Three-fourth of citizens think that the level of corruption in public services is increasing in the last one year (2004-2005). Hardly ten percent think that such corruption is on the decline. There are no significant differences between the States in the perceptions about the extent of corruption or in their experience with such corruption.
This study taken up by TI India in alliance with CMS, brings out that one-third to half of the compulsions leading to such petty corruption involving the common man could be addressed and also removed with simple initiatives including introduction of technologies.
One-third of citizens think that “both the officials concerned and the users” of these eleven services know how much to be paid as “extra” to get a job done or attended to.
Corruption is not merely in the media or in the minds of people as it is sometimes made out. But it is in the system all across the public services, is what this study highlights. And the users and providers of those public services know what needs to be done to address the problem as this study has brought out.
The eleven public services covered in this study are: Police (Crime/Traffic), Judiciary, Land Administration, Municipal Services, Govt. Hospitals, lectricity (Consumers) PDS (Ration Card/Supplies), Income Tax Individual Assesses), Water Supply, Schools (upto 12th) and Rural Finacial Institutions (Farmers).
According to this survey, relatively Police stands out high on the corruption index. Judiciary (lower Courts) and Land Administration are rated next only to Police. The corruption in Government Hospitals is mostly to do with non availability of medicines, getting admission, consultations with doctors and availing diagnostic services. Despite reforms, electricity service figure high on corruption index. PDS figures lower in the corruption index score because the problem of common man dealing with services is more to do with leakages in the system rather than direct monetary corruption.
Going by composite ranking of States on corruption involving common citizen and in the context of eleven public services, Kerala stands out as the least corrupt State in India. Bihar, on the other, is the most corrupt State. Jammu & Kashmir is next only to Bihar. In fact, perhaps not surprisingly, on all parameters and in the context of all the eleven
services, Bihar stands out far-ahead as the most corrupt State. Himachal Pradesh perhaps is less corrupt – even compared to States like Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra or Gujarat. Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka, Rajasthan and Assam, on the other, also are on the top of corruption.
This unique study for its scope and sample size takes into account both perceptions, which are as important as actual experience particularly in the case of these public services, and experience of actually paying bribe to get attended to or serviced by these public services.
An overwhelming majority of citizens are vocal about absence of transparency and accountability in the delivery of these services. They are full of anguish and at times some anger at the state of affairs. It is evident from annual CMS surveys on corruption that use of technology at the front-end of those offices is likely to bring down corruption with increase in transparency.
One-sixth of public think that citizens/users of Government services themselves are responsible for corruption. They believe that there is no active and sustained civil society movement. The efforts are more sporadic, localized and short-lived and have never acquired a character of a larger movement.
One-third of citizens think that corruption is “an obvious fact” where both giver and taker are familiar with modalities, it cannot be addressed only by reforms and by adopting technologies, although they are the first order of initiatives to be taken, unless certain deterrent punitive action on those indulging in corruption are also taken.
Now that technology is being adopted in a big way, it should be feasible to take more specific action to bring down corruption. That is how the initiatives of Transparency International India (TII) in sponsoring studies like this help mobilize civil society. TI India proposes to go to States with the findings of this study to sensitize and promote civil society initiatives.
Citizens’ Charter, promising certain performance standard on the basis of “Where to Go, How to proceed”, is a recent initiative in most of these services. But the Charter as it is made out is neither directly relevant nor are citizens aware of such a thing, as this study brings out. In fact, not all concerned in the public services know about Citizens’ Charter or the promises made therein. The study brings out the urgency of activating Citizens’ Charter and making it directly relevant and implementation being reported back to public.
This study acquires added relevance in the context of more recent Right to Information Act. When this Act comes into effect, public utilities and services shall need to gear up to increase transparency in decision making. Next round of such national surveys could be expected to bring out the extent this Act would help in the process.
The India Corruption Study 2005 brings out the magnitude of the problem, the contours of petty corruption involving common citizen and the efforts required to address the issues in the case of each service.
Users of various public services across the country in this study have named seven key factors that stand out as responsible for wide spread corruption in the system. These include,
∙ Lack of transparency and accountability in the system,
∙ Lack of an effective corruption reporting mechanisms,
∙ Lack of honesty in officials in the Government,
∙ Acceptance of Bribe as a way of life, custom and culture,
∙ In effective judiciary,
∙ Poor economic policies,
∙ Inadequate training and orientation of Government officials.
