Two months is usually enough time for a new Director General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) to get acquainted with the Exim Policy and people involved in the implementation of it.
Now, it is time for L Mansingh to start meeting the exporters and importers and understand their problems.
One of the major problems is the process for fixation of input-output norms. It is opaque. The exporter has no means to appeal. His grievances remain unattended.
An exporter can apply for fixation of new input output norms or ask for modification of existing norms. He may also directly obtain an advance licence on 'no norms' basis.
In such cases, the licence will be issued immediately and the norms finalised later. If, in the meantime, he has imported any goods duty free in excess of the norms approved later, he has to pay duty on the same.
On all such matters relating to fixation or modification of norms, the office of DGFT acts as a clerk.
It passes on the application to the technical officer in the concerned ministry, convenes meeting of the committee that will formally approve what the technical officer says and then communicates the decision of the committee to the applicant exporter.
What happens when the technical authority approves input output norms quite different from what the exporter has asked for?
There is little that the exporter can do except ask for a review. But, the matter goes to the same technical officer.
There are no proper procedures for appeals, personal hearing or even references to experts outside the government. The technical officer's word is final. Invariably, the exporter has no alternative but to meet the technical person and bribe him or engage a consultant who will do that.
For an exporter who is unwilling to indulge in underhand dealings or make deals with the technical officers, there is no hope. His letters, faxes, e-mails go unattended.
At best, the DGFT's clerks send out the same sort of stereotyped letters saying that the matter has been reconsidered and that the earlier decision stays.
There are many cases where the technical officer has changed the description of export products causing enormous hardship, especially to those who have exported the goods immediately after filing the application.
How can the technical officer in Govt. be the repository of all the wisdom in respect of all the items in say a product group?
There are exporters whose knowledge of say, chemistry is much greater than that of the technical officer.
The applicant exporter actually manufactures the product and furnishes actual data regarding input output. He knows what the yields are in a particular process.
On the other hand, the technical officer fixes the norms using his theoretical knowledge. Some times it takes years to get the issues resolved. Quite a few exporters give up. They have to end up suffering duties, interest, penalties, bank guarantee charges and so on.
The DGFT should quickly introduce disciplines. If the technical officer does not grant the norms that the exporter asks, he should give justification. If the exporter asks for appeal, independent persons should decide the matter, within say three months.
If need be, opinions of reputed research institutions or experts should be taken. The DGFT must personally review all the grievance matters.
