Deficiencies in the present anti-corruption systems at Central Government level.

Deficiencies in the present anti-corruption systems at Central Government level.

At central Government level, we have Central Vigilance Commission, Departmental vigilance and CBI. CVC and Departmental vigilance deal with vigilance (disciplinary proceedings) aspect of a corruption case and CBI deals with criminal aspect of that case.

Central Vigilance Commission: 

CVC is the apex body for all vigilance cases in Government of India.

•          However, it does not have adequate resources to deal with the large number of complaints that it receives. CVC is a very small set up with a staff strength less than 200. It is supposed to check corruption in more than 1500 central government departments and ministries, some of them being as big as Central Excise, Railways, Income Tax etc. Therefore, it merely acts as a post office and forwards most of the complaints to the vigilance wings of respective departments. It directly enquires into very few complaints of its own. For instance, during 2009-10, it directly enquired into just 11 out of more than 1800 cases that it received. Rest all cases were merely forwarded.

•          CVC is merely an advisory body. The departmental vigilance wing of any Central Government Department first conducts an enquiry into any case and then seeks CVC’s advice on what punishment should be given in that case. However, the head of that Department is free to accept or reject CVC’s advice. Even in those cases, which are directly enquired into by the CVC, it can only advise government. Experience shows that whenever senior officers are involved in corruption, CVC’s advice is rarely accepted.

•          CVC has jurisdiction only on bureaucrats. It does not have powers over politicians. If there is an involvement of a politician in any case, then CVC can enquire only into the role of bureaucrats in that case.

•          It does not have any direct powers over departmental vigilance wings, to which it forwards all complaints. Often it is seen that CVC forwards a complaint to a department and then keeps sending reminders to them to enquire and send report. Many a times, the departments just do not comply. CVC does not have any powers over them to seek compliance of its orders.

•          CVC does not have administrative control over officials in vigilance wings of various central government departments to which it forwards corruption complaints. Though the government does consult CVC before appointing the Chief Vigilance Officers of various departments, however, the final decision lies with the government. Also, the officials below CVO are appointed/transferred by the Head of the same department only.

•          Appointments to CVC are directly under the control of ruling political party. The appointments are arbitrary and intransparent.

•         CVC Act gives supervisory powers to CVC over CBI. However, these supervisory powers have remained ineffective. CVC does not have the power to call for any file from CBI or to direct them to do any case in a particular manner. Besides, CBI is under administrative control of DOPT rather than CVC.

•          Therefore, though CVC is relatively independent in its functioning, it neither has resources nor powers to enquire and take any action. CVC has been reduced to merely a show piece.

Departmental Vigilance Wings: 

Each Department has a vigilance wing, which is manned by officials from the same department (barring a few which have an outsider as Chief Vigilance Officer. However, all the officers under him belong to the same department).

•          Since the officers in the vigilance wing of a department are from the same department and they can be posted to any position in that department anytime, it is practically impossible for them to enquire against their colleagues and seniors. If a complaint is received against a senior officer, it is impossible to enquire into that complaint because an officer who is in vigilance today might get posted under that senior officer some time in future.

•          In some departments, some field officials double up as vigilance officials. It means that an existing field official is given additional duty of vigilance also. So, if some citizen complaints against that officer, the complaint is expected to be enquired into by the same officer. Even if someone complaints against that officer to the CVC or to the Head of that Department or to any other authority, the complaint is forwarded by all these agencies and it finally lands up in his own lap to enquire against himself. There are hundreds of examples of such absurdity.

•          Many of the officials posted in vigilance wing by that department have had a very corrupt past. While in vigilance, they try to scuttle all cases against themselves. They also turn vigilance wing into a hub of corruption, where cases are closed by taking money.

•          Departmental vigilance does not investigate into criminal aspect of any case. It does not have the powers to register an FIR.

•          They also do not have any powers against politicians.

•         Since the vigilance wing is directly under the control of the Head of that Department, it is practically impossible for them to enquire against senior officials of that department.

•          Therefore, most of the time, the vigilance wing of any department are seen to scuttle genuine complaints or are used to enquire against inconvenient officers.

CBI: 


CBI has powers of a police station to investigate and register FIR. It can investigate any case related to a Central Government department on its own or any case referred to it by any state government or any court.

•          CBI is overburdened and does not accept cases even where amount of defalcation is alleged to be around Rs 1 crore.

•          CBI is directly under the control of Central Government. CBI Director and all other officials in CBI are directly appointed by Central Government.

•          CBI has to seek government’s permission to start investigation into any case involving joint secretary and above. It has to seek the permission of the government to initiate prosecution in any case. Sometimes, the people who have to give permissions are either themselves accused in some corruption cases or are under some political obligation of accused people.

•          After investigation is completed in any case, when a case is filed by CBI in a court, CBI’s lawyer is selected and appointed by the Law ministry. Therefore, if any minister is involved in any case, law ministry would appoint such a person, who would try to kill the case rather than get the accused punished.

•          So, if a complaint pertains to any minister or politician which is part of ruling coalition or a bureaucrat which is close to them, it is practically impossible for CBI to do a fair investigation. In such cases, CBI’s job is to scuttle these cases.

•          Again, because CBI is directly under the control of Central Government, CBI has often been used settle scores against inconvenient politicians.

Therefore, if a citizen wants to make a complaint about corruption by a politician or an official in the Central Government, there isn’t a single anti-corruption agency which is effective and independent of the government, whose wrongdoings are sought to be investigated. CBI has powers but it is not independent. CVC is independent but it neither has powers nor resources. 

Reference From: IAC site