Need Protection To Work Without Fear Of Reprisal From Politicians, They Say
New Delhi:The CBI chargesheet against former telecom secretary Shyamal Ghosh has shaken the civil service fraternity, which has generally felt protected by the “system”. Theoretically, this safety net is necessary for bureaucrats to function without fear of reprisal from politicians, particularly if they are resisting unfair pressure from leaders.
The chargesheet against Ghosh drew mixed reactions from serving babus. While most of them refused to go on record, a section among them believes that there should be adequate protection for bureaucrats as they have to carry on with the ‘orders’ of their political masters whereas the other section thinks that officers of All India Services — specifically from IAS — have enough powers to express ‘dissent’ in official notes.
“This will demoralize senior officers,” observed Naresh Chandra, former Cabinet secretary. He said that the problem has been sharpened because of the definition of “misconduct” in the Prevention of Corruption Act, where the civil servant could be charged even in the absence of any wrongful intent. “This makes the law draconian for the bureaucrat,” he said.
On the other hand, a senior official said that a minister cannot proceed unless bureaucrats support him — sometimes by becoming complicit in corruption, or by ignoring the political master’s decision/ views as it may unnecessarily unsettle him in his or her current posting. Another official said that since there was sometimes a very thin line between a ‘deliberate’ mistake or an ‘inadvertent’ error while taking decisions, the investigating agency should take care of this while charging any officer.
“Even protection under the provision to grant or reject prosecution sanction doesn’ always save bureaucrats if something comes up after a change of regime. Their dis sent notes are the only protec tion in that case if the matter eventually comes in court,” the officer said.
Vishwa Ranjan, former DGP of Chhattisgarh, said, “If it’s a blatantly illegal order, a bureaucrat has no business to quietly sign it. He should have pointed out its illegality by making notings on the rele vant file. He could have eventu ally been overruled or ran the risk of being shunted out. But still, he would have been saved from prosecution for being party to an illegal decision.”
There is general agree ment that the chargesheet against Ghosh has strong polit ical intent behind it, which opens up another can of worms. As a result of in creased activism by CVC and CAG, many upright bureau crats now fear decisions, so that they don’t get tarnished later. The flip side of this is that a bureaucrat’s position is not really safe, because his/her po sition depends on the politic ian, who can order his transfer and settle postings.
Courtesy:
TIMES NEWS NETWORK
http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Scripting/ArticleWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=TOINEW&BaseHref=TOIM/2012/12/22&PageLabel=13&EntityId=Ar01300&ViewMode=HTML
New Delhi:The CBI chargesheet against former telecom secretary Shyamal Ghosh has shaken the civil service fraternity, which has generally felt protected by the “system”. Theoretically, this safety net is necessary for bureaucrats to function without fear of reprisal from politicians, particularly if they are resisting unfair pressure from leaders.
The chargesheet against Ghosh drew mixed reactions from serving babus. While most of them refused to go on record, a section among them believes that there should be adequate protection for bureaucrats as they have to carry on with the ‘orders’ of their political masters whereas the other section thinks that officers of All India Services — specifically from IAS — have enough powers to express ‘dissent’ in official notes.
“This will demoralize senior officers,” observed Naresh Chandra, former Cabinet secretary. He said that the problem has been sharpened because of the definition of “misconduct” in the Prevention of Corruption Act, where the civil servant could be charged even in the absence of any wrongful intent. “This makes the law draconian for the bureaucrat,” he said.
On the other hand, a senior official said that a minister cannot proceed unless bureaucrats support him — sometimes by becoming complicit in corruption, or by ignoring the political master’s decision/ views as it may unnecessarily unsettle him in his or her current posting. Another official said that since there was sometimes a very thin line between a ‘deliberate’ mistake or an ‘inadvertent’ error while taking decisions, the investigating agency should take care of this while charging any officer.
“Even protection under the provision to grant or reject prosecution sanction doesn’ always save bureaucrats if something comes up after a change of regime. Their dis sent notes are the only protec tion in that case if the matter eventually comes in court,” the officer said.
Vishwa Ranjan, former DGP of Chhattisgarh, said, “If it’s a blatantly illegal order, a bureaucrat has no business to quietly sign it. He should have pointed out its illegality by making notings on the rele vant file. He could have eventu ally been overruled or ran the risk of being shunted out. But still, he would have been saved from prosecution for being party to an illegal decision.”
There is general agree ment that the chargesheet against Ghosh has strong polit ical intent behind it, which opens up another can of worms. As a result of in creased activism by CVC and CAG, many upright bureau crats now fear decisions, so that they don’t get tarnished later. The flip side of this is that a bureaucrat’s position is not really safe, because his/her po sition depends on the politic ian, who can order his transfer and settle postings.
Courtesy:
TIMES NEWS NETWORK
http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Scripting/ArticleWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=TOINEW&BaseHref=TOIM/2012/12/22&PageLabel=13&EntityId=Ar01300&ViewMode=HTML
Girls Whatsapp Numbers For Friendship 2017 Sexy
ReplyDeleteHere : https://friends-whatsapp.blogspot.com
Here https://friends-whatsapp.blogspot.com