2.0 COVERAGE & METHODOLOGY
India Corruption study is the largest corruption survey ever undertaken in the country with a sample of 14,405 respondents spread across 20 states. From each State about 525 - 950 respondents were interviewed. The survey covered 151 cities and 306 villages.
This national survey on corruption is the first in its scope. It is not just limited to estimating monetary value of petty corruption but also ranks public services and states. The study also looks into systematic aspects of corruption in the public services and has come up with service specific initiatives to reduce corruption.
The focus of this survey is on petty corruption experienced by common man in availing public services. Petty corruption is something which citizens end up paying to get one or other job attended to at the public utilities/services which they are entitled to without spending anything “extra money”.
The estimation of monetary value of petty corruption is to give a reliable idea of the money involved. This estimate does not include contractors or large scale transactions involving procurement, tenders, etc or the dealings of corporates or large business. It also does not include welfare and other Government programmes for the rural population or vulnerable sections. The estimate of petty corruption is specific to the services in each case and does not include valuation of “corrupt practices”.
The survey is based on a unique methodology developed by independent CMS, over the years. Improving on three previous CMS annual studies on corruption in public utilities, the methodology followed for this larger and comprehensive India Corruption Survey 2005 is unique.
Firstly, it aims at both “perception” and “experience” and, secondly, the outlook of the service provider too is taken into account. For this, the study relied on a combination of methodologies. These include household survey, “exit poll” to capture the experience of service users, discussions with service provider, case studies and tracking of implementation of initiatives.
The services to be included for the survey were selected based on “CMS 7 criteria”
∙ Monopolistic nature of services
∙ Large public interface and intensity of interface
∙ Directly effects the day to day life of common man
∙ High dependence on these services by common man
∙ Essentiality of the services
∙ Services available across the country
∙ User could be identified, traced and tracked
The ranking of public services and the States on petty corruption is based on a “composite index” developed for the purpose. The indicators were carefully choosen based on our experience in the three earlier round of survey. The indicators ensure that there is minimum scope for over or under reporting. The weightages were finalized after extensive consultations with the experts. A detailed sensitivity analysis were undertaken.
The 11 public services short listed for the study are of varied nature; hence for the purpose of ranking the services have been divided into two groups
a) Need based
b) Basic services, based on the intensity of interaction.
The field work for the survey was undertaken during December 2004 and January 2005 months except in Chattisgarh, Jharkhand and J&K where it was done later in March 2005. The survey in J&K could not be taken up earlier due to hostile weather conditions. The survey in Jharkhand was taken up after the elections to State assembly was completed.
Analysis and interpretation:
3.0 RANKING OF PUBLIC SERVICES
The Corruption Index scores show that Need based services are more corrupt than Basic services covered in this survey. This for two reasons, firstly, for most Need based services (except RFI) there are no alternatives sources to avail service unlike in the case of Basic services, where there are private service providers. Secondly, since most need based services are vested with substantial powers therefore the repercussions of not paying bribe could be quite serious.
(Figures in Percentage of respondents)
Among the 11 public services covered in the survey, the Police is the most corrupt. An overwhelming 80 % of those who had interacted with the department had paid bribe. Further three fourths of those who had interacted with Police department in the last one year are not happy with the services. No wonder then that 88 percent perceive the department to be corrupt.
Judiciary (lower courts) and Land administration are the next most corrupt public services. In Judiciary, of those who paid bribe, 41 % had paid to influence judgment, 31 % to speed up or delay judgment, 28 percent to get routine jobs like listing of case or to get copy of documents.
In Land Administration, of those who paid bribe, nearly half had paid for property transaction related issues (valuation of property, payment to registrars etc), 36 percent paid to get property documents or for mutation and 12 percent for clearing or settling tax dues. In Municipal Services, nearly three fourth of those who paid bribe for approval of building plan or modifications (53%) and tax related issues (22%).
Nearly two thirds of people surveyed perceived that the Income Tax department to be corrupt. In spite of this the department is low in the Corruption Index score. This is because the survey was limited to individual assesses who had apparently not encountered much corruption.
