Many ministers,Chief Ministers,MPs and MLAS,MLCs are flowers of corruption.Our Democracy gets lubricated by bribes.The Voters want bribes.One or two may win elections honestly,but 99.99999% bribe to win in the elections.THere are chief ministers who actually strut around proudly after having corrupted the society completely-vertically,horizontally and laterally.Brazen smile mocks with advertisements at government expense. YM
On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 9:04 AM Rajaram Krishnamurthy <[email protected]> wrote: > I waited lest someone will write but that is the efficacy of corruption. > But it is in blood Artha sastra says so :*ARTHASASTRA* > > *Corruption in India* is has been a problem ever since the country had > been having a multilayered administration by officers, ministers and other > administrative chiefs. The corruption problem in ancient India, coupled > with bribery, kept infesting the society more and more in an increasing > rate. This is quite clear from the way the contemporary writers like > Ksemendra and Kalhana have condemned the government officials, as well as > other employees of different levels, in their celebrated works. Ksemendra > in his *Dasavataracaritam* has advised the king to remove all the > officials, ministers, generals and priests from office with immediate > effect, who were either taking bribes themselves or have been indulging in > corruption in some other way. Yet another work by Ksemendra, called > *Narmamala*, depicts corruption bribery spreading fast like rampant > maladies. He also found an answer to the much discussed question *how to > stop corruption in India* of his time; he has explicitly addressed the > contemporary intelligentsia to step forward and shoulder the responsibility > of purging their folks. > Kalhana too was merciless in his condemnation of the *corrupt government > officers in India* of his own time. He damned the officials outright and > asked the king to stay alert from their evil entente. Kalhana has also > cited some examples of *top incidents of corruption in India* of his > days. He said that Bijja became even richer than the kind as he sought to > unfair means of getting money, while Ananda managed to achieve a high post > in the office by bribing his higher officials. > Embezzlements and Black Money in Ancient India > > *Embezzlements in India* was just the same problem in the yesteryears as > they are now, mostly among the police and administrative officers.1 In > fact, Kautilya has given a detailed list, referring to not less than forty > ways of embezzlement that the treasury officers in his time were used to > practice. The most common of them were *pratibandha* or obstruction, > *prayoga* or loan, *vyavahara* or trading, *avastara* or fabrication of > accounts, *pariahapana* or causing less revenue and thereby affecting the > treasury, *upabhoga* or embezzling funds for self enjoyment, and *apahara* or > defalcation. And he uses a nice metaphor too – just like one cannot resist > tasting the drop of honey or poison on the tip of the tongue, a government > servant can never resist devouring even a bit of the government revenue. > Again, we cannot confirm if a fish under water is drinking water or not; > similarly, ascertaining the bribery, corruption and embezzlement on the > part of government officials and policemen were equally impossible. > And no wonder, this huge amount of embezzlement in different spheres of > the administration and in varied degrees led to the piling up of a huge > amount of *black money in Indian market* in the age of the *Arthasastra*; > nevertheless, we would not enquire into that in detail and make this > article unnecessarily long. In brief, that caused all the similar problems > we find today, including sudden and unpredictable hikes in the prices of > essential goods. It would have been quite interesting to address the issue > under the present economic circumstances of the present day India, but the > scope of this article would ask to better leave that out. > Legal Punishments for Corruptions in Ancient India > > There were a wide range of legal *punishments for corruptions in ancient > India* for the depletion of treasury – monetary, corporal, and even > sentences to death.2 Sometimes corrupt police officers would let the > prisoners break away after taking a healthy amount of bribe. However, if > they were caught, both the escaping prisoner and the corrupt police > official were sentenced to death at the same time. Considering the present > day situation of law and order in a number of agitated places in India, as > well as the general corruption on the part of some police officers, we may > quite confidently conclude that the system of the