Creating Public Wealth From Social Evils

Creating public wealth from social evils

I am initiated to write this by the recent debate on the raid conducted by anticorruption cell of Lok Ayukta in the residential premises of an assistant commissioner of the Bangalore City Corporation, and his subsequent suicide, stating the ignominy he had to face from his significant others constituency and the loss of self esteem, mental agony etc. as the cause for this extreme action. While one can extend one’s solidarity with his family in this trying hour, one cannot take this act of the officer, as a reason to rethink / initiate a debate on anticorruption measures taken by the Lok Ayukta. It is a different story, if the raid and the subsequent actions of the Lok Ayukta will at all result in any conviction, repossession of ill gotten wealth and be seen as exemplary to others who are adventurous of a similar kind. It is by now well known that the office of the Lok Ayukta has only been able to make a lot of noise, but no tangible outcomes, have resulted in the last couple of years, since the institution of this very important office, to ensure acceptable norms of governance in government. But noises made are to be treated as focused effort by his institution to generate public awareness, expose the corrupt (as exposure itself is a loss of self esteem and tantamount to punishment for the soft hearted only, as in the case of the late BBMP officer), generate public opinion to make this institution more effective by raising demands to vest it with the needed powers for effective functioning. I am now made to think a little different to handle the social menace of corruption by government officials. India has been ranked as one of the most corrupt countries in the world by transparency international which is a watchdog on corruption, may be only behind countries like China and a few others. One of the reasons for the consistent growth of this evergreen business of corruption is the lack of credibility of the institutions meant to deter, detect, arrest, and punish the corrupt. The cost of indulging in corrupt practices is perceived to be very low, by the corrupt officials. Or the expected returns are high that make it a lucrative business with zero investment other than mortgaging one’s self respect, 1

professional pride and be ready for some inconsequential temporary hiccups in life . Due to the corrupt getting away scot free, after all the cacophony, post a raid, such instances have also gained a perception of a heroic act by the daring few. It also tends to get eulogized by the coterie in private parties. The clean ones are quietly branded as soft, timid, conservative and foolish, to remain what they are. Otherwise most corrupt officials wouldn’t indulge in the practices and look for more accepted and legitimate means of enriching themselves. In technical language this behavior is explained through the concept of expected payoff. Expected pay off is the perceived weighted value of the net of benefit and cost of indulging in corruption i.e. the real earnings from corrupt practices – the product of cost (actual diminish in wealth, cost of legal services, cost of corrupting police / other officials, imputed value of other inconveniences such as image loss self esteem..)

of getting caught and convicted and its probability, is perceived to

be high. This perception is also due to the belief that one can play tantrums and ensure that the legal process is long drawn and no conviction happens during one’s life time…. Now a few radical thoughts on the ways to tackle this menace. The legal system shall shift from the practice of imprisonment of the convicted for corruption to confiscation of the ill gotten wealth and a penalty, as a proportion of the ill gotten wealth unearthed, to pay for the wealth already enjoyed. The corrupt are not ones who indulge in heinous crimes and therefore they are not dangerous to be let to move around in society, but are those who should not be given a platform or positional opportunity to indulge in rent seeking activities such as corruption. These are the people who have had respectable education (bureaucrats who come to positions of power through competitive exams etc.) and try to misuse their position for self enrichment to lead a larger than life lifestyle. These may also be the type who would have become frustrated due to lack of /delayed upward movement in the organisation, inability to benefit from emerging opportunities in the external environment, and nursing a sinking feeling. One could call this a mid career crisis in the government sector. These people are made of a different emotional material and can go only upto a self imposed limit, unlike hardcore criminals.

2

To tackle this corruption issue there shall be time limits for conviction of a maximum of three months from filing a charge sheet and another three months for confiscation of ill gotten wealth and rehabilitating them where they belong . My theory of public wealth from social evil starts here. The punishment for those who are not able to explain the source of the ill gotten wealth, within say, a max of three months of charging, should be simple in concept, easy to implement and without any scope for manipulation, interpretation and bending the law.

In simple terms any wealth acquired that is not explainable shall be simply taken over by the state, whether it is movable and liquid asset such as cash, or immovable asset such as real estate, in any form. While assessing the quantum of disproportionate assets acquired, only those assets (liquid, immovable, other forms) acquired during the employment in government of the individual shall be counted, not the current market value of ancestral property, or other acquired property with adequate evidence taken from the acquisition trail. The assets that are beyond one’s legitimate acquisition from sources such as salary, or other declared businesses shall without any opportunity for interpretation / twisting facts shall be simply taken over by the State, and brought into a separate account created by the State, for depositing the confiscated wealth. The wealth confiscated may fall into various categories such as cash, real estate, movable assets, gold and the such, and shall therefore be deposited in the state’s hundi (fund/account created). The assets in the hundi shall be accounted and auctioned without any delay, so that the state is not burdened with the responsibility for guarding this assortment of wealth as well as loss of value over time. The auction can take place through well publicized media such as the internet, auction houses and shall be given possession to the winner without any liabilities and with a marketable title. All such funds brought into the account (confiscated items as well as proceeds of sale of confiscated items) shall be deployed for national development

works

such

as

physical

and

social

infrastructure

creation,

development, maintenance. 3

What do we do with the culprits caught and convicted. There is no point in sending them to jail and maintain them at state’s expense for periods of 10, 15, 20 years. These are not people dangerous to society through their criminal acts. They are only greedy, overambitious and unscrupulous elements who have used the system and the privilege given to them to enrich themselves. In short they are opportunists who used the system for quick gains, based on their own perception of expected payoff mentioned above. The jails are overcrowded and there is no place even for the hard core criminals too dangerous to be let loose in society, for whom it is a legitimate right, to be kept and fed there at state’s expense. The corrupt shall be rehabilitated at special accommodations befitting standards of their normal life if they were to be honest in their dealings. They are free animals, but only need to be reined, from making their life larger than life size, at some one’s cost. There is no point in punishing their families, damaging career of their children for no fault of theirs by prolonged litigation / imprisonment. Of course, the family was also a major beneficiary of the corrupt dealings of the official. Loss of image, self esteem and value in society as well as denying pleasures bought from ill gotten wealth is sufficient punishment. As an exemplary measure, the corrupt and convicted shall be put on compulsory menial jobs much below their original status in their own parent department, so that they are made to feel disrobed and belittled among their own colleagues who were one time cheer leaders. If they refuse to do this, they shall be put on community jobs such as garbage clearing, caring for the aged, and help in hospitals… The key drivers are credibility of the system to check the corrupt, speedy action, visibility of the action as an effective deterrent and shifting the high pay off scenario to a low pay off one, for the corrupt. The combination of the above should bring in the needed visibility and desired results.

4