Editorial 1: A step towards fighting corruption
Introduction:
- In a judgment in December 2022 — Neeraj Dutta case— the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court (SC) came down heavily on corruption among public servants in the country and lowered the bar for the quantum of evidence required to convict persons charged with corruption.
- This verdict was hailed by those who desire probity in public administration and demand deterrent penalties for criminal activities. This was not the first time that the Supreme Court was speaking on endemic corruption in our system; on many occasions in the past, the court gave equally strong expression to this scourge that afflicts our public administration. But in spite of its unequivocal stand, the extent of corruption in public life remains undiminished.
The Neeraj Datta case judgement:
- Through its ruling, the Supreme Court debunks the myth that absolute proof of guilt alone can help convict an offender. The court has now laid down that even if prosecution witnesses turn hostile, a conviction would be in order if all the circumstantial evidence marshalled by the prosecution and produced before the court points unmistakably to the guilt of the accused.
- This is a great step towards ensuring integrity in public services, especially in the ‘superior’ services such as the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) and Indian Police Service (IPS).
- There are two aspects to the fight against corruption: the severity of the law and its application; and the strength of public opinion that would help carry forward the campaign for a clean public life. Both are equally important if we are to rid the country of the weakest link in a burgeoning bureaucracy.
Legal framework:
- There is often a cry in favour of making our laws more stringent so that the wrongdoer is punished. Even law-makers and the public sometimes don’t understand that deterrence works only up to a point. The demand for the death penalty for a wide range of offences is therefore misdirected.
- Legislators disregard the fact that the more you enhance penalties for criminal behaviour, the higher will be the quantum of proof required by the courts to be convinced of the guilt of those arraigned before them. It is probably this hard reality that persuaded the Constitutional Bench to lower the bar for the quantum of evidence required to convict persons charged with corruption.
- In effect, the Supreme Court has set the standard of ‘preponderance of probability’, a yardstick that is usually not acceptable to sustain conviction in criminal trials. Earlier, the belief was that only conclusive proof, namely, proof that does not leave an iota of doubt in the minds of the courts, was required. This has now been diluted.
- The court has directed that infirmities such as non-availability of the complainant, either because he is dead or otherwise not traceable, should not stand in the way of accepting the story of the prosecution.
- The same liberal application of the law of evidence will now apply to cases where prosecution witnesses turn hostile, either because of inducement or intimidation. It is well known that some powerful people are accused of ‘buying’ prosecution witnesses. Some lawyers have also been part of this, bringing shame to the criminal justice system and to the bar. The apex court is aware of this and believes it can no longer be a mute spectator.
Acts related to corruption
Indian Penal Code, 1860:
- The IPC defines “public servant” as a government employee, officers in the military, navy or air force; police, judges, officers of Court of Justice, and any local authority established by a central or state Act.
- Section 169 pertains to a public servant unlawfully buying or bidding for property. The public servant shall be punished with imprisonment of upto two years or with fine or both. If the property is purchased, it shall be confiscated.
- Section 409 pertains to criminal breach of trust by a public servant. The public servant shall be punished with life imprisonment or with imprisonment of upto 10 years and a fine.
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
- In addition to the categories included in the IPC, the definition of “public servant” includes office bearers of cooperative societies receiving financial aid from the government, employees of universities, Public Service Commission and banks.
- If a public servant takes gratification other than his legal remuneration in respect of an official act or to influence public servants is liable to minimum punishment of six months and maximum punishment of five years and fine.
- The Act also penalizes a public servant for taking gratification to influence the public by illegal means and for exercising his personal influence with a public servant.
- If a public servant accepts a valuable thing without paying for it or paying inadequately from a person with whom he is involved in a business transaction in his official capacity, he shall be penalized with minimum punishment of six months and maximum punishment of five years and fine.
- It is necessary to obtain prior sanction from the central or state government in order to prosecute a public servant.
Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013
- It provides for an establishment of an ombudsman for the central and state governments (Lokpal and Lokayuktas, respectively).
- These bodies are required to act independently from the government and have been empowered to investigate allegations of corruption against public servants, which include the prime minister and other ministers.
Central Vigilance Commission (CVC)
- Though created in 1964, it became an independent statutory body only in 2003 by an Act of Parliament.
- Its mandate is to oversee the vigilance administration and to advise and assist the executive in matters relating to corruption.
Conclusion:
- Corrupt public servants will find other means of covering up their misdeeds. This is because many are willing to offer bribes to public servants, either on their own or on demand. This nexus between offender and victim has become a part of our ethos.
