Reforming the Cockatoo Bureau of Investigation, aka CBI

Of all the acronyms that Indian public associate with investigation, CBI (Central Bureau of Investigation) is the most common. However, if its functioning is anything to go by, the motto ‘Industry, Impartiality, Integrity’ would be one of the longest-running jokes in the history of the country.

Over the decades, the agency that was originally established to tackle corruption and serious crimes meriting attention of the Central government has been turned into a tool of political coercion and vendetta. Any political leader, business house and organisation that fell foul of the ruling establishment have learned this the hard way.

Once the era of coalitions began at the Centre, the CBI has been used extensively for arm-twisting allies and opponents. There is hardly any major party that has not borne the brunt of this. One day you find the CBI filing cases, chargesheets and talking about ‘clinching evidence’ against a political leader, but once he/she yields to the demands of the Centre the process reverts to snail’s pace.

The investigative agency’s diligent efforts played a crucial role in the success of the ‘carrot and stick’ policy that has made Lalu Prasad Yadav of RJD, Mayawati of BSP, Jayalalithaa of AIADMK and Mulayam Singh Yadav of the SP die-hard supporters of the Congress-led government at the Centre.

“It’s not easy to fight with the government. It has a thousand hands and can use the CBI and put one in jail,” said Mulayam recently. A disproportionate assets case against him and his son has been under investigation by the CBI since 2007 — and he has been a loyal UPA fan ever since.

The exemption to the CBI from the Right to Information (RTI) Act has made it virtually impossible for any independent verification of the legality in its manner of functioning.

Angered by the CBI allowing the PMO and law ministry to make changes to its investigation report on the infamous ‘Coalgate’ scam, the Supreme Court admonished the country’s premier investigating agency for acting shamelessly as a ‘caged parrot’ that repeats after its master — the Central government.

At least two former CBI directors have conceded in interviews that the agency was subject to political influence. Former CBI chief Joginder Singh has gone on the record to say that he was forced out after refusing to be the government’s stick in the Fodder Scam. And the current chief Ranjit Sinha, too, has admitted that autonomy does not exist for the agency.

Embarrassed by the stinging observations of the Supreme Court, the government has formed a group of ministers (GoM) to draft a law to free the caged parrot. One can’t help but be cynical considering the huge number of GoMs and EGoMs and their dismal record of delivering the goods.

An investigating agency that can function independent of political control is the need of the hour.

Unless the Aegean Stables of the CBI is not cleansed of the political filth accumulated over the decades, there is no hope for this country.

(This article was published as the editorial column in Postnoon on May 15, 2013.)

Stabbing the cause from the front

Closely after the Raising Day of the National Security Guard (NSG), several national dailies reported a rather disturbing story of discrimination of women. No. This time it’s not the male chauvinists, but the women leaders who have done their bit.

The NSG has raised a women’s division, given the same training as its men. However, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister J Jayalalithaa and BSP supremo Mayawati have reportedly refused to be protected by these women commandos.

Ironically, both are often cited as examples of women power triumphing in a male-dominated society. Both had towering male mentors and overcame challenges to their authority and consolidated power. As party bosses whose MPs’ support decides the fate of the government, they are also symbols of well-earned power that inspires thousands of women across the country.

However, their refusal to trust the security cover provided by women commandos has damaged the very foundation of the call for equality of women in all professions. Mayawati and Jayalalithaa have indirectly hinted that they don’t consider women commandos as competent as their male counterparts.

Not only have these politicians insulted these brave soldiers, but also they have undermined their own competence to be in positions of power.

Now how can one say Jayalalithaa is as capable as the No 2 in the party or the ministry? How can she be trusted to handle the political and administrative leadership of a crucial southern state?

For Mayawati, the questions would be even more difficult. She is not just a political leader. She is also considered by many as a symbol of empowerment for Dalits (though her biggest project was self-glorification through statues, parks and memorials). How can the Dalit community put its trust in a party and its leader, whose competence is in question because of her gender?

Even worse is the predicament of the premier security agency, whose ‘black cats’ are the most reassuring sight for the VIPs. They have put together a squad of talented, committed and well-trained women. With the VIPs refusing their services and the government policy not permitting their deployment in counter-terrorism operations, they will be reduced to mere showpieces.

Any professional who has spent substantial time ‘on the bench’ will vouch for the crushing feeling of boredom and self-doubt. So, imagine the plight of these brilliant women who have been trained for the most risky field operations, but forced to stay put at their base.

We hear ridiculous comments that degrade women from obsolete institutions like khaps and fringe groups that call themselves moral police. And we attribute little significance to their takes due to their dubious backgrounds and illegal activities.

However, what Mayawati and Jayalalithaa have done is not something that can be ignored that easily. Both must apologise, and accept protection from women commandos.

(This article was published as the editorial column in Postnoon on October 17, 2012)