chapter-chapter --- vivviivi - shodhgangashodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/35901/10/chapter...

CHAPTERCHAPTERCHAPTERCHAPTER---- VIVIVIVI

A CRITICAL STUDY OF WORKING A CRITICAL STUDY OF WORKING A CRITICAL STUDY OF WORKING A CRITICAL STUDY OF WORKING AND FUNCTIONING OF AND FUNCTIONING OF AND FUNCTIONING OF AND FUNCTIONING OF KARNATAKA KARNATAKA KARNATAKA KARNATAKA

LOKAYUKTALOKAYUKTALOKAYUKTALOKAYUKTA

250

CHAPTER VI

A CRITICAL STUDY OF WORKING AND FUNCTIONING OF

KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA

6.1 . INTRODUCTION.

The civil services is formed and operates on the basis of the principles of

professionalism, independence and integrity, political neutrality, transparency, service

to the public, career continuity, accountability and correctness in the application of

binding legislation. The civil service regime is to perform duties abiding by and

respecting the principles and ethical standards established by law, honesty, probity,

rectitude, good faith and republican austerity. The civil servants are expected to serve

for the nation in order to safeguard the interests of the State in all their acts aimed at

the satisfaction of general welfare, and consequently granting a privilege to public

interest over individual interest.

As is increasingly recognised in academic literature and by the various reports of

international organisations, corruption undermines these basic principles of the civil

service and standards of accountability, equity, transparency, concurrence and

reasonability in public affairs. It has economic, political, individual and social-

structural impacts which contribute to generating or exacerbating poverty. It creates

legal insecurity, distorts commercial competition and inhibits the development of the

private sector. It reduces the efficiency and quality of governance and lessens equality

of opportunity for all in the share-out of public goods and services. Moreover,

corruption hinders the creation of democratic legitimacy or leads it astray.

This devastating and rampant corruption calls into question the success of

development policy initiatives in every sphere in which political, administrative and

economic power are acquired and exercised. This makes preventing corruption a cross-

cutting task. But a need still exists for analytical tools and practice-oriented

recommendations for preventing corruption in particular fields of work.

Responding to this need, the aim of the present chapter is to organise and

summarize the intended statistical research work on corruption with a view to

identifying opportunities for further improvements in the performance of Karnataka

251

Lokayukta. Survey-oriented diagnostic studies help identify the pattern and profile of

corruption and facilitate analysis into the institutional weaknesses at the heart of the

problem. The present study aims at strengthening capacity of Karnataka Lokayukta in

support of the implementation of Karnataka’s Anti-corruption Strategy and Action

Plan, in compliance with existing anticorruption laws.

The purpose of this chapter, based on survey findings, and Statistics of

Karnataka Lokayukta, is to present general overview and perspectives on corruption

and its impact on the quality of public services in Karnataka. The research and

subsequent analysis is framed with a particular focus on analysing the current degree

of integrity in describing the quality of various public service providers and to assess

the existing corruption reporting system, prevailing attitudes and the role of the legal

system. The present chapter consist two parts. The first part consist general statistical

and working analysis of Karnataka Lokayukta and the second part is pertaining to the

survey of the findings of non-doctrinal work on the corruption.

6.2 . CRITICAL EVALUATION OF THE WORKING OF KARNATAKA

LOKAYUKTA.

The Karnataka Lokayukta institution is the anti-corruption institutional body

created under the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984 to improve the standards of public

administration, by looking into complaints against the administrative actions, including

cases of corruption, favouritism and official indiscipline in administrative machinery.

The Act provides for the appointment of a Lokayukta and one or more Upalokayukta’s

to investigate and report on allegations or grievances relating to the conduct of public

servants and in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of

every public authority.1 The institution performs these tasks through by conducting

investigations and enquiries in accordance with the provisions of this Act.

In addition to Karnataka Lokayukta institution, there are good numbers of

mechanism which directly or indirectly involving in the eradication of corruption in

India as well as in Karnataka.2 Nonetheless, the Karnataka Lokayukta institution is the

1. Section 3 of The Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984, provides a provision for the appointment of

Lokayukta and Upalokayukta’s. 2. For example, Public procurement system, E-Governance activities such E-Procurement, E-Tendering,

Boomi, audit monitoring system, centralized public grievances redressal mechanisms Right to

Information, SAKALA etc.

