Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
Administrative accountability, at its core, refers to the obligation of public officials to justify their actions, decisions, and performance to the public and other legitimate authorities. In India, this accountability is currently ensured through mechanisms like parliamentary control, judicial review, Right to Information (RTI) Act, and internal vigilance mechanisms. However, with the proliferation of media – both traditional and new – its role in scrutinizing administrative actions has become increasingly significant. The question of whether media exposure should be formally included in the rules for administrative accountability is a complex one, demanding a careful consideration of its potential benefits and inherent limitations.
Existing Framework of Administrative Accountability
Currently, administrative accountability in India operates through a multi-layered system:
- Legislative Control: Parliament exercises control through questions, debates, and committees.
- Judicial Review: Courts can review administrative actions through writs like habeas corpus, mandamus, and certiorari.
- RTI Act, 2005: Empowers citizens to access information held by public authorities.
- CVC & Lokpal: Institutions designed to investigate corruption and maladministration.
- Internal Mechanisms: Departments have internal vigilance and audit wings.
Arguments for Including Media Exposure
- Enhanced Transparency: Media can bring to light instances of corruption, inefficiency, and abuse of power that might otherwise remain hidden.
- Increased Public Awareness: Media coverage can inform the public about administrative actions and their impact, fostering greater citizen participation.
- Deterrent Effect: The fear of media scrutiny can discourage unethical behavior among public officials.
- Speedy Redressal: Media can act as a catalyst for quicker resolution of grievances. Example: The exposure of the mid-day meal poisoning incident in Bihar in 2013 by media led to immediate action and investigations.
Arguments Against Including Media Exposure
- Lack of Objectivity & Sensationalism: Media often prioritizes sensationalism over accuracy, potentially leading to biased reporting and unfair targeting of officials.
- Trial by Media: Premature media exposure can prejudice investigations and violate the principles of natural justice.
- Privacy Concerns: Excessive media intrusion can infringe upon the privacy of individuals involved.
- Potential for Manipulation: Media can be influenced by vested interests, leading to biased coverage.
- Absence of Due Process: Media reports are not legally admissible evidence and cannot replace formal investigation procedures.
Safeguards and a Balanced Approach
While outright inclusion of media exposure as a formal rule might be problematic, a balanced approach is possible:
- Strengthening RTI: Empowering citizens to access information remains the most effective tool for accountability.
- Promoting Responsible Journalism: Encouraging media ethics and fact-checking mechanisms.
- Establishing a Code of Conduct: For media reporting on administrative matters, emphasizing fairness and accuracy.
- Leveraging Social Media: Utilizing social media platforms for citizen feedback and grievance redressal, while addressing concerns about misinformation.
- Capacity Building: Training public officials to effectively engage with the media.
- Independent Fact-Checking Organizations: Supporting independent organizations dedicated to verifying information disseminated by the media.
Constitutional & Legal Considerations
Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution guarantees freedom of speech and expression, which includes the freedom of the press. However, this freedom is subject to reasonable restrictions, including those related to defamation and contempt of court. Any attempt to regulate media exposure must be carefully balanced against these constitutional rights.
The Press Council of India (PCI) plays a role in regulating the press and ensuring ethical standards, but its powers are limited. The Information Technology Act, 2000, addresses issues related to online content, but its application to media accountability is complex.
Conclusion
In conclusion, while media exposure can undoubtedly contribute to administrative accountability by enhancing transparency and public awareness, its formal inclusion as a rule requires careful consideration. The inherent risks of bias, sensationalism, and violation of due process necessitate a cautious approach. Strengthening existing accountability mechanisms, promoting responsible journalism, and fostering a culture of transparency are more effective strategies than relying solely on media exposure. A collaborative approach involving the media, government, and civil society is crucial for ensuring effective and ethical administrative governance in India.
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.