That the the nation is facing unprecedented political, economic and social upheavals is self-evident. The cascading events of the past few years (and the past few days) eloquently convey these inner fissures of Indian polity. While the socio-economic and political aspects of these tectonic disturbances are discussed (though insufficiently and fractiously), the administrative and moral dimensions are hardly ever the subject of national concern. Behind the occurrence of every instance of atrocity against women, children, Dalits or other vulnerable sections or hunger, deprivation or denial of justice, there is a clear failure of the administrative machinery. However, in the din that surrounds every event that attracts media attention, the discourse gets polarised on political lines. The responses are also political in nature.
Even the most horrendous of such failures attract nothing more than a few token actions like suspensions, transfers and the announcement of a commission of inquiry. (Or, at best a CBI inquiry.) Seldom do the Governments go beyond this kind of tokenism to find the system failures and other structural weaknesses. The political compulsions in a volatile situation are to contain it with minimum political damage. Despicable acts of violence, injustice and failure of the administrative machinery keep recurring with loathsome and shameful frequency because the root causes are unaddressed. The buck stops with political management.
Governance takes place through several instruments. Political executive, of course, has all the powers of the state. Then, there are the higher civil services and police force and the whole network of government functionaries with specific responsibilities. District being the most pivotal unit of administration, the District Magistrate continues to be a very important functionary despite the emergence of other power centres like the elected local bodies. People still look towards the District Collector/Magistrate as the visible symbol of Government. No government functionary has absolute powers; yet there are specific powers and responsibilities vested on each of them. They have the responsibility to discharge these specific duties ‘without fear or favour’. However, what we have been witnessing is just the opposite — discharging duties with fear and favour.
At the grassroots level, the ruling political party, the locally powerful groups and individuals do influence the administrative machinery to compromise on free and fair service delivery and law enforcement. Exposed to such pressure continually, government employees at the field level begin to believe and behave as vassals of the political party in power. Eventually, the ordinary citizen (bereft of power or proximity) ceases to expect fairness from administration. In a democracy with a permanent bureaucracy, this is a corrosive and perverse phenomenon. Service organisations owing allegiance to political parties lend legitimacy to this partisan slant of the bureaucracy, meant to be free and fair.
This rot has shown itself in the DM’s behaviour in the abhorrent incident at Hathras. The gang-rape and killing of a 19-yearold Dalit girl in itself is the height of criminal violence and brutality. But the callousness with which the district administration behaved in the hasty cremation at night and the subsequent insensitive treatment meted out to the devastated family are far too shocking. It has been reported in the media that the DM intimidated the bereaved family and wanted them to make milder statement. If that is true (I wish it isn’t) the decay from within seems to have reached a terminal stage.
A young person joining the Civil Service has to necessarily take an oath at the Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration that he/she shall always uphold the Constitution, and abide by it in discharging official duties. If what is reported is true, the Hathras DM has violated his oath. He seems to have attempted to deny the family of the victim equality before law (Article 14), freedom of speech (Art. 19), protection in respect of conviction of offense (Art. 20) and protection of life and personal property (Art. 21).
Civil servants are duty-bound to truthfully implement the policies and programmes of elected governments, and work under the political executive. But bureaucracy is neither designed nor expected to behave as bouncers of the ruling party. Of course, there are always individuals who are willing to crawl when asked to bend. But if crawling becomes a behavioural pattern, it is time to panic. Every conscientious civil servant should be able to distinguish the political wishes of a government from its policies and programmes. Bureaucracy is paid and maintained to implement Government’s programmes and not to oblige the partisan wishes of political parties or further their agenda. The developmental and the political agenda might overlap at times, but the officialdom should be able to discern government’s programme from political agenda. This distinction is alarmingly becoming thinner by day; it might soon disappear leaving no trace of demarcation.
Beyond the pulls and pressures of political exigencies, civil servants have to constantly ensure that their actions are aligned with Constitutional values. The sense of helplessness at the steady loss of freedom in decision-making that is enveloping the higher civil services is a tragedy with multiplier effects. This freedom has to be redeemed at individual and collective levels.
K Jayakumar
Writer is a poet and former chief secretary, Kerala
k.jayakumar123@gmail.com