Despite the slow enforcement of corruption in India, the last two cases of assault on human rights and the right to information activists in the country reiterates its concern that the fight against corruption in India committed suicide. Of the two incidents, one is reported other Jharkhand and Rajasthan. In Jharkhand, criminals abducted Mr. Niyamat Ansari, a defender of human rights and the right to information activists working in the Latehar district from his home in the village of Jerusalem on March 2, he brutally assaulted about an hour and left for dead. Ansari, but was transferred to Latehar Sadar Hospital, died in hospital the same day. In Rajasthan, on March 3, human rights and right to information activist Mangalaram Mr suffered serious injuries when a gang of robbers attacked him with axes and sticks. One of the attackers tried to shoot his gun Mangalaram, which was prevented by the present.
The incident, reported two separate and distant states of India only reiterates the fact that fighting corruption is a deadly business in the country. The two victims are human rights defenders who work the provisions of the Law on Right to Information in 2005 for denouncing corruption, particularly in the implementation of social welfare schemes implemented under the National Rural Employment Mahatma Gandhi Guarantee Act, 2005, a law created to provide guaranteed employment for the poor of the country.
What is alarming however is that the two incidents are not isolated and are the latest representations of how people benefit from the fight against corruption back to the public who report fraud in India. For example, at least six activists right to information activists were killed and 11 seriously assaulted in the state of Maharashtra, only in the last 14 months. Of the injured, Mr. Arun Sawant who was attacked in February 2010 for exposing business fraud lands within the jurisdiction of Badalapur council is permanently paralyzed from his injuries. Similar incidents of brutal attack on the activists who try to expose public corruption has been widely reported across the country. However, these incidents have resulted in only isolated responses of the authorities, the statement by the Chief Information Commissioner Hussain Janat of Andhra Pradesh, which called for immediate action by central and state governments to stop attacks activists of the right to information and other human rights defenders.
To conceive of the governments of the Union or the government could do something to prevent such attacks, however, is difficult. The Government of the Union has contributed to the deplorable environment of the lack of transparency in the country for the appointment of Mr. PJThomas as the Central Vigilance Commissioner in Central Vigilance Commission (CVC). The top bureaucrat leaving office, once the Supreme Court of India decided in a case brought against the government that the appointment of Mr. Thomas as Commissioner was unfounded and that a person suspected of being involved in corruption against which proceedings are pending in the Court of Special Judge for offenses punishable under the Prevention of Corruption of 1988 in the state of Kerala, where Mr. Thomas served in several senior positions, including that of the state chief secretary. The CVC is the highest body of government with a mandate to fight corruption in India.
CVC's fiasco is further evidence that the fact that the functioning of public institutions in the country is severely affected by corruption. Even the Supreme Court of India is no exception to this. Again and again senior judges and lawyers have repeatedly said the country's judiciary is not free of corruption. The latest suspect is the former Chief Justice of India who is currently serving as President of the National Human Rights Commission, Justice KG Balakrishnan. The government, despite the fact that is important and incriminating Balakrishnan, has failed to carry out a thorough investigation of the case. A public interest litigation filed before the Supreme Court is pending against the government, in which the Court has already expressed dissatisfaction over the slow pace of investigation into allegations against former judge. In addition to the former judge, former Union minister also faces corruption probe. However, another alleged fraudster, Mr. Hasan Ali Khan, is also facing investigations for corruption and financial fraud, which in its course is to expose the link between Khan's ill-gotten wealth and political and bureaucratic elite in Maharashtra.
Abnormalities in the assembly of two cases, those involving some of the most influential people in the country and that they include petty contractors suspected behind the assault of the right to information activists, is that Although the amounts involved in cases involving former judge, the minister and MrKhan is amazing, amounting to millions of people, where the poor human rights and the right to information activists have been assaulted or killed in acts of corruption is less of relatively small amounts of money. Although the scenario exposes corruption at both ends, it probably is corruption in the lower level directly affecting the poor. Can also be argued that corruption, both serve each other and now in India, no serious attempt to stop it.
Even the media is no exception to this. The recent news about some of the scribes former self-proclaimed 'celebrity' in the country's participation in "fixing agreement" demonstrates scams. In the midst of all, Prime Minister of India has expressed his apology in Parliament on his office's error in referring Mr. Thomas at the head of the CVC.
Admit a mistake, however, will not solve the problem facing the country today. What is needed is a concentrated action by the government and all other stakeholders, including civil society and the general public to address the corruption that has eaten all the pillars of the country's democratic framework.
There are several examples around the world where governments have given strong measures against corruption effectively and to society have maintained a satisfactory immune to corruption then. The Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) in Hong Kong is a very successful example in the region. Unlike India, Hong Kong has no right to information. However, the country is able to control corruption so much so that today, offering a bribe person is considered an insult to the integrity of the person and, often immediately informed the authorities.
This was possible only by the Hong Kong ICAC has the full support of the administration to carry out its mandate and as an organization that was built, maintained and equipped to meet what is expected to do. Not surprisingly, one of the prime objectives of the ICAC was the police force of Hong Kong. This was not because there are no other agencies in Hong Kong were corrupt at the time, but was an action on the basis of a clear understanding that unless the surveillance system is freed from the clutches of corruption, anti- corruption would be impossible and therefore a financial sense.
In addition, the ICAC did not have police officers on secondment to the ICAC. What you see on the successful model of Hong Kong are three main features: (1) The ICAC has a separate mandate to investigate corruption and the administration supports, (2) The ICAC is made of staff with impeccable records, selected trained and equipped to do their job, and (3) There was no local police officers served in the ICAC, a rule of the institution continues even today.
Since the establishment of the ICAC, corruption in Hong Kong not only drastically reduced, but also pushed forward economically Hong Kong, which today is considered the territory as a security business center in Asia. The ICAC model for success has been replicated in other larger countries such as Australia and studied by experts working for governments that are serious about eliminating corruption.
In India, however, prevention of corruption is a nasty pill for the government. While the appointments as Mr. Thomas is done for the main charges, police officers are often assigned to work for the agencies to prevent corruption. Officers who work for these agencies lack training and equipment. Despite India's software design experts and sophisticated technology for the rest of the world, most are not used in the country, still today a review of a good fingerprint or DNA analysis will take years, if not decades to be completed and these instruments are often available for agencies implementing the law in many parts of the country.
Although the justice system, despite having reduced to a crude joke as an inept institution shackles delays, judges and prosecutors unable to poor, the country is yet to devote much attention to this institution. It is neither a dream nor general plan by the government to address brutal violence committed by law enforcement across the country with almost absolute impunity. The bill against torture, proposed by the government in 2010, says a lot about how little the government is interested in the discipline of the country's police. Serious visible defects that affect the country's justice institutions, could have almost no motivation for the public to react against corruption. On the contrary, corruption becomes a lubricant to make a broken and demoralized to work, for those who can afford to let the system work.
The result of this neglect is very visible in the country and it is clear to the public, that those who benefit from this chaotic environment are created intentionally by politicians, officials rich, dishonest government including the police and the corrupt elements in the country's judiciary.
In the turmoil of this half-rotten, the prime minister's apology in parliament is not just for members of the legislature, but the entire nation. If no further actions to follow, this apology will go down the drain as but one more attempt to mislead the country, which mean nothing and do something to change the status quo unacceptable.
No comments:
Post a Comment