252

very professional institution which’s motto is to bring transparency and accountability

in the State administration. The performance profile of Karnataka Lokayukta

institution is as follows:

6.2. A. Registration of the Cases.

The Fight against corruption cannot be started, let alone won, without the active

meaningful support of the public at large. The Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984, has

made specific provision for lodging a complaint of all right thinking people in their

effort to eliminate this scourge. Any member of the public can lodge a complaint with

Karnataka Lokayukta where a complaint involving a grievance or an allegation is

made in respect the administrative action. The following table indicates the number of

cases registered before Karnataka Lokayukta institution since 2000 to 2012.

REGISTRATION OF THE CASES.

TABLE- I.

Year Number of cases

registered U/PCA,

1988

2000 65

2001 211

2002 151

2003 115

2004 110

2005 276

2006 353

2007 345

2008 486

2009 511

2010 582

2011 675

Total 3880

Source: Karnataka Lokayukta.

253

REGISTRATION OF THE CASES.

FIGURE- I.


The above Figure-1 shows the trend of registration of cases with Karnataka

Lokayukta institution. For the sake of analysis, 2005 to 2011 data has been derived

from the above Table-1. In 2005 the cases registered with Lokayukta were 206 and the

same stood at 675 in 2011. The average increase of the registered cases per year is 79.

Even though the curve shows the increasing trend of the registered cases with

Karnataka Lokayukta Institution, it is apparent from the above analysis that the

increasing trend is very negligible. It is also evident from the above Table-1 and

Figure-1 that the increase of the cases in the consecutive year is indifferent. For

instance, the increases of the cases, during 2007-2008 are very indeclinable on the

other hand the difference during 2006-2007 is by only 7 cases.

6.2. B. Department Wise Cases Registered.

The research work has chosen various agencies which deliver various kinds of

services to citizens of Karnataka. The researcher has chosen the departments which are

very familiar to lay man and certain departments which are closely associated with

educated people. These services encompass personal services such as health and

education as well as public services such as police and justice / Courts. Some of these

services have low contact with the average citizen (customs) others have high level of

contact such as Health department and Police. Furthermore, some have a poor

reputation and are seen as corrupt. Others enjoy a relatively favourable reputation.

Based on statistics obtained from the Lokayukta institution, the following analysis

demonstrates the major corrupt department in the State.

276353 345

486 511582

675

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Registration of the Cases with K.L

254

DEPARTMENT WISE CASES REGISTERED.

TABLE- II.

Department Cases Registered

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Total

Revenue Department

50 83 88 98 103 131 125 678

Rural Development

and Panchayat

Raj Department

24 31 22 31 48 44 81 281

Home

Department

20 32 50 69 56 50 50 327

Health & family

Welfare

Department

16 24 19 20 13 20 29 141

Education 15 16 12 16 19 11 20 109

Urban

Development

Department

15 19 20 14 18 17 16 119

K P T C L 7 16 13 25 19 19 24 123

Finance 5 13 11 19 17 15 30 110

PWD

Social Welfare

Department

13

10

11

13

8

9

14

11

16

10

13

11

7

8

82

72

Total 10 13 9 11 10 11 8 72


The above Table-2 shows the departmental distribution of corruption cases in the

State. It consist both trap and raid cases initiated by police wing of Karnataka

Lokayukta. Among various departments, Revenue department ranks first and since

2005 to 2012 the department has maintained the same tempo in corrupt activities. The

significant number of cases unearthed by Lokayukta institution in the Revenue

department is a clear sign of continues exploitation of agricultural and poor section of

the society in the State of Karnataka. It is strategically apparent from the above table

that the poor or marginalized section of the society is the actual victims of the

corruption. The revenue department is followed by Home Department, Rural

Development and Panchayat Raj Department, Health & family Welfare, K P T C L,

Urban Development Department, Finance, department of education. Very petty thing

is even the social welfare department which dedicated itself to the socio-economic

development of vulnerable and marginalised section of the society is grossly affected

255

by the problem of corruption. It is a clear sign of clutch of corruption over the socio-

economic policy of the State.

DEPARTMENT WISE CASES REGISTERED.

FIGURE- II.


The following observations are clear from the above Table-2 and Figure-2 that

the departmental distribution of the cases not determined by the Lokayukta as a bulk of

the cases arises out of citizen complaints. In addition, given the growing importance of

the welfare function of the State the overall share of essential functions is likely to

increase rather than decrease.