Among Basic services the Government Hospitals are the most corrupt public services. The corruption in the department is mostly to do with non availability of medicines, getting admission into hospitals, consultation with doctors and availing of diagnostic services.
Electricity service is the second most corrupt among Basic public services. Nearly 65 percent of the corruption involves issues of billing and grant of new connection. PDS figures lower in the corruption index score because the problems of common man dealing with service is more to do with leakages in the system rather direct monetary corruption. The corruption affecting common man is limited to getting ration card & over charging for ration supplies. However there are larger issues like diversion of supplies, irregular supplies, poor quality, under weighing etc.
Water supply services have low corruption score. This could be because water tariff in the most states is not consumption based or it is nominal as well. Therefore, there is limited scope for corruption. However, the corruption in the service is limited to certain areas like release of new connections, availing the service of water tankers and ensuring more supply of water.
4.0 RANKING OF STATES
As per the composite ranking of states on petty corruption, involving common citizen and in the context of eleven public services, Kerala stands out as the least corrupt State in India. Bihar, on the other hand is the most corrupt State. In fact, on all parameters and in the context of all the eleven services, Bihar stands out as the most corrupt State. Himachal Pradesh is less corrupt – even compared to States like Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra or Gujarat. Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka, Rajasthan and Assam are afflicted with the problem and score high on the index.
States highlights
Kerala: All 11 public services considered for the study are ranked as the least corrupt in the country.
Himachal Pradesh: Most services in the State are ranked as relatively
lower corrupt in the country.
Gujarat: Overall the State is ranked as less corrupt in comparison to
other States. However certain services like Education, Land Administration and Judiciary are relatively ranked as more corrupt in comparison to others services in the State.
Andhra Pradesh: Government Hospital and Water Supply services are ranked more corrupt in comparison to other services in the State.
Maharashtra: Municipal services in the State rank among the top five corrupt in the country.
Chattisgarh: On the corruption index all the services in the State are much better ranked than the parent State Madhya Pradesh
Punjab: PDS, Police, Judiciary and Municipal services are ranked more corrupt in comparison to other services in the State.
West Bengal: Water Supply service in the State is ranked as the most corrupt in the country.
Orissa: Judiciary ranks among the top four corrupt in the country
Uttar Pradesh: Electricity, Schools and Income Tax figure high in the corruption rankings.
Delhi: PDS in Delhi is ranked as the second most corrupt in the country
Tamil Nadu: While over all the State ranks 12th on the Corruption Index, Schools, Hospital, Income Tax and Municipalities rank among the top corrupt in the country. This is surprising given that the State has one of the best health infrastructure and also ranks quite high on the Education Development Index.
Haryana: Schools, Land Administration and Police figure among the top corrupt in the country.
Jharkhand: On the corruption index all the services in the State are much better ranked than the parent State Bihar.
Assam: Police is the most corrupt in the country. Electricity figures among the top corrupt.
Rajasthan: Judiciary ranks among the less corrupt in the country
Karnataka: The state ranks fourth on the corruption index because key services like Income Tax, Judiciary, Municipalities & RFI figure among the top corrupt services in the country. However, Electricity & Schools rank among the least corrupt in the country.
Madhya Pradesh: Despite initiating reforms in service delivery, the State still ranks as third most corrupt among States included in the survey. Only Municipal services are ranked relatively better than other services.
J&K: Except Hospital & RFI, most other services rank among most corrupt in the country. Not surprising that it is the second most corrupt State.
Bihar: All the services are ranked among the most corrupt in the country.
5.0 MONETARY VALUE OF PETTY CORRUPTION
Total monetary value of petty corruption nationally in 11 services is estimated at Rs. 21,068 crores.
There are difference between the ranking of services based on composite corruption index presented earlier in the report and the standing of the departments purely based on monetary value of petty corruption given below. This is because certain services like Schools (upto 12th) which have large citizen interface are likely to have higher monetary value of corruption just because more people are interacting with the department.
ESTIMATES OF PETTY CORRUPTION (Rs. In Crores)
The data shows that in majority of services more than 5 percentage of total households in the country had paid bribes except in case of few services like Income Tax, Municipal, Water Supply and RFI. The incidence of paying bribe was higher incase of Basic services as there is greater interaction of common people with these services when compared to Need based services.
