 |
||
|
||
|
||
Let the inferno of thy indignation
consume the wrong-doer and the indolent one alike. Rabindranath Tagore's
equi-contempt for the one who committed a wrong and the one who tolerated
such wrong was not merely an emotional outburst but a logical deduction
holding both as equally guilty. From time immemorial, there has been no
dearth of attempts to justify tolerance to offences palpably wrong, on
philosophical, material or political counts. The apologist while defending
inaction has invariably pleaded either helplessness, like the blind Dhritarashtra
in Mahabharata, or compulsion, like Mr Manmohan Singh, the honest Indian
premier, has been murmuring of.
There is no denying that the Cabinet
of Mr Manmohan Singh comprises tainted and perceptibly dishonest politicians
against whom serious charges of corruption are pending trial in courts.
Given a choice, Mr Singh would certainly not have included politicians
like Messrs Shibu Soren (now dropped), Lalu Prasad Yadav, Mohammad Taslimuddin,
MAA Fatmi, Jayprakash Narayan Yadav, Prem Chandra Gupta, etc., in his Cabinet
till at least they were cleared by the courts. But the compulsion of coalition
politics has blinded him altogether of the inevitable disastrous consequences
owing to their inclusion. Secularism has now been a convenient refuge for
crafty and corrupt politicians, projecting communalism and not corruption
as the largest issue before the country, parading themselves as saviours
of the minorities. Communalism or secularism, however, was missing as an
issue when India became independent after witnessing the worst ever riots
followed by the Partition.
When KT Shah of the Congress moved an amendment to the draft Constitution to declare India to be a "secular, socialist", sovereign, democratic republic, it was turned down by BR Ambedkar and others on two grounds. First, the Constitution having recognised separate religious entities had lost its secular character. Second, Hindus who constituted over 85 per cent were secular in their outlook and, therefore, it was redundant. Though there was no provocation or warrant for Indira Gandhi during the Emergency to amend the Constitution to incorporate the word "secular", her only raison d'etre was to gain minority support for all her wrongs. The realpolitik of Emergency still continues, rendering secularism as the refuge of the corrupt and the crooks.
According to Transparency International's Corruption Perception Index, 2003, India ranks 83 in the list of 133 countries (in descending order from the least to the most corrupt) and is placed in the bottom half of even Asian countries, below Singapore (5) Hong Kong (14), Japan (21), Malaysia and UAE (37), Saudi Arabia (46), China and Sri Lanka (66). With the induction of tainted ministers in the UPA Cabinet, India's rank is likely to go down further, affecting its future economically as also on moral front. The oft-cited NDA precedence will obviously impress none as Mr Vajpayee did not patronise any corrupt minister. Even assuming he did, it does not justify the UPA Government going gaga with perceptibly corrupt ministers with the pretension to fight for secularism, supposedly in peril.
Corruption in India has been spreading like a plague affecting every sphere of life. Divesting India of its spiritual past in the name of secularism destroyed the very foundation that propped up national leaders in the freedom movement like Tilak, Gandhi, Bose and several others who did not find any contradiction between secularism and Hindu spirituality as contained in the Upanishads, Vedanta and Gita. This spiritual orientation in character building, strongly advocated by Swami Vivekananda, was clearly wanting in Mr Nehru's prescription for independent India. The demonic lust, greed for power and wealth, and the desire to lord over the poor and the weak, got unleashed and uncontrolled, witnessing concentration of power and wealth in a few hands and the vast multitude languishing in poverty. This distortion in Indian economy caused by cancerous corruption is clearly detrimental to investment and growth.
"No matter how much investment and trade flows into a country," wrote James Wolfensohn, President, World Bank, in his article 'A Back to Basics Anti-Corruption Strategy', "and no matter how fast the economy is growing, economic stability cannot take root in an environment subverted by corruption." To him, corruption "undermines the rule of law, strangles economic growth and hurts the poor most severely". His observation: "The perception in donor countries that corruption in recipient countries sends their aid assistance down a black hole is a threat to future aid," could not have been missed by our economist premier and his honest and competent colleague in the Finance. They surely realise that the continuation of tainted ministers in the Cabinet may administer a serious blow to the country's image and consequently the economy in near future, resulting in shrinkage of foreign exchange reserve, gradual withdrawal of direct foreign investment and unabated inflation.
Wolfensohn further remarked: "Voters no longer tolerate corruption or the misappropriation of public trust. Civil society in nearly every country in the world is holding the leaders accountable." Unfortunately in India, corrupt leaders have been managing to win election after election even while in jail, allegedly by rigging through the mafia at their command. As for remedial action, drastic electoral reforms are the need of the hour so that corrupt individuals are barred ab initio from contesting in the polls. Second, the state funding of polls may seriously be considered so as to curb the influence of money in the electoral process. Third, the institution of Lokpal to try corruption charges against ministers including the prime minister and other senior public servants may be set up at the earliest.
Corruption is a tool of the evil
to make the rich richer, the powerful more powerful and the poor poorer.
The nation should confront the evil boldly rather than turning to non-issues
like secularism, aroused usually by political demagogues who are perceived
to be the most corrupt.
|
||
|
||
|
||