6.2. C. Registration and Disposal of Trap and Ride Cases.

In addition to the lodging of the complaints from the citizens, the ride and trap

cases of Karnataka Lokayukta constitute significant effort of Lokayukta institution

against corruption in Karnataka. These rides and trap can be initiated either on the

basis of citizen’s complaints or by using its suo moto power.3 The brief profile of these

registrations, of trap, ride and other cases are as follows:

3. Suo moto power was conferred to Karnataka Lokayukta in 2010 by amending The Karnataka

Lokayukta (Amendment) Act, 2010, by amending Section 7(2) of the Act.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

256

PROFILE OF TRAP AND RIDE OTHER CASES.

TABLE-III.

Year Cases

Type

Opening

Balance

1

Registere

d

2

Total

3=(1+2)

Ch-

sheeted

4

B-C Rpt

5

Abate

(before

CS)

6

Transfer

to CBI

7

Dispo

sal

8

UI

(9 = 3 - 8)

(Pending)

PSO

Awaited

(10)

2001 Ride 60 13 73 - - - - 73 0

Trap 35 169 204 15 9 - - 24 180 43

Others 25 1 26 - - 26 0

Total 120 183 303 15 9 - - 24 279 43

2002 Ride 73 9 82 1 - - 1 81 0

Trap 180 117 297 99 4 - - 103 194 32

Others 26 1 27 - - 27 0

Total 279 127 406 99 5 - - 104 302 32

2003 Ride 81 3 84 1 1 - - 2 82 1

Trap 194 81 275 93 9 - - 102 173 29

Others 27 5 32 - - 32 0

Total 302 89 391 94 10 - - 104 287 30

2004 Ride 82 82 82 23 5 - 28 54 17

Trap 173 69 242 242 103 29 - 132 110 22

Others 32 5 37 37 17 - 17 20 1

Total 287 74 361 361 143 34 - 177 184 40

2005 Ride 54 24 78 78 28 1 - 29 49 10

Trap 110 166 276 276 64 6 - 70 206 34

Others 20 30 50 50 2 3 - 5 45 7

Total 184 220 404 404 94 10 - 104 300 51

2006 Ride 49 27 76 8 1 - - 9 67 7

Trap 206 244 450 153 30 - - 183 267 79

Others 45 30 75 7 3 - - 10 65 10

Total 300 301 601 168 34 - - 202 399 96

2007 Ride 67 26 93 7 3 - - 10 83 2

Trap 267 264 531 185 33 - - 218 313 43

Others 65 8 73 12 9 - - 21 52 4

Total 399 298 697 204 45 - - 249 448 49

2008 Ride 83 97 180 13 8 - - 21 159 14

Trap 313 300 613 150 43 - - 193 420 76

Others 52 9 61 8 12 - - 20 41 2

Total 448 406 854 171 63 - - 234 620 92

2009 Ride 159 54 213 30 5 - - 35 178 13

Trap 420 335 755 258 30 - - 288 467 59

Others 41 14 55 5 7 - - 12 43 1

Total 620 403 1023 293 42 - - 335 688 73

2010 Ride 178 41 219 24 1 1 - 26 193 22

Trap 467 357 824 267 40 - - 307 517 90

Other 43 10 53 7 4 - - 11 42 2

Total 688 408 1096 298 45 1 - 344 752 114

2011 Ride 193 32 225 50 6 - - 56 169 12

Trap 517 436 953 360 34 - 2 396 557 91

Others 42 18 60 7 3 - - 10 50 3

Total 752 486 1238 417 43 - 2 462 776 106


257

PROFILE OF RIDE CASES.

FIGURE- III.


PROFILE OF TRAP CASES.

FIGURE- IV.


The Figure-3 and 4 shows the trap and raid cases by the Karnataka Lokayukta.

The Figures briefly provides a look at opening balance and newly registered raid and

trap cases. The balance sheet of raid cases is continuously increasing and comparison

this balance cases with newly registered cases, the later cases are steadily decreased.

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

54 4967

83

159178

193

24 27 26

97

5441

32

78 7693

180

213 219 225

Opening balance Cased registered Total

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Opening balance

Cased registered

Total

258

The opening balance of raid cases on 2005 were 54 and the cases newly registered in

the same year were 24. In the years 2009, 2010 and 2011 witnessed this unfortunate

development of decrease of newly registered cases at strategic level. It is the live

instance of the weakness of the executing authorities of the Karnataka Lokayukta

Institution.

The trap cases Figure stood quite different than the raid cases. The opening

balance and new trap cases are to the maximum extent continued in parallel way. Even

though, it is positive sign in respect of the new trap cases number game, it is certainly a

pathetic position in terms opening balance. It seems from the Figure-4 that the

executing authorities are not much interested in lowering the rate of opening balance

cases and they are very much interested in carrying both balance and new cases in

same line.