age of the *Arthasastra* was > quite good enough as it succeeded to reduce the number of such cases by a > significant degree. > The accountants of all sections, departments and tiers needed to submit > their accounts and audit reports to their respective higher officials on a > regular basis. The work officers or the *Karmikas* needed to report the > details to the Officer in Charge of Accounts, or the *Karanika*, every > year. In *Police Administration in Ancient India*, K. K. Mishra has > explicitly shown how they were punished for lack in their parts in audits > and related jobs – "If they did not turn up for this purpose and came > without the account books or balance sheets properly arranged, they were to > be fined ten times of the amount involved. Again, if the work-officer > presented himself with the records for being audited but the > accounts-officer was not ready for audit, he (accounts-officer) was to be > imposed the fine of the first amercement."3 Passing counterfeit coins as > genuine ones was also widely practiced, and less often met with punishment, > just as we find the circumstances today. There were several other severe > punishments for the plethora of *corruptions in ancient India* which we > simply cannot exhaust within the scope of this article. > > Well, it looks like the mentality of the country has not changed much even > in millenniums, and *anti corruption measures by Govt of India 2011* do > not seem do anything real good, very much like the state policies of the > Maurya empire that were also only partially successful. > > Kautilya provides a comprehensive list of 40 kinds of embezzlement. In all > these cases, the concerned functionaries such as the treasurer > *(nidhayaka)*, the prescriber *(nibandhaka)*, the receiver > *(pratigrahaka)*, the payer *(dayak)*, the person who caused the payment > *(dapaka)* and the ministerial servants *(mantri-vaiyavrityakara)* were > to be separately interrogated. In case any of these officials were to lie, > their punishment was to be enhanced to the level meted out to the chief > officer *(yukta)* mainly responsible for the crime. After the enquiry, a > public proclamation *(prachara)* was to be made asking the common people > to claim compensation in case they were aggrieved and suffered from the > embezzlement. 13 > <https://idsa.in/issuebrief/CorruptioninAdministrationEvaluatingtheKautilyanAntecedents_TarunKumar_121012#footnote13_lt4f94n> > Thus, > Kautilya was concerned about carrying the cases of fraud to their logical > conclusion. > > The Arthashastra states that an increase in expenditure and lower revenue > collection *(parihapan)* was an indication of embezzlement of funds by > corrupt officials. 14 > <https://idsa.in/issuebrief/CorruptioninAdministrationEvaluatingtheKautilyanAntecedents_TarunKumar_121012#footnote14_ergdrdf> > Kautilya > was sensitive enough to acknowledge the waste of labour of the workforce > involved in generating revenues. 15 > <https://idsa.in/issuebrief/CorruptioninAdministrationEvaluatingtheKautilyanAntecedents_TarunKumar_121012#footnote15_fwsa3ra> > He > defined self enjoyment *(upbhoga)* by government functionaries as making > use of or causing others to enjoy what belongs to the king. 16 > <https://idsa.in/issuebrief/CorruptioninAdministrationEvaluatingtheKautilyanAntecedents_TarunKumar_121012#footnote16_3o108eb> > He > was perhaps alluding to the current practice of misusing government offices > for selfish motives such as unduly benefitting the self, family members, > friends and relatives either in monetary or non-monetary form which harms > the larger public good. > > Kautilya was also not unaware of corruption in the judicial > administration. He prescribed the imposition of varying degrees of fines on > judges trying to proceed with a trial without evidence, or unjustly > maintaining silence, or threatening, defaming or abusing the complainants, > arbitrarily dismissing responses provided to questions raised by the judge > himself, unnecessarily delaying the trial or giving unjust punishments. 17 > <https://idsa.in/issuebrief/CorruptioninAdministrationEvaluatingtheKautilyanAntecedents_TarunKumar_121012#footnote17_pxfu6kx> > This shows that there were incidents of judicial pronouncements being > biased, favouring one party to the detriment of others. In an atmosphere of > corruption prevailing in the judicial administration as well, Kautilya > perhaps wanted to ensure that the litigants are encouraged and given voice > to air their legitimate grievances. He expected judges to be more receptive > to the complaints and be fair in delivering justice. > > Kautilya prescribed reliance on an elaborate espionage network for > detecting financial misappropriation and judicial impropriety. Spies were > recruited for their honesty and good conduct. 