Modi’s landing into the PM’s chair through whirlwind media campaigns happened conclusively, more so because his promises of bringing back incalculable black money parked outside and uprooting corruption had caught the fancy of the masses. So, bureaucrats no longer spent their mornings on Delhi’s most prestigious course as the Prime Minister had sought to jolt them into action to revive growth in Asia’s third-biggest economy from a nearly decade-long low. It was rated the worst among the twelve seemingly respectable economies in Asia.
Modi expected them to be at work quite in the morning and not show off at the elitist club as $230 billion worth of investment money was waiting for land and environment permits and clearances from federal and state governments run by bureaucrats.
Modi had told the bureaucrats to clean up offices, keep hallways unobstructed and documents neatly stacked, according to a letter sent by Cabinet Secretary Ajit Seth. Further, every department should repeal at least 10 rules seen as obsolete or redundant, reduce the number of decision-making levels and shorten formats to one page only.
“Reducing the bureaucracy might be the biggest challenge India is facing today,” says Jim O’Neill, former chairman of Goldman Sachs Asset Management. “Without success in this simple area, other policy goals won’t be able to be met due to wastage, inefficiency and so on.”
India’s bureaucracy has been ranked the worst among 12 Asian countries for almost two decades, according to a survey of about 1,200 investors across the region by Hong Kong-based Political & Economic Risk Consultancy ltd.
Modi hosted 77 of India’s most senior bureaucrats at his official residence a week after taking office, the first such meeting in eight years. He twitted afterwards to say his prime objective was to inspire the bureaucrats to simplify administrative processes and make Government people-friendly. Modi gave all bureaucrats his personal phone number and mail address to remain in touch to help.
The dramatic sacking of Sujatha Singh from the Foreign Secretary’s post, the axing of Union Home Secretary Anil Goswami for allegedly trying to stall the arrest of Saradha scam accused and former Minister Matang Sinh led to a countrywide debate. These moves had sent shock waves in the complacent bureaucratic circles. Just weeks before Singh was sacked, the Government had also terminated the appointment of Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) chief Avinash Chander, 15 months before his contract was to end.
Prime Ministers so far have never intervened in the nuclear and strategic policy issues. Organisations like the Department of Atomic Energy and the DRDO enjoy incredible autonomy but have repeatedly failed in delivering quality output. Major projects including the light Combat Aircraft Tejas, Nag missile, long-range Surface-to-Air missile project and the Airborne Early Warning and Control System have either not been completed on time or resulted in huge cost overruns. It took almost a decade and a half to operationalise Agni-I.
Modi had criticised the DRDO for its casual attitude during an address in Kargil when he said, “If a project was conceived in 1992, in 2014 we should be ashamed of saying some more time is required.” The Government seems to have taken the bull by the horns and removed Chander to ensure a semblance of accountability in the organisation.
The appointment of Jaishankar is also to recognise and reward merit. At a time when India’s global imprint is expanding rapidly, a “risk-averse” foreign policy won’t be able to meet the nation’s aspirations. The notion that seniority should determine who should be the nation’s top diplomat is long gone. But bureaucratic resistance has prevented substantive reforms. There’s hardly any incentive for quality performance or penalty for underperformance.
It was Manmohan Singh who had wanted to introduce lateral entry into the Indian bureaucracy in his first term, but the idea was quietly killed by the self-serving bureaucratic super brains that are highly skilled in misguiding the political masters citing complex rules. No wonder, ad hocism pervades Indian bureaucracy, because of incompetent public officials only to preserve their own institutional privileges. In democracies, effective political control and guidance is absolutely critical if bureaucracy is not to become corrosive on policy-making. On this score, the Modi government is right in shaking up and making Indian bureaucracy more accountable and effective. Hence, the final call for inefficient and corrupt babus to make reform and amend themselves.
