How IT can help war on corruption...

Last weekend, over a candle-lit dinner at the Westview restaurant on the Maurya's rooftop in Delhi, Nandan Nilekani discussed with some of us the ins and outs of his ambitious book, "Imagining India," which is due to hit the markets this week. This tome is an effort by the co-chairman of Infosys Technologies - arguably the showpiece of reforming India - to turn an elder statesman in matters related to governance.

The scene was surreal, because we discussed poverty, corruption and such murky issues in a five-star ambience. Some loud Turkish music coming from the lawns provided a metaphorical contrast.

It is not easy to have a quiet dinner amidst the din, and it is not easy to carry big ideas, however rational and well-researched, into the hurly-burly of a huge society. But make no mistake, this dinner was no exercise in self-delusion or simple book promotion.

The well-researched book, in which Nilekani sounds more like a painstaking reporter or systematic programmer than an armchair intellectual, also provides valuable ideas on how information technology can turn the tide for the poor. Loaded with examples, Nilekani's book offers a blueprint in which IT can help fight corruption, reduce bureaucracy and make citizens empowered.

I have witnessed some as a journalist, such as the fingerprint-linked computerization of land records in Karnataka which has made it easy for farmers to get simple proofs of ownership and avoid exploitative encroachment. To my somewhat cynical question on how public-private partnerships (which he likes) can potentially over-ride transparency, he responded by pointing out to how IT can address it.

Nilekani recommends a "national grid" of information, much like interlinked power grids, and "national information utilities" (NIUs) which - functioning like the National Stock Exchange - can bring in transparency and ease of use. We had an example last week when the telecom regulator simply referred to its Internet site to answer a letter from the Central Vigilance Commissioner on questions about irregularities.

"NIUs would be databases that mass information, streamlining it for the government, and also making it more accessible and transparent for citizens," says Nilekani. "NIUs offer us a new kind of governance model - one that is scalable, with a single point of accountability, and where the amount of information available maintains a balance of power between the citizens and the government.

" Clearly, there is much more to IT than gizmos, corporate efficiency and software exports. And it has only just started.

CORRUPTION PERCEPTION INDEX-INDIA

Transparency International India
Registered under the Societies Registration Act 1860, Delhi
the coalition against corruption
BALWANTRAI MEHTA VIDYA BHAWAN -ASMA, GREATER KAILASH, PART II,
NEW DELHI-110 048, INDIA
Tel. : +91-11-29224519, 26460826 Telefax : 26460825,
Email : tiindia.newdelhi@gmail.com Website: www.transparencyindia.org

PRESS RELEASE

Corruption Perception Index – 2008

India – Marginally more corrupt in CPI-2008

New Delhi, Sept. 23:

India with an integrity score of 3.4 (versus 3.5 in 2007 and a ranking of all 85th instead of 72 out of 180 countries) is perceived to be marginally more corrupt than in the earlier two years when its integrity score was 3.3 and 3.5 respectively. India and China were on par till last year. This year China has remained at 72 with a marginally higher integrity score of 3.6.

With the exception of Bhutan, which has a score of 5.2,. India with 3.4 is still at the top of all CPI in South Asia.

One wonders whether bundles of currency notes being displayed in Parliament during the Confidence Vote Debate in July could have influenced such an assessment.

Transparency International India, has been pressing for the passage of the Lok Pal Bill, the Corrupt Public Servants (Forfeiture of Property) Bill and other progressive measures like the ratification of the UNCAC. Our political establishment has shown no will to address these measures which would influence India’s standing in the world community and show that it is serious about combating corruption.

Nearly half of the countries have scored three or even lower points; a clear indication that corruption is perceived to be rampant. Haiti, Iraq, Myanmar and Somalia have recorded the lowest score of less than 1.5.

The declining performance of some wealthy exporting countries in tackling corruption shows their failure to honor their commitment to put an end to the questionable methods of their companies in acquiring and managing domestic and overseas businesses. These methods include the role of money in politics.

Transparency International has found that a strong correlation between corruption and poverty continues to exist, jeopardizing the global fight against poverty and threatening to derail the UN Millennium Development Goals.

Some of TI India’s Initiatives:

Transparency International India (TII) has been actively engaged in the campaign against corruption, together with other civil society organizations like Lok Sewak Sangh, MKSS, Parivartan, Public Affairs Centre, Campaign for Judicial Accountability & Reforms, Citizens’ Forum Against Corruption, Association for Democratic Reforms, Lok Satta etc.



Integrity Pact (IP) : one of the possible reasons why India improved its integrity score in 2006 and 2007 is the success of the IP procedures aimed at bringing about greater transparency and integrity between buyer and seller, eliminating external interventions, improving a sense of ethics, and reducing the number of representations/complaints from bidders and contractors. TII has, therefore, been espousing the need for the adoption of the Integrity Pact (IP) in public contracting & procurements. Whereas 28 PSUs have so far agreed to implement it, regrettably the govt.-nominated directors on the boards of some of the PSUs have shown reluctance to do so. The power sector is the one area where not a single PSU has introduced the IP despite the advisories by the CVC.

It is heartening to note that the Ministry of Defence has adopted IP for all procurements of Rs. 100 crores and above and Rs. 20 crores for the Public Sector Enterprises (PSEs) of the Ministry. So far, the defence sector’s track record has been marred by allegations of corrupt deals. If the planned procurement of defence equipment goes through the IP procedures, India’s CPI integrity score will receive a big boost.

Lok Pal : The bill to appoint a Lok Pal has been introduced in Parliament on eight occasions and allowed to lapse for reasons not difficult to understand.
This demonstrates total lack of political will. It is pertinent to mention that the Second Administrative Reforms Commission has also recommended the constitution of the Rashtriya Lokayukta.

