Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
Corruption, a pervasive challenge to good governance, continues to plague India despite decades of efforts to curb it. While a robust framework of laws, institutions, and social mechanisms has been established – including the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, the Right to Information Act, 2005, and the establishment of bodies like the Central Vigilance Commission – corrupt practices persist and even evolve. This suggests a fundamental disconnect between the intent of these measures and their actual effectiveness, necessitating a critical evaluation of their shortcomings and the underlying systemic issues. The recent Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index (CPI) 2023, where India ranks 93rd out of 180 countries, underscores this continuing challenge.
Legal Mechanisms: Limitations and Justifications
The legal framework, while comprehensive, suffers from several weaknesses:
- Delayed Justice: Prolonged trials under the Prevention of Corruption Act, often exceeding 10 years, diminish deterrence. The lack of specialized courts and inadequate infrastructure contribute to this delay.
- Low Conviction Rates: Despite numerous investigations, conviction rates remain abysmally low (around 6-7% as of 2022, based on National Crime Records Bureau data). This is often attributed to weak prosecution, lack of evidence, and political interference.
- Limited Scope: Existing laws often focus on bribery and pecuniary gain, failing to adequately address issues like crony capitalism, influence peddling, and abuse of power.
Institutional Mechanisms: Shortcomings in Implementation
Institutions designed to combat corruption face challenges related to autonomy, resources, and effectiveness:
- Central Vigilance Commission (CVC): While the CVC plays a crucial role in overseeing investigations, its lack of statutory powers and dependence on the government for resources limit its independence.
- Lokpal and Lokayuktas: The Lokpal, established in 2019, has faced challenges in its functioning due to a lack of infrastructure and adequate staffing. The effectiveness of Lokayuktas varies significantly across states.
- Vigilance Cells: Often lack the necessary authority and resources to effectively investigate high-profile cases, particularly those involving politically influential individuals.
Social and Technological Measures: Addressing the Symptoms, Not the Root Cause
Measures like RTI and a vibrant media play a crucial role in exposing corruption, but their impact is limited by:
- RTI Limitations: Information access is often delayed or denied, and the Act is not effectively utilized by citizens due to lack of awareness and bureaucratic hurdles.
- Media’s Role: While the media exposes corruption, sensationalism and a lack of in-depth investigative journalism can sometimes undermine its credibility. Furthermore, media ownership and political affiliations can influence reporting.
- Code of Conduct: Codes of conduct for civil servants often remain on paper, lacking effective enforcement mechanisms and a culture of accountability.
Evolving Forms of Corruption & Systemic Issues
The nature of corruption is evolving, requiring a more nuanced approach:
- Crony Capitalism: The nexus between politicians, bureaucrats, and businesses leads to preferential treatment and unfair advantages, often escaping the purview of traditional anti-corruption laws.
- Digital Corruption: The increasing use of technology has created new avenues for corruption, such as online bribery and manipulation of digital records.
- Systemic Issues: Root causes like weak governance, lack of transparency, complex bureaucratic procedures, and a culture of impunity contribute to the persistence of corruption.
| Measure | Effectiveness | Justification for Ineffectiveness |
|---|---|---|
| Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 | Limited | Delayed trials, low conviction rates, narrow scope |
| Right to Information Act, 2005 | Moderate | Delays in information access, bureaucratic hurdles, lack of awareness |
| Central Vigilance Commission | Moderate | Lack of statutory powers, dependence on government |
| Lokpal & Lokayuktas | Low (currently) | Lack of infrastructure, staffing, and independence |
Conclusion
While India has implemented a range of measures to combat corruption, their effectiveness remains limited due to systemic issues, implementation gaps, and evolving forms of corrupt practices. A shift towards a preventative approach, focusing on strengthening governance, promoting transparency, simplifying procedures, and fostering a culture of integrity, is crucial. Investing in technology for better monitoring and accountability, empowering citizens through greater access to information, and ensuring the independence and effectiveness of anti-corruption institutions are essential steps towards achieving a corruption-free India. Furthermore, political will and a sustained commitment to ethical governance are paramount.
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.