Y more cof its y India, nade by Admin- 27 INTEGRITY IN THE CIVIL SERVICE T= Acton’s insightful remark “Power corrupts and absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely” appears to have universal validity. Corruption has always been a primary concer, if nota problem, of all systems of governance at all times, It is a multi-headed hydra, with no Hercules in sight to slay it. Corruption is so obvious and yet 50 mysterious. Little wonder, efforts to captureit ina systematic definition have not met with total success. Only some dimensions of corruption are identifiable, the rest remain concealed even from the most perceptive eyes. Corruption has been defined as “the use of public power for private profit in a way that constitutes breach of law” and as “dishonesty and illegal behaviour in position of authority and power” * In other words, itimplies the exploitation of one’s official position for one’ sown interestat the cost of public good. Joseph Nye perceives corruptionasa behaviour which deviates from the formal duties of a public role because of private-regarding influence.’ Like- wise, Carl J, Friedrich argues that corruption isa kind of behaviour which deviates from the norm actually prevalent or believed to prevail in a given context, such as the political. It is deviant behaviour associated with a particular motivation, namely that of private gain at public expenses... Such private gain may be monetary one, and in the minds of the general public it usually is, butit takes many other forms.* ‘The Santhanam Committee gives an interesting twist to the definition of corruptoin in public systems: “Any aciton or failure to take action in the performance of duty by a Government servant for some ad vantages corrup: tion.”* Thus, the scope of a corrupt activity is expanded by including within its ambit action as well as non-action, though the motivation in both cases is similar. Corruption, thus, involves: (i) misuse of official position or authority, (ii). deviation from rules, laws and norms, (iii) non-action when action is required,594 Indian Public Administration (iv) personal gain for selfish motives, (0) monetary or non-monetary forms, and (oi)_harm to public good. Krishna K. Tummala rightly cautions that while defining the content and “ope of corruption, nuances in behavioural patterns should be accounted for. reater clarity in this respect will be helpful in tackling the problem of corruption. Tummala observes that in the wider interpretation of corruption, ‘even inefficiency in performance would be considered as corruption while the predominant view is that corruption implies money changing hands either in anticipation of favours or in return to those already rendered. Second, corruption is situational—what is corruption in one culture may not be so in nother. Third, in developing countries, there may be different norms for judging an individual’s personal life and his official life. Fourth, corruption must be distinguished from a scandal—both may be independent of each other. Fifth, the magnitude of corruption and the frequency of its occurrence should be distinguished. Sixth, corruption may take several forms, with the varying impact of each form. Seventh, excessive preoccupation with corrup tion migh divert attention from the more important developmental aspects of governance. Eighth, political and administrative corruption, though interre- lated, should be distinguished analytically and, if possible, operationally.° Itis commonly accepted that corruption is dysfunctional to the system of governance and to society as a whole. It promotes illegality, unethicalism, subjectivity, inequity, injustice, waste, inefficiency and inconsistency in ad: ministrative conduct and behaviour. In addition, it erodes the faith of the ccmmon man in the legitimacy of the politico-administrative system and eventually saps the idealism of those in public service and destroys the moral fabric of society ‘There is a counter-view that corruption may indeed be eufunctional in stain situations, Samul Huntington observes that corruption may help in assimilating new groups into the system and thus serve as a substitute for reform, Myron Weiner sees corruption reducing the rigidities of bureaucracy and makingit relatively flexible. And, of course, thereis the functionalist view that the beneficiary of a corrupt activity would find it “useful”? But these views have only limited currency and acceptance. Despite their situational validity, itis difficult to underestimate the harmful consequences of corrup- tion on individuals, communities and nations. Corruption appears to be regular, repetitive and integral part ofthe organizational society.*Itis univer- salinits pervasiveness. According to Ralph Braibanti, government corruption is found inall forms ofbureaucracies inall periodsof time.’ Further, corruptic appears tobea phenomenon common to democratic as wellas non-democratic regimes. Edward Gibbon, the great historian of the Roman Empire, remarked “Corruption is the most infallible symptom of constitutional liberty”. Cor versely, one finds numerous accounts of corruption existing in the erstwhile Soviet Union and other totalitarian regimes. A totalitarian government by nature as well as necessity cannot but he irremediably corrupt Indira Gandhi had once remarked that corruption was a global phenom-ition ratic ked: Con- yhile it by jom- Integrity in the Ctoil Service 59S ‘enon. She was right, though universalism of corruption should not be taken as anexcuse for complacency in combating it. Whether Louis XV, Cesare Borgia or Nero in the past or Spiro Agnew (USA), Roh Tae Woo (Korea), Carlos Salinas de Gortari (Mexico) or a number of former Japanese Prime Ministers of recent times, a corrupt public servant can emerge anywhere at any time. Wherever there is excessive concentration of power and too littleaccountabil- ity, turpitude and payoffs rule the roost. Though corruption knows no boundaries, it appears that it is more “responsive” to poverty-stricken areas. According to the Transparency International, graft and poverty go hand in hand. Nevertheless, in spite of their prospering economies, Thailand and China have a high level of official corruption. Of course, they would stil fall within the zone of developing countries. A recent poll of 10,000 people in 23, Latin American countries placed corruption at the top of their respective countries’ problems." THE INDIAN LEGACY There are numerous references to the prevalence of official corruption in ancient India. But the most elaborate reference source seems to be Kautily2’s Arthashastra. Its chapter entitled “Detection of what is Embezzled by Govern- ment Servants out of State Revenue” reads likea modern official reporton the modes of corruption.” Kautilya believes that despite greatest care taken in recruiting officials, there would besome who would turnout tobe corrupt. “Justasitisimpossible not to taste honey that finds itselfat the tip of the tongue, so it isimpossible for a government official not to eat up at least a bit of the king’s revenue.” It is inevitable, Kautilya observes, for those employed in revenue administrative positions to indulge in direct oF indirect corruption. Moreover, itis always a problem to identify thecorrupt. Justasone cannotobserve fish drinking water, so it és impossible not to find employees having revenue positions indulging, inembezzling money. In fact it would be easier tolocate the movementot birds flying in the sky than to know about the actions of the employees engaged in embezzlement Kautilya identifies forty different types of embezzlement including bribery, graft, favouritism, frauds, manipulation of prices of commodities, inflation in the salaries paid, theft in different departments of the government etc (On the negative consequences of corruption, Kautilya says that corruption causes misuse of government treasury, administrative inefficiency and ob- struction in the path of national development. Hence, strict discipline is a prerequisite to curbing corruption and, consequently, severest punishment must be meted out to corrupt officials. Kautilya observes that an effective spying system could help locate corrupt officials. Cases of corruption should be examined by the investigation commit tees appointed by the king. Those proven to be corrupt should be removed from service and their properties confiscated. Moreover, corrupt persons should be publicly paraded with cowdung stuck on their faces and their heads