NEWSLINKS
US EDITION
COLUMNISTS
DIARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
THE STATES
ELECTIONS
ARCHIVES

Search the Internet          Tips

Recent Columns

Unworthy selections Where have the      leaders gone? Reality of War Doing your own thing Our superiority will      prevail

Trial by the media

Gujarat continues to hog the headlines more than a month after Godhra became a household topic of conversation. Lost amidst the many aspects of the carnage was a small report in the inner pages.

The chief vigilance commissioner had asked for some explanations from the defence ministry. Some months ago, the comptroller and auditor general had made the front pages with the issue of the costly coffins that were ordered for the casualties of the Kargil conflict.

Not many years ago, such matters would have been dealt with by correspondence or discussion between the parties concerned. The public would know little about the matter until some investigative reporter decided to delve deeper into the rather dull annual report of the CAG.

Even then, the matter normally made headlines for a few days and then died down during the proceedings of Parliament's Public Accounts Committee. The country's watchdogs, who were established by the Constitution to inspect public expenditure, did their jobs quietly and handed over their reports to their bosses in Parliament. There, the ministries concerned had opportunities to defend themselves before the PAC and offer their explanations, which most of the time satisfied the members of the august body. Sometimes the matter was indefensible and the PAC took action to punish the offender or the department concerned.

No longer. Apparently some watchdog in the recent past decided that the work of the CAG was not being appreciated or that the government was getting off lightly. So today we have a trial and conviction by the public long before such matters come before Parliament. In fact, the matter is often discussed on the floor of the Lok Sabha even before it is taken up by the PAC.

Every so often we have some choice bits of the CAG's observations on the workings of the defence ministry making headlines in the media. Coffins were purchased at exorbitant prices. Airborne early warning helicopters were acquired without proper assessments. Astronomical prices were paid for spare parts, which were available for a few dollars elsewhere. The ministry retaliates with its own version and explanations. Or, as has been happening in a few cases, government files are made available to a pliable reporter who then proceeds to write an article giving the ministry a clean chit.

By this time of course, the damage has been done. Brought up on TV soap operas and courtroom dramas, the Indian public loves scandals. Both the public and the media have already finalised the verdict based on the first report of an alleged wrongdoing. They neither have the patience nor the desire to wait for the explanation of the other side. This is vigilantism at its worst, putting to shame some of the lynchings during the worst days of the Wild West.

In most democracies a person is deemed to be innocent until he is tried and convicted. Not in India, where accusations, however wild they may be, is proof of final guilt. Never mind that in most cases the person who claims to have all the evidence finds it difficult to produce it before a court. Mumbai's [former deputy municipal commissioner] G R Khairnar made a large number of charges against [former] Chief Minister Sharad Pawar, but failed to produce even a single file or piece of evidence in court.

It is rather sad that even a highly respected person like the chief vigilance commissioner is not immune to this method of public trial. Some time ago the names of a number of bureaucrats against whom cases had been registered were displayed on the commission's Web site to the glee of the public who have never held that class in high esteem. This, mind you, before a single officer had been convicted. The damage to the reputation of many had been done even if on a later date some of the officers might be acquitted of any wrongdoing.

Sometimes the government has very plausible and genuine excuses. Take, for example, a recent case of the Indian Navy having paid astronomical prices for some minor electronic valves. For some 20 years during the seventies and eighties the Indian armed forces received a large quantity of Soviet arms. The method of dealing and negotiating with the Soviets had nothing in common with purchases from arms dealers in the West. Indian delegations in the early years, used to negotiating with the West, were aghast to discover that the Soviets did not have the slightest idea of negotiating or pricing. The prices did not bear any resemblance to international or even manufacturing prices. They were decided arbitrarily by the political overlords.

In the 80s the Indian Navy received five destroyers at Rs 80 crore apiece when the international price of such ships was about Rs 200 crore! The Soviets had never heard of escalation or inflation. A submarine was offered in 1988 at the same price as the first one in 1981, both at Rs 80 crore apiece against an international price of Rs 150 crore. It was all an Alice in Wonderland atmosphere, which can never be understood by today's auditors.

The Soviets were never able to understand why the Indian side always wanted to negotiate when they were practically donating the ships. Whereas one keeps on hearing about the Rs 12,000 paid for valves costing Rs 50, there is never a word about how we saved thousands of crores on the ships and submarines in those days.

The dream world changed overnight after the Soviet Union disintegrated in 1991. The new market-savvy officials appear to be working overtime to recoup some of the losses incurred by them 20 years ago. The days of cheap ships, submarines and aircraft are over. Today even the refit of the aircraft carrier Admiral Gorshkov will set us back by Rs 4,000 crore.

In true Parkinsonian style, the auditors appear to be determined on spoiling reputations and tarnishing images on minor matters. After all your man on the street understands what a coffin is and how much it should cost. He finds it a lot easier to condemn the entire ministry, who can afford to pay about a lakh each for them, as a den of thieves. The Rs 6,000 crore contract for the Su-30s signed in a matter of two weeks in 1997, the Rs 4,500 crore contract signed in 1998 for three frigates and the yet-to-be signed Rs 4,000 crore contract for the Gorshkov refit and another Rs 6,000 crore for the MiG 29k aircraft on board are too complex for him to understand. After all, who knows how much an aircraft carrier should cost?

By and large the Indian public has lost all faith in the ability of the judiciary to bring to book and punish wrongdoing by officials in the service of the government. They have watched helplessly as the convicted are being elected to Parliament or given Rajya Sabha seats. In such a populist and publicity-conscious environment it is most unlikely that the emerging system of media or public trial will disappear any day soon.

Admiral (retd) J G Nadkarni