Sunday, 12 August 2018

Prevention of Corruption Act : Amended





Economic Times ( 25 July ) carries following news :







Extract :



*   The contentious Section 19 of the old Act now stands amended saying criminal misconduct means “intentional illicit enrichment” and possession of “disproportionate assets” —essentially makes 'mens rea' ( presence of intention and enrichment ) an essential prerequisite to prove corruption.

 

*  A new Section 17A has been added which says no inquiry will done without “previous approval” of government if the serving or retired official took a decision or made a recommendation in discharge of his official duties or duties.  PC Act amendment is a landmark decision. 



*  A public servant can now take bona fide decision without any fear.


Earlier, even if no pecuniary benefit is received by a public servant, he / she could still be penalised. This is a game changer as only malafide decisions would now be punished. 





Shri Amitabh Kant [  CEO , NITI Aayog  ] says in a tweet :



Gr8 step forward to enable public servants to act boldly, take risks in national interest & drive development in a bona fide manner.



This was long overdue. Greatly appreciate Government ‘s initiative to provide protection to honest officers.



The abuse of PC Act Section 13( 1) (d) ( iii ) had hurt many well intentioned public servants whose decisions granting relief to any private person were questioned even if there was no pecuniary advantage. Insertion of new Section17A brings in a much needed layer of due diligence






This is indeed a very good step , which begs the question :



“How will bureaucrats prove that their decisions were “bona fide“ and  not “mala fide“ ?



There is only one way



By implementing what I suggested in my following email ( dated 20 June 2014 ) sent to the Cabinet Ministers  :





To err is human


To forgive is divine ( provided it was a
honest error )


All of us keep making errors , all the time


But rarely same " mistake " twice


Often , decisions taken at a point of time , turn out to be " poor " , with passage of time


Reasons are simple :


*  
We never have all the information - relevant to the problem we are trying to solve –
    available with us , at the time of taking a decision


*  
Even when most of such relevant info is available , we may not have the capacity /
   competence to " process " such info


*  
As humans , we have our biases / prejudices , based on our previous experiences ,
   which influence our decisions


*  Quite often , and often against our own better evaluation / judgement of a given
    situation , we are wrongly influenced by our peers / bosses / subordinates or even
    voters - all of whom have different expectations / vested interests !


*  
Additional - and more relevant - information surfaces , AFTER we have taken a
    decision ( happens all the time  !  )


To encourage Babus and Ministers to take FAST decisions , Shri Narendra Modi must insist that they carefully " Record " on the files :


*   
What info / data he wished was available for a better decision


*   
What different " views / opinions " were presented to him for consideration


*   
What " Data / Views " he would have obtained if he had more time


*   
Who all , the decision might offend


*   
What is the likely " Cost " of postponing that decision


And finally a declaration :


*   
THIS DECISION IS NOT LIKELY TO BENEFIT ANY OF MY NEAR RELATIVES / FRIENDS
    , DIRECTLY OR  IMMEDIATELY
 
    

After all of this, if the decision appears to be " wrong " in hindsight , it must be " forgiven " and treated as an honest error


To err is human  !


======================================================



As far as the mechanism is concerned , I suggest the following :


·         Law Ministry to launch a web site which is only accessible to specified government officers



·         This web site will carry a “ DECISION ANALYSIS  cum  DECLARATION “ form




·         The form need not wait entry only when a decision is taken . It can be filled up progressively , over a period of time , leading up to the point of decision



·         Officers taking decisions will fill up this form online as suggested above




·         As time passes , concerned officer can ADD further data / comments to the form but cannot EDIT what he has already entered



·         Form can be “ accessed “ at any time by his superiors



·         Upon a formal request by any investigating agency , concerned Minister may grant “ Access “ to the form to that agency


=======================================================




13  Aug  2018



No comments:

Post a Comment