Just as correlation does not establish causation, asking questions does not amount to passing judgements. The Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) is an important constitutional office that has a role to play in improving governance. However, going beyond one’s brief can always harm an institution in the long run and be counterproductive. An auditor’s dharma is to see if spending has been correctly accounted for and to check if there has been any avoidable and wasteful spending. However, auditors cannot arrogate to themselves the role of policy makers and managers. Every good manager knows concrete decisions are taken under concrete conditions. An auditor often seeks to know why ideal decisions were not taken under ideal conditions.
The manner in which a media-hungry CAG and colleagues have sought to project their reports as the last word on governmental decision making brings institutional accountability and democratic governance into question. Before things get out of hand, CAG must step back and ensure that governance does not get paralysed in the name of accountability. While publishing reports is in the public interest, the manner in which a senior CAG official brandished a report before the media, like a sportsperson holding a trophy, gives the impression that CAG is now seeking publicity for itself rather than accountability from the government. The purpose of an audit is to seek answers from managers, not indict them and question their intent or thinking.
In the current highly politically charged environment, there is a danger that questionable administrative practices will be elevated to high principle, like opting for the lowest tender, unmindful of the consequences. It is precisely such blind audit objections that have forced honest officials to become completely risk-averse and dishonest ones to find means that escape detection. Either way, the purpose of the audit is aborted. More recently, CAG chose to step beyond its brief to explore a new territory: social and environmental audit. The recently-constituted high-profile advisory group has been asked to come up with ideas so that CAG can “audit” the benefits of public programmes and projects, and conduct peer reviews for university teachers and government scientists. Recently, CAG sought to question the Securities and Exchange Board of India. It may now ask the Reserve Bank of India to explain its policies. This manic pursuit of auditing power could create an institution that brings the entire government to a halt.
This critical view of the manner in which CAG has been behaving in the past few months should not be seen as an indictment of the institution. Instead, it is a wake-up call for those who must run the institution and ensure that its reputation survives their tenure in office. India has seen many Tughlaqs in office and will see more, but the Constitution of the Indian Republic has created enough checks and balances that prevent any one institution from usurping all power or crippling other institutions. CAG is an important part of that system of checks and balances. As long as it performs the role assigned to it, and does not entertain fanciful thoughts of being a new super institution that will cleanse all or cripple all, no lasting damage would be done. Auditors too must be prepared to have their role audited.