No. OF HOUSEHOLDS WHO PAID BRIBES (Last one year)
6.0 SERVICE PROVIDERS PERSPECTIVE
One of the key features of this survey is that services provider’s views have been taken into consideration. This has helped to understand the problems faced by the service providers to deliver services. Some of the key concerns of the service providers are given below.
6.1 Basic Services:
• Heavy work load: With more and more citizen’s availing public services and no commensurate increase in the personnel, there has been substantial increase in work load.
• Outdated infrastructure: The scope of the services has increased over the years but the infrastructure has not kept pace with services growth or need. For example, water delivery infrastructure in most states is outdated and plagued with leakages.
• No incentive: There is no incentive for staff to perform. For example, in
certain telecom companies incentives are linked to Customer Satisfaction.
There is no such incentive for service providers in the 11 public services
covered in the survey.
• Political interference: Frequent interference by political leadership has
resulted in significant demoralization of the service providers.
6.2 Need Based Services:
• No Respect for law/ law obedience: There are several instances where
citizens have indulged in illegal activities like under declaration of property
value, concealment of income etc. They then pay bribe to staff of the
department.
• Passive Citizens: Citizens do not complain about corruption in the
department. Unless Citizen’s cooperate, it would be difficult to reduce
corruption substantially.
• Pressure of influential people: There is tremendous pressure to either
speed up a case or to settle disputes or to dole out favors resulting in feeling of helplessness and bowing to the pressure.
• No training to staff: Due to rapid changes in various sectors, the expectation of the users has gone up. They have become much more demanding. There is an urgent need for training to cope up with increased customer expectations.
• Centralization of decision making: The service delivery is affected because most of the decision are centralized, which require the files to move through many layers.
• Intermediaries: In services like Income Tax, the Charted Accountants have not created awareness among their clients about rules and procedures.
7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on this survey we have come up with some suggestions which will help to reducecorruption in public services. Much more detailed suggestions are provided for each service in the service specific chapters in the next volume.
7.1 Basic Services
7.1.1 Environmental Aspects
∙ More competition: Replacing public monopolies with private monopolies is not likely to lead to significantly lower corruption level. Our indepth analysis of Electricity service shows that private run utilities are only marginally better than Government run utilities. However, there is need to facilitate greater competition in provision of services where ever possible.
∙ Allot funds on outcome basis: Funds allocated to various departments
should be linked to outcomes. For example, in schools various indicators like enrollment rates, absence of children, dropout rates, results in board exams, can be used. Similarly indicators can easily be worked for other departments. The Departments should work to improve performance on these indicators by holding the institutions accountable.
7.1.2 Internal Systems
∙ Simplify procedures: This study shows that irrespective of the educational background, the citizens are unable to fill forms and complete procedures on their own. This calls for simplification of procedures, documentation and more education to the users. This will reduce dependence of the users on middlemen and touts.
∙ Performance based incentive to staff: In order to improve service delivery, there should be fixed and variable component in the Staff salary. The variable component should be linked to objective and measurable outcomes. For example in Electricity and many other services, incentives can be linked to Customer Satisfaction.
∙ Users Committees: Merely setting up users committees is not enough. CMS studies in the past have shown that there is need to provide them with certain powers (like report card of teachers, recommend fines for poor service etc) to make departments accountable to them. There are various successful experiments of users committees like Parent committees in case of Schools, Patient committees in case of Hospitals.
∙ Outsource certain services (wherever possible): Public service
departments should be purchasing outputs rather inputs where ever possible. For example in hospitals instead of buying X ray machines they should buy reports. This will help eliminate several opportunities for corruption like buying of X-ray machines, purchase of spares, procurement of X-ray films, hiring of Radiographers, his transfer etc. Instead hospital could ask an entrepreneur to operate and provide X-ray services in the premises of the hospital etc. A detailed Service Level Agreement (SLA) should be worked out to ensure required quality of service is provided. This experiment has already been initiated in some hospitals in Delhi.
∙ Greater Transparency: Citizen’s do not know as to how much money was received, on what purpose it was spent. Research has shown that there is lesser corruption if the allocation and spending are made public. Right to Information is one tools which could facilitate greater transparency in public spending.
∙ Use of technology: Public services can use technology to reduce the need for citizens to visit their offices. Various technology enabled features like Toll free lines, websites, or SMS based application can be developed for better service delivery. For example E-Seva centers in Hyderabad have helped common man to use technology to avail public services.