PROFILE OF OTHER CASES.

FIGURE- V.


The above Figure 5 illustrates a statistic view of the newly registered and

balances cases, other than the cases coming under ‘trap and raid’ category. In 2005 the

other cases registered under Prevention of Corruption Act, were 20 and the balance

cases were 30. The Figure-5 further asserts that the balance cases list continuously

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

20

45

65

52

41 43 42

30 30

8 9

1410

18

50

75 73 71

55 53

60


259

increasing. Fortunate development is that the increasing balance cases list is slightly

lower than ride and trap cases. The average registration of the ‘new other cases’ from

2005 to 2011 stood at 44 cases per year, on the other hand the average balance of the

‘other cases’ from 2005 to 2011 stood at 17 cases per year.

TOTAL NUMBER OF RIDE/TRAP/OTHER CASES.

FIGURE- VI.


Figure 6 is the consolidation of the Figure 4, 5 and 6. Both the balance cases and

newly registered cases curves have moved up and continuously increasing in terms of

number. But the level of the way they going up are not satisfactory. In 2005, 2006,

2007 and 2008 the newly registered and opening balance of ride, trap and other cases

are very close to each other and there is no much distance in both categories. But,

subsequent years, i.e.2009, 2010, and 2011, witness a quite significant gap between

these two categories of the cases. But, the increasing trend is pertaining to the balance

cases not for the new cases.

184 300 399 448620 688 752

220301 298

406403 408

486

404

601697

854

10231096

1238

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011


260

DISPOSAL OF RIDE CASES.

FIGURE-VII.

Source: Karnataka Lokayukta

DISPOSAL OF TRAP CASES

FIGURE- VIII


The above Figure-7 and 8 exhibits the disposal of ride, trap and other cases by

Karnataka Lokayukta police wing. After the investigation, the Charge Sheet will be

filed by the prosecuting authority. It is delighting fact from the above Figures that

almost all the ride, trap and other cases are successfully investigated by the Lokayukta

Institution. After the filing of the Charge Sheet the facts have turned towards negative

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

28

8 713

3024

50

1 1 38

51

60 0 0 0 0 1 00 0 0 0 0 0 0

29

9 10

21

35

26

56

Charge sheeted B-C Reported Abate Befor CS Transfer to CBI Total

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

64

153

185

150

258 267

360

630 33 43

3040 34

0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 2

70

183

218193

288307

396

Charge sheeted B-C Reported Abate before CS Transfer to CBI Total

261

path. Even though, the good number of cases entered into the Court by way of Charge

Sheet, the ultimate output in terms of disposal is not up to mark.

In 2005, the Charge Sheeted cases were 64 and in 2011 it was 360. The average

Charge Sheeted cases from the year 2005 to 2011 are 205 per year. The Karnataka

Lokayukta is very prominent prosecuting authority in unearthing and executing anti-

corruption laws on corrupt officials. Nonetheless, it doesn’t mean that it is parallel

prosecuting authority to CBI. The Karnataka Lokayukta could have utilized CBI in

complex and grand corruption cases. But it is clear from the above table that so far the

Karnataka Lokayukta institution has not taken such assistance from the CBI except for

two cases in 2011.

DISPOSAL OF OTHER CASES.

FIGURE- IX.


The above Figure-9 shows the disposal of the cases not coming under the ride

and trap categories. The statistics in the table clearly indicates that the ride and trap

cases stood at best number than other cases. The disposal of the other cases is also

stood at distinctive place in B-reported cases. The significant number of the other cases

have been B-reported by the prosecuting authority and the rate is quiet higher than ride

and trap cases.

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

2

7

12

8

5

7 7

3 3

9

12

7

43

0 0 0 0 0 0 00

5

10

2120

1211

10

Charge sheeted B-C Reported Abate before CS Transfer to CBI Total

262

TOTAL DISPOSAL OF RIDE/ TRAP/OTHER CASES.

FIGURE- X.


TOTAL DISPOSAL OF RIDE/ TRAP/OTHER CASES.

FIGURE- XI.


The above Figure-10 and Figure-11 are the consolidation of disposal of trap, ride

and other cases. It is clear from the chart that the majority cases are disposed by the

prosecuting authority by the way of Charge Sheeted cases and the cases undergone

through the B-report, abate before Charge Sheet and cases referred to CBI are steadily

very less in number. The happiest fact from the Table-3 is that disposal of the cases

Colum containing the charge sheeted, B-reported, abated before charge sheet, referred

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Charge sheeted

B-C Reported

Abate before CS

Transfer to CBI

Total

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Charge sheeted

B-C Reported

Abate (before Charge

sheet)

Cases Reffered to CBI

263

to CBI, stood at 100 percent, but it seems as worst if we have a look at total convict

rate.

