In the history of ideas and historiography, the discourse of corruption has often, though not exclusively, been associated with the tradition of civic republicanism. More recently, a significant body of research has brought the tools of social science to bear on the identification and measurement of corruption in the political sphere, and offered general theories about conditions under which corruption is fostered or retarded. A recent study by Aligarh University historian S Chandni Bi provides an interesting insight in to this. According to her, ancient India had a well-evolved democratic system that went down to the grassroots, its elected leaders had to adhere to well-defined laws that prescribed stiff penalties for those who swindled public money or indulged in improprieties.
These conclusions are based on the study of inscriptions in Tamil Nadu, in which various dynasties — the Cheras, Cholas, Pallavas, Pandyas and Vijaynagar — in South India, from eighth to the 16th century, had strict guidelines to eliminate corruption and check financial bungling by those in positions of power. While swindling of funds of public property drew extremely harsh punishment, a failure to submit accounts by public functionaries rendered them and their three generations from holding a public office.
While historians differ on whether India was ever totally corruption free — one of the oldest Indian texts on statecraft, Kautilya’s Arthashastra — lists 30 types of corrupt practices; the punishment for corruption was deterrent. One of the most telling examples of this is to found from the temple of Tiruvottiyur, north of Chennai. The inscription from the Chola period records how, in an audit by the king, the elected members of the village committee that were responsible for testing and certifying the purity of gold had not performed their job correctly. When the trial established their guilt, their private property was auctioned off. May be we can take a leaf from our ancient past in our fight against corruption.
