What next for Anna Hazare — electoral reform? What should one do to make the government in a democracy like India accountable and achieve policy reform? The recent national attention Hazare’s fast and his subsequent success have received make this a pertinent question. While Hazare has become successful for now, there are several ways in which one could make the government work better. What is the method that Santosh Hegde, the former Lokayukta of Karnataka, followed to nail down on corrupt practices in the mining industry in the state? What methods are followed by expert committees that are constituted to look into certain issues?
Hegde’s method was logical in that he used reports of field investigations, primary data, archives and government records to find the flow of processes, procedures and the actual set of actions that followed. In this way, he was able to point to the huge mining scam that was plundering the state’s natural resources for the benefit of a few private investors and officials. This is similar to the approach of government committees that are constituted to provide solutions to specific problems. The Balasubramaniam committee that was appointed by the Lokayukta on the public distribution system in Karnataka found the total leakage was Rs 1,737.6 crore annually.
Other approaches to make the government respond are those that are used by educated or well-informed individuals such as with the Right to Information (RTI). The Indian Parliament passed the RTI Act in 2005 and it is a powerful instrument in the common man’s hand to seek more information from public authorities, if not the solution.
When we evaluate the effectiveness of each of these approaches, one finds that public protests are effective as far as release of emotions and mass mobilisation are concerned. A mob cannot always think; it usually can only act upon instinct. The government, being all powerful, can also thwart such moves by invoking instruments meant to tackle law and order problems in such instances – for example, invocation of Section 144 – which it may not even be entitled to in a democracy. Another potential problem with such mass protests is that not all those protesting are clear about what they are against. Further, there is some information that is now available on the socio-demographic composition of the crowd — only about six per cent of the supporters were postgraduates, with about 23 per cent of the support coming from graduates, which implies the crowd is educated enough to understand the issue, but not in any great depth.
The proposed Jan Lok Pal Bill being advocated involves the institution of Jan Lok Pal at the central government level, and Jan Lokayukta in each state, so that the respective Jan Lok Pal will be able to accept corruption complaints against the central government departments and Jan Lokayukta against state government departments. While the Lok Pal Bill provides for filing complaints of corruption against ministers and members of Parliament with the ombudsman, the version of the (government’s version) Lok Pal Bill has kept the prime minister and the judiciary as well as the conduct of MPs in Parliament out of the ambit of the anti-corruption watchdog. However, the Jan Lok Pal and Jan Lokayukta are expected to provide relief to the common man as each government department will have to make a citizen’s charter that specifies who does what job and in how much time. For example, the citizen’s charter will tell X officer will make ration card in Y days. If the charter is not followed, then people can complain to the head of that department who will be designated as the public grievance officer (PGO), who will redress the complaint within a maximum of 30 days. If the complainant is not satisfied with the PGO’s response, a corruption case is deemed to have been identified. If the allegation were to be proved, Jan Lok Pal or Jan Lokayukta will dismiss the PGO or the relevant officials from their job within a month. The moot question is, even in the aftermath of the success, how many of the protesters can reflect about these two versions of the Bill and then support one in preference to the other?
In many countries, public protests are also considered a national waste since they result in significant time, output and productivity losses. Other methods such as those used by educated individuals such as with the RTI, even approaching a superior government official or other high-level contacts to expose problems of corruption might be considered very valid. However, the problem with these approaches might be that they might be confined to the educated civil society, not to the masses. Further, another problem with such approaches is that these tend to be confrontational. We know too well about several RTI activists who have been killed recently.
Therefore, one of the best methods to make the government responsive and accountable, nonetheless will be mass mobilisation, but it must be accompanied by rigorous methodological research and findings based upon that, which is the approach followed by expert committees or peer reviews. An equally important dimension of successful policy reform is to craft research findings into crisp elements that can be responded to, worked upon, or simply cannot be ignored. Poor communication of primary findings will only cause the government to put up its shutters, as has been the case recently. Genuine and unbiased research will bring all parties to a negotiating table, create pressure on the erring departments and would force them to become accountable.
The authors are with Public Affairs Centre. These views are personal