Ratification of UNCAC: It is ironical that global financial centers, located in the wealthy countries with top scores on the CPI, allow corrupt officials to move, hide and invest their illegally gained wealth through offshore facilities and money laundering. However, TI India had been pursuing the matter with the concerned authorities. But there is no response. The issue would continue to be pursued as it is in the interest of the financial health of the country.

Admiral (Retd) R H Tahiliani
Chairman, Transparency International India
Website: www.transparencyindia.org

RTI- APPLICATION-LICHTENSTEIN'S LTG BANK

Dated: 28.05.2008

TO,
The Public Information Officer,
Prime Minister’s Office,
South Block, New Delhi

Sub : Application under Right to Information Act, 2005

Dear Sir,

Attached report of Times of India dated 21.05.2008 says that though the German
Government is willing to part with the list of account holders in Liechtenstein’s LTG Bank,
GOI is hesitant in accepting it. In this regard, please provide following information:

1. Has GOI already decided not to accept the above list? If yes, reason for the same.

2. Please provide copies of all correspondence between GOI and German Government in
this regard.

3. Please give a list of the Ministries/Departments dealing with this subject. Kindly forward
a copy of this RTI application to all these Ministries/Departments under section 6 (3) of
RTI Act. I would be grateful if I am informed of the same.

4. Please give a list of all the files in PMO dealing with this subject. I would like to
inspect these files, including file notings. Kindly intimate date and time when I can come
for inspection.

5. Section 2 (f) of RTI Act reads as follows:
“information” means any material in any form, including records, documents and
information relating to any part private body which can be accessed by a public authority
under any other law for the time being in force.

The list contains names of some private bodies. Since the GOI now has the power and
opportunity to obtain this list, the said list is covered under the definition of “information”.

It should therefore, be obtained by GOI and made public.

I am separately attaching Rs. 10/- postal order no. as application fee.

Your sincerely
Anupama Jha

Transparency International India
Lajpat Bhawan, Qr. No. IV,
Lajpat Nagar IV, New Delhi – 110024



Dated : 14.07.08

To
Mrs Pragya Sahay Saksena,
Director (FT&TR-I) & Appellate Authority,
Room No 908, Hudco Vishala Building,
14, Bhikaji Cama Place,
New Delhi – 66

Sub: First appeal under RTI Act in the case of information regarding tax evaders from
German Government

Dear Madam,

I had sought certain information under RTI Act, copy of which is enclosed. In point no 2 of
the said application, I had sought copies of all correspondence between GOI and German
Government on the subject. In point no 5, I had requested the Indian Government to obtain the information about tax evaders from German Government and provide it to me under section 2(f) of RTI Act. However, information for these two points has not been provided to me.

The PIO, in his reply dated 25.6.08, has quoted the “Exchange of information” Article of the India/Germany DTAA to claim exemption from disclosure of information. The said article reads as follows:

ARTICLE 26 - Exchange of information - 1. The competent authorities of the
Contracting States shall exchange such information as is necessary for carrying out
the provisions of this Agreement. Any information received by a Contracting State
shall be treated as secret in the same manner as information obtained under the
domestic laws of that State and shall be disclosed only to persons or authorities
(including courts and administrative bodies) involved in the assessment or collection
of, the enforcement or prosecution in respect of, or the determination of appeals in
relation to, the taxes covered by this Agreement. Such persons or authorities shall use
the information only for such purposes. They may disclose the information in public
court proceedings or in judicial decisions.

2. In no case shall the provisions of paragraph 1 be construed so as to impose on a
Contracting State the obligation :

(a) to carry out administrative measures at variance with the laws and
administrative practice of that or of the other Contracting State ;

(b) to supply information which is not obtainable under the laws or in the
normal course of the administration of that or of the other Contracting State ;
and

(c) to supply information which would disclose any trade, business,
industrial, commercial or professional secret or trade process, or information,
the disclosure of which would be contrary to public policy (ordre public).
After quoting the said article, the PIO has sought exemption under clause (a) and (f) of
section 8(1) of RTI Act. Section 8(1)(a) reads as follows:

“information, disclosure of which would prejudicially affect the sovereignty and
integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the State,
relation with foreign State or lead to incitement of an offence.”

Section 8(1)(f) reads as follows:
“information received in confidence from foreign Government”

My objections to PIO’s refusal to provide information is as follows:

1. In point no 2, I have just sought copies of correspondence between Indian
Government and German Government. According to media reports, though the
German Government is willing to part with the list of accountholders in
Liechtenstein’s LTG Bank, the GOI is hesitant in accepting it. I am interested in
finding out what was the offer of the German Government? What was Indian
Government’s response thereto? How could this correspondence be covered under
Article 26 of DTAA? Did German Government write in their letter that they were
writing that letter under Article 26 and that the same should be treated as confidential?
Did German Government say that disclosure of the said letters would affect India’s
relations with the German Government? If not, then why is the Indian Government so
hesitant in disclosing it?

2. At point no 5, I have requested that the said list be obtained from German
Government and be disclosed. I am not commenting on this issue at this stage and
reserve the right to plead later after going through the said correspondence.
I would therefore request you to direct the PIO to provide the said correspondence
immediately. I would be grateful if I am provided an opportunity of personal hearing should you decide to reject my prayer.

With best regards
Yours sincerely,
(Anupama Jha)

Transparency International India,
Lajpat Bhawan,Qr.No IV
Lajpat Nagar IV, New Delhi - 110024