An ideal civil servant should be: first a gentleman officer with good character, courage of conviction, intellectual and moral capabilities, leadership qualities and the capability of taking right decisions at the right time. For all this, a bureaucrat has to be assessed on the in-depth professional knowledge, self confidence, good communication skills, analytical mind, a flexible (never rigid) attitude, and most importantly, the ability to inspire and motivate colleagues and sub-ordinates.
The popular belief that no senior federal civil servant can be dismissed easily is only a myth. As per natural justice, no employee person shall be dismissed or removed or reduced in rank except after an inquiry in which he has been informed of the charges against him and given a reasonable opportunity of being heard in respect of those charges. The Act provides further that
(a) when a person is dismissed or removed or reduced in rank on the ground of conduct which has led to his conviction on a criminal charge; or
(b) where the authority empowered to dismiss or remove a person or to reduce him in rank is satisfied that for some reason, to be recorded by that authority in writing, it is not reasonably practicable to hold such inquiry; or
(c) where the President or the Governor, as the case may be, is satisfied that in the interest of the security of the State, it is not expedient to hold such inquiry.
(3) The decision to dismiss an official by the authority empowered to dismiss or remove such person or to reduce him in rank shall be final.
Routinely, opportunity before an employee getting dismissed will be available twice - at the inquiry stage and later at dismissal stage. However, this changed through a Constitutional amendment (42nd Amendment Act, 1976) where in, after inquiry, a punishment including dismissal, removal or reduction of rank will be given on the basis on evidence obtained during the inquiry.
‘Dismissal’ bars the person from further employment. ‘Removal’ allows the person to seek further employment.
The British when ruling India put the people under the Indian Civil Service (ICS). Officers were specifically trained to administer India in a manner that protected the interests of the ruling class and not the people. The IAS, moulded on the ICS pattern, instils a similar mindset into the bureaucracy which has proved to be horrifically detrimental to the growth and prosperity of the nation and its citizens. Believably the immediate past UPA decade was perceived to be very bad. The people voted for Modi imagining he is Messiah. The people voted against the Netas for misrule and threw them out. But often the Babus who actually thought designed and drafted out the disastrous policies that sunk the Indian economy during the previous regime do still reign supreme.
A few years ago, Infosys chief NR Narayana Murthy rued that the IAS has become ‘sell by date’ meaning outdated and dysfunctional. He recommended disbanding the IAS in its present form. “For over 1,000 years, the Government belonged to aliens sitting 2,000 or 4,000 miles away. There is no sense of societal ownership,” he said. “The penalty for corruption is so minimal that there is no fear of repercussions on being held accountable or guilty.
Modi who seems to be worried about unworthy babus must take a call on whether the US system has delivered better than the British. He must think out-of-the-box solutions for the nation to evolve.
India does urgently need a structural change in governance and the current administrative setup consisting of the terribly archaic IAS, IFS, IPS and the IRS cadres which are just unfit to deliver satisfactorily unless the bureaucrat is mission driven to serve the public.
The IAS has continuously avoided the discussion on performance and there has hence been no incentive to learn. However, technology upgradation in all sectors has radically changed the way things are happening. Today’s world is based on performance based on learning and execution. The IAS structure which is far removed from these realities should hence no longer be the sole people who become administrators in the state or central Governments. Governance needs a whiff of fresh air and it is time to make administration in India should not be the exclusive domain of the civil services. Performance evaluation should be objective, measurable and linked to the rule of law. Deviations, unless properly justified, will be a factor for dismissal or harshest reprimand. Compulsory periodic stints in the private sector can do big magic by humbling them down. Cross-breeding of good practices of public and private sector will benefit both sectors thereby ensuring progress in the nation.
Simultaneously, private sector functionaries should be encouraged to serve in the public sector as the exchange of viewpoints and strategies would create synergy to benefit the country immensely.
So, the age-old perception that the senior civil servants can’t be dismissed unless the President is pleased to discard them is all humbug. Pleasure of the head of the state is a mere routine formality. Political will in a democracy is what matters the most.
(The writer is a core member of Transparency International, Odisha)