Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India, a constitutional authority established by Article 148 of the Constitution, is the apex auditing institution of the country. It audits all government accounts and ensures the legality and propriety of government expenditure. Often hailed as the ‘guardian of the public purse’, the CAG plays a vital role in ensuring accountability and transparency in governance. However, the CAG’s functioning is often debated, with criticisms regarding its powers and limitations. The statement in question encapsulates these concerns, portraying the CAG as possessing significant responsibilities but being hampered by structural constraints.
The CAG as a ‘Prosecutor with a Hobbled Law’
The analogy of the CAG as a ‘prosecutor’ stems from its power to identify irregularities and inefficiencies in government spending. The CAG’s reports often expose corruption, mismanagement, and violations of financial rules. However, the ‘hobbled law’ refers to the limitations on its enforcement powers. Unlike a prosecutor, the CAG cannot directly initiate criminal proceedings. It can only report its findings to the legislature (Parliament and State Legislatures), which then decides whether to take action. The CAG relies on the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) and other parliamentary committees to examine its reports and recommend corrective measures. This dependence on the legislature significantly weakens its prosecutorial power. The lack of direct enforcement authority means that many of the CAG’s findings remain unimplemented, and those responsible for irregularities often go unpunished.
The CAG as a ‘Judge Without the Power to Sentence’
The comparison to a ‘judge’ highlights the CAG’s role in determining the legality and propriety of government actions. It assesses whether expenditure conforms to the law and established financial principles. The CAG’s audit reports often contain ‘observations’ and ‘findings’ that effectively pass judgment on the actions of government departments and officials. However, the CAG lacks the power to ‘sentence’ – it cannot impose penalties or enforce its judgments. Its findings are merely recommendations to the legislature and the executive. While the legislature can take action based on the CAG’s reports, it is not legally bound to do so. This limitation renders the CAG’s role as a judge incomplete, as it cannot ensure that its judgments are enforced.
The CAG as a ‘Litigant with No Right to Appeal’
The CAG functions as a ‘litigant’ in the sense that it often challenges government decisions and actions that it deems illegal or improper. It can file petitions in courts to seek clarification on constitutional issues or to challenge government policies. However, unlike a regular litigant, the CAG has no right to appeal against adverse court rulings. This is a significant limitation, as it prevents the CAG from seeking redressal when its findings are overturned or its authority is challenged. This lack of recourse can undermine the CAG’s credibility and effectiveness. The Supreme Court has, in several cases, clarified the scope of the CAG’s powers, sometimes limiting its jurisdiction. The CAG is bound by these judicial pronouncements, even if it disagrees with them.
Constitutional and Legal Framework & Limitations
Several constitutional provisions and legal frameworks contribute to the CAG’s limitations:
- Article 149: Defines the duties and powers of the CAG, primarily focusing on auditing.
- Article 150: Provides for the presentation of CAG reports to the President, who then causes them to be laid before Parliament.
- The Government Accounting Rules, 1990: Govern the accounting procedures followed by government departments, which the CAG audits.
- Lack of Statutory Backing for Recommendations: The CAG’s recommendations are not legally binding, relying on moral and political pressure for implementation.
Recent Developments & Case Laws
Recent cases have further defined the CAG’s role. For instance, the Supreme Court in Centre for Public Interest Litigation v. Union of India (2016) clarified that the CAG’s jurisdiction does not extend to private entities receiving government funding unless there is a clear statutory basis for such audit. This ruling highlighted the need for a precise definition of the CAG’s audit mandate.
Impact and Effectiveness
Despite its limitations, the CAG has played a crucial role in exposing corruption and promoting accountability. The 2G spectrum allocation scam (2010), exposed by the CAG, led to widespread public outrage and ultimately resulted in the cancellation of licenses. Similarly, the Coal allocation scam (2012), also brought to light by the CAG, triggered investigations and legal proceedings. However, the slow pace of implementation of CAG’s recommendations and the lack of effective follow-up action remain major concerns.
| Aspect | CAG’s Role | Limitations |
|---|---|---|
| Auditing | Audits all government accounts | Cannot audit private entities without statutory basis |
| Reporting | Reports irregularities to legislature | Reports are not legally binding |
| Enforcement | Cannot directly initiate legal action | Relies on legislature for action |
Conclusion
The statement accurately reflects the paradoxical position of the CAG – a powerful auditing authority constrained by legal and constitutional limitations. While the CAG serves as a vital check on government spending and promotes accountability, its effectiveness is hampered by its lack of enforcement powers and the non-binding nature of its recommendations. Strengthening the CAG’s powers through legislative reforms, ensuring timely implementation of its findings, and providing it with a limited right of appeal could enhance its effectiveness and further solidify its role as the ‘guardian of the public purse’.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.