7.1.3 Citizen Interface
∙ Active Citizen Charter: Citizen Charters should be drafted in consultation with various stake holders like service providers, users etc. The Charters should have realistic and measurable action standards, and not just statement of intent. The Charters should have penal provisions if the department fails to deliver service in the time frame mentioned in the
Charters. The Charters should be prominently displaced and easily available to users. An independent agency should survey periodically to prepare a report card of the department.
∙ Faster grievance redressal mechanism: This survey shows that the
confidence of the users on the Grievance redressal mechanism is low. The
grievance redressal mechanism has to be faster. In order to improve
confidence the public services should clearly display information on
complaints received, solved and pending. There should also be information
on whom to approach in case the grievances are not addressed in the normal course.
∙ Public hearing: There should be periodic public hearings so that service
providers are accountable to users. The Government may institutionalize a
system where in prominent Citizen with unquestioned integrity hold periodic
hearings. The public hearing should be well publicized so that there wide and active participation by various stakeholders. An action taken report should placed by the department in the next public hearing.
∙ Satisfaction surveys: Independent surveys should be undertaken at periodic intervals to benchmark, measure and track quality of service. The findings of the survey should be made public. Some regulators like TRAI & State Electricity Regulatory Commission (SERC) are undertaking periodic
satisfaction surveys.
∙ Public awareness: There is need for generate greater awareness about
services, procedures and initiatives.
7.2 Need Based Services
∙ Independent and decentralized vigilance: At the moment Vigilance
department needs to take many approvals to initiate any serious actions. This hampers investigation of cases and taking action in case of those found guilty. The Vigilance department should be given greater power so that it is far more effective. At the same time adequate care must be taken to ensure that the innocents are not victimized.
∙ Reduce “middlemen” role: The role of middle men could be reduced by
simplifying procedures and developing standard formats For example
standard templates of agreement to sell or power of attorney could be made available to citizens. Wherever they cannot be totally avoided, then license them (like document writers) and take strict action if they indulge in corrupt practices.
∙ Separate regulation & service functions: In most of these departments
there is no clear separation between regulatory and service function. For
example, Municipalities (Town planning) are responsible for both evolving
building rules and also approving plans. This results in drafting rules with
certain loopholes.
∙ Training of staff: Regular training need to be provided to Staff on various aspects like how to deal with citizens, manage stress and keep pace with advances in technology, so that the staff is more service oriented.
∙ Role of RWA: RWAs could be involved as partners in delivery of various
services. For example ward committees in Mumbai and involvement of
communities in Policing in Punjab have proved useful. These have been dealt in detail in service specific chapters.
Questionnaire:
- Which State has highest Composite Index in India?
Ans. Bihar
- Which State has the lowest Composite Index in India?
Ans. Kerala
-
What is the full form of C.M.S. ?
Ans. Content Management System.
-
What is the full form of R.F.I.?
Ans. Rural Financial Institution.
- Which department is considered to be most corrupt part of the survey ?
Ans. Police
-
What is the full form of P.D.S. ?
Ans. Public distribution system
-
What is the full form of S.E.R.C. ?
Ans. State Electricity Regulatory Commission.
-
What is the full form of T.R.A.I ?
Ans. Telecom regulatory Authority Of India
-
What is the full form of R.W.A. ?
Ans. Residents Welfare Association.
- Name any one component of ‘3D’ Corruption model ?
Ans. Perception (Estimation, Experience)
- How much cities did survey cover?
Ans. 151
- Averagely how much people were interviewed from each state?
Ans. 525-950
-
What is the full form of TII ?
Ans. Transparency International India
- In which years this survey was done?
Ans. 2004-05
- How much percent of people think that corruption is on decline ?
Ans. 10%
- How much Bribe did the common citizens of the country pay?
Ans. Rs. 21,068 crores
- What is the main moto of the survey ?
Ans. Corruption experienced by common man.
- In which two groups the departments are divided for the survey ?
Ans. A) need based, B) basic services
- Which three departments are considered to be most corrupt ?
Ans. Judiciary, Police & Land Administration.
- Which is the second most corrupt department among Basic Public Services ?
Ans. Electricity Service.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
- www.churumuri.wordpress.com
- www.scribd.com