18 > <https://idsa.in/issuebrief/CorruptioninAdministrationEvaluatingtheKautilyanAntecedents_TarunKumar_121012#footnote18_rosmgjy> > They > were to keep a watch even over the activities of accountants and clerks for > reporting cases of fabrication of accounts (avastara). On successful > detection of embezzlement cases, Kautilya advocated hefty fines to be > imposed apart from the confiscation of ill-earned hordes. If a functionary > was charged and proved even of a single offence, he was made answerable for > all other associated offences related to the case. 19 > <https://idsa.in/issuebrief/CorruptioninAdministrationEvaluatingtheKautilyanAntecedents_TarunKumar_121012#footnote19_cc54oc9> > Since > taxes paid by the people are utilised for their welfare, any loss of > revenue affects the welfare of the society at large. This is precisely the > reason why Kautilya explicitly argued that the fines imposed should be “in > proportion to the value of work done, the number of days taken, the amount > of capital spent and the amount of daily wages paid”. 20 > <https://idsa.in/issuebrief/CorruptioninAdministrationEvaluatingtheKautilyanAntecedents_TarunKumar_121012#footnote20_qzqohl1> > > The threat of fines being imposed and subsequent public embarrassment do > deter judicial officials, to some extent, from resorting to corrupt > practices. But Kautilya was proactive in laying down traps to catch public > functionaries with loose morals and inclination to resort to bribery or > seek undue favour. The strategy he prescribed was for secret agents to take > a judge into confidence through informal channels and ask him to pronounce > judgments favouring their party in return for a payment. 21 > <https://idsa.in/issuebrief/CorruptioninAdministrationEvaluatingtheKautilyanAntecedents_TarunKumar_121012#footnote21_yeul9xe> > If > the deal was fixed, the judge was treated as accepting the bribe and > prosecuted accordingly. > > Interestingly, Kautilya also dealt with the concept of whistleblowers. > Any informant *(suchaka)* who provided details about financial wrongdoing > was entitled an award of one-sixth of the amount in question. If the > informant happened to be a government servant *(bhritaka)*, he was to be > given only one twelfth of the total amount. 22 > <https://idsa.in/issuebrief/CorruptioninAdministrationEvaluatingtheKautilyanAntecedents_TarunKumar_121012#footnote22_2zg8x8n> > The > former’s share was more because exposing corruption while being outside the > system was more challenging. But in the case of *bhritakas*, striving for > a corruption free administration was considered more of a duty that was > ideally expected of them. > > Kautilya also warned at the same time about providing wrong information or > not being able to prove the accusations. He advocated either monetary or > corporal punishment for such informants so that the tool could not be > misused for settling personal scores and harassing genuine officials. If an > informant himself were to backtrack on the assertions he made against the > accused, Kautilya suggested the death penalty for him. 23 > <https://idsa.in/issuebrief/CorruptioninAdministrationEvaluatingtheKautilyanAntecedents_TarunKumar_121012#footnote23_g9s4sd3> > This > provision was not only draconian, but would have effectively discouraged > whistleblowers. While such provisions would certainly make people think > twice before levelling accusations, the threat of capital punishment was > too harsh to help people root out the corrupt. > > In an atmosphere of all round corruption, honesty becomes a virtue and not > a desired duty. Kautilya argued for advertising the cases of increase in > revenue due to the honest and dedicated efforts of the superintendents by > giving rewards and promotions. 24 > <https://idsa.in/issuebrief/CorruptioninAdministrationEvaluatingtheKautilyanAntecedents_TarunKumar_121012#footnote24_qin17ex> > Bestowing > public honour creates a sense of pride and boosts the motivation and morale > of honest officials. They act as role models for ideal youngsters who wish > to join the administration and serve the state. > > KR IRS 20 6 23 > > > On Sun, 18 Jun 2023 at 21:37, Rangarajan T.N.C. <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> For e-governance to be effective, plain, simple governance must be clean. >> >> On Sat, 17 Jun, 2023, 00:25 KS Ramakrishnan, <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> >> [image: Inline image] >> >> >> >> >> -- *Mar* -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Thatha_Patty" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CACDCHCLugZXXOwirDR0LdO8Bs%3DgXfWdgGoNOGO8bs0xy1nUfdA%40mail.gmail.com.