6.2. D. Process of Investigation.

The autonomy and security of investigations are both important, not only to

encourage and protect those who report corruption or assist in other ways, but also to

ensure that the results of investigations, whether they uncover corruption or not, are

valid and credible. Information derived from investigations should be capable both of

supporting criminal prosecutions and of assisting in the reorganisation of public or

private administration to make these more resistant to corruption. The police wing of

the Karnataka Lokayukta is entrusted with the process of investigation of corruption

cases in Karnataka and brief analysis of this section is as follows:

Cases under Investigation: The number of cases under investigation and the

cases waiting for previous sanction has steadily been increasing since 2005-2011. A

total of 776 cases were under investigation at the end of the year 2011 as against 300

cases under investigation at the end of 2001 and the average yearly increases of the

cases under investigation since 2001 are rising at 47cases per year. The following

Figure-12 and 13 show the comparative figures for the last years and also the level of

the rising at the end of each year.

CASES UNDER INVESTIGATION.

FIGURE- XII.


0

200

400

600

800

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Cases under Investigation

264

CASES UNDER INVESTIGATION.

FIGURE- XIII.


It is evident from the above analysis that adequate training and resources are

necessary to ensure that reported cases are dealt with effectively and to encourage

those aware of corruption to come forward with information. As observed in large

number of cases, informants are more likely to assume the risk of reporting, if they are

confident that effective action against corruption will be the result. Such confidence

requires assurances not only that investigations will themselves be independent and

free of corruption, but also that investigators are actually capable of detecting it,

gathering evidence against offenders, and taking whatever measures are needed to

discipline the offender and to eliminate recurrences.

6.2. E. Criminal Prosecution.

Criminal prosecutions and punishments can effectively remove corrupt officials

from positions where they can commit further offences, and can deter the individuals

involved and others in similar positions. Since much corruption is economic in nature,

and is pre-planned rather than spontaneous, general deterrence is likely to form a

significant part of the criminal justice component of anti-corruption strategies.

Where corruption has gone unpunished, or sanctions have been delayed due to

weak systems and difficulties of obtaining evidence to prove Court cases, parts of

society have developed the perception that corruption is condoned, and tended to

tolerate and participate in petty corruption due to sympathy regarding poor pay and the

300

399448

620688

751 776

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

265

belief that there are those who are involved in more serious corruption but have not

faced serious sanctions because they were not successfully prosecuted. The criminal

prosecution profile of the Karnataka Lokayukta is as follows:

STATISTICS RELATING TO COURT TRIAL CASES SHOWING YEAR WISE CHARGE

SHEET FILED,COURT DISPOSAL, PENDING TRIAL UNDER PC ACT.

TABLE- IV.

Year Charge sheet Filed Court Disposal Pending Trial

2000 113 112 1

2001 150 150 0

2002 182 176 6

2003 141 135 6

2004 155 125 30

2005 106 77 29

2006 182 144 38

2007 221 149 72

2008 164 84 80

2009 291 87 204

2010 312 43 269

2011 427 11 416

2012 135 0 135

Total 2579 1293 1286


The Table-4 shows the disposal of the cases by special Lokayukta Court. The

table shows the combined work of prosecuting authority and Lokayukta Court. The

charge sheeted cases are continuously increasing from year to year and the cases were

106 in 2005 and 427 in 2011. From 2000 to 2012 March 31st total 2579 cases have

been charge sheeted out of which 1293 cases are disposed by the Court and it

constitutes 51 percent of the disposal cases. The status of pending cases is also similar

to Court disposal cases. The pending cases are also increasing year by year. The

pending cases in 2005 were 29 and same was 416 in 2011.

266

STATISTICS RELATING TO COURT TRIAL CASES SHOWING YEAR WISE CHARGE

SHEET FILED,COURT DISPOSAL, PENDING TRIAL UNDER PC ACT.

FIGURE- XIV.


6.2. F. Disposal of the Cases.

During 2000-2011, the courts have delivered verdicts in 1737 Court cases. Out of

these, 331 cases resulted in conviction, 1315 in acquittal, 91 in discharge and 41 cases

were disposed of as abated. The conviction rate stood at 67%. The following Table-5,

Figure-15 and 16 shows the disposal by Courts during the years 