- The latest Supreme Court judgement may not deter people from corruption. However, that is no reason for us to give up the fight. It is here that we need enlightened opinion leaders who are not scared of taking on powerful elements in politics or in administration.
Editorial 2: Avoid further delay in conducting the Census
Introduction:
- Recently, it was announced that the freezing of administrative boundaries that precedes the Census would be done with effect from July 1, 2023. Such a freezing is necessary as State governments are in the habit of creating new districts and tehsils or reorganising existing ones. If such changes happen during a Census, there would be chaos in the field as to who should oversee such areas and a likelihood of some areas being left out of the Census.
Status of enumeration:
- House-listing operations take about a month, but were traditionally taken up in various States at different points of time between March and September of the year prior to the Census. It is not clear whether the government is planning to synchronise the house-listing operations to reduce the interval between the freezing of boundaries and the actual Census enumeration.
- The next decennial census was supposed to be done in 2021. But due to COVID-19 it has been continuously being delayed. There is no official statement yet about when the Census would be conducted.
- When restrictions were imposed to contain the pandemic in March 2020, several States in the country were on the threshold of starting house-listing operations. Enumerators were appointed and trained, questionnaires were printed, mobile applications were ready for use by willing enumerators and other logistic arrangements were in place. But the pandemic ensured that the house-listing and, consequently, the population enumeration phase were postponed. Two years have been lost. There is no reason for a further postponement.
Census Act, 1948:
- The Constitution talks about the use of Census data for delimitation of constituencies and for determining the quantum of reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. However, it does not say what should be the periodicity of the census.
- The Census Act, 1948, which predates the Constitution, provides the legal background for several activities relating to the Census without mentioning anything about its periodicity. It says, “The Central Government may,... declare its intention of taking a census..., whenever it may consider it necessary or desirable to do so, and thereupon the census shall be taken”.
- This provision puts the onus of deciding when to conduct a Census on the executive. This is unlike the position in several countries such as the U.S. and Japan where the Constitution or the Census law mandates a Census with defined periodicity.
Implications of the delay:
- The Census alone can provide population data for every village and town in the country. Sample surveys can provide reliable data on social and demographic indicators only at higher geographic levels. Apart from the population count, the Census has also been providing data on population characteristics, housing and amenities.
- We have population projections at the State and national level that have been fairly accurate in the past. However, it is not feasible to get reliable projections at lower geographic levels such as for districts and cities or even small States and Union Territories.
- For answers to questions on the improvement in literacy and educational levels, economic activity, migration, etc., or the impact of programmes like Swachh Bharat Abhiyan, one must depend on sample surveys.
Socio-economic impacts:
- The Census data are used to determine the number of seats to be reserved for SCs and STs in Parliament, State legislatures, local bodies, and government services. In case of panchayats and municipal bodies, reservation of seats for SCs and STs is based on their proportion in the population. Other than the Census, there is no other source that can provide this information.
- Delay in the Census means that the data from the 2011 Census would continue to be used. In many towns and even panchayats that have seen rapid changes in the composition of their population over the last decade, this would mean that either too many or too few seats are being reserved. Delimitation of parliamentary and Assembly constituencies would continue to be based on 2001 Census till data from a Census after 2026 are published.
Widening divides:
- The rural-urban distribution of population has been rapidly changing over the years. There is high population growth in the urban areas. Some cities have been growing faster than others through in-migration. The rural-urban distribution of population has been rapidly changing over the years. There is high population growth in the urban areas. Some cities have been growing faster than others through in-migration.
- The pandemic resulted in deaths among adults and the aged relatively more than children. Its impact on age distribution in severely affected areas would be of interest as it would give an indirect estimates of the number of deaths. This would either validate or reject the various estimates of the number of deaths due to the pandemic.
Census and NPR:
- The decision to collect data for the National Population Register by piggybacking on the Census operations was the most debated issue before the Census was postponed. Such controversies negatively impact the Census, which is the largest administrative exercise for collecting data.
- The Census is a single-shot operation and there is no scope for a retake. The Central government’s stated stand is that the data for the National Population Register would be updated during the Census. As the Census has been considerably delayed, it would be advisable to separate these two and disassociate the Census from a politically sensitive issue. This would help complete the Census as early as possible and maintain reliability of data.
Conclusion:
- The first Census after 2026 would be used for delimitation of parliamentary and Assembly constituencies and for apportionment of parliamentary seats among the States. Due to the disparity in growth rates between the States, there could be changes in the distribution of seats in Parliament. That Census is likely to be held in a more politically charged atmosphere. Hence, it is necessary that this Census is done as early as possible.