India-specific Corruption Index is a sensible idea because quantifying corruption enables a rare reformer to effect change in the system. This consists of individual corruption perception indices on all public sector undertakings, government departments and ministries, in fact any governmental organisation with public interface. Indeed, previous studies — conducted by the Public Affairs Centre, Bangalore in 1993, and more recently, by Transparency International’s India chapter in Kerala — have shown that borderline cases can be embarrassed into responding to public grievances and reforming themselves. That said, the CPI will probably be ineffective in drastically curbing corruption.
The data which could be utilised by the key actors — the Lal Bahadur Shastri National Administration Academy, the Department of Personnel, the National Productivity Council and the Central Vigilance Commission — is already available. But is it reliable? Ought a department be judged on the basis of “number of prosecutions” or “number of signed complaints received”, two parameters outlined, when signed complaints, even affidavits, can be purchased easily by ingenious detractors and court cases drag on forever?

Furthermore, who’ll judge the judges? Should a PSU be graded on the basis of its chief vigilance officer’s report, which itself is a function of the officer’s allegiances? For instance, a favourable report, rather than giving an accurate snapshot of the public’s perception of the PSU, may merely reflect the CVO’s reluctance to nail those corrupt and in the process, burn his bridges. And what of political will or the lack thereof? Would the LBSNAA — a training ground for civil servants — really want to come up with drastic solutions to mitigate the use of public office for private gain? It would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to ensure the credibility of agencies entrusted with the task, given the inherent conflict of interest.
Finally, is such an exercise financially sustainable? Mr Vittal himself admits that in order to be effective, CPIs would have to be generated annually. However, it’s unlikely that a ministry/department would willingly pick up the tab for this inconvenient exercise year after year. Of course, CPIs will generate public awareness about corruption and that is reason enough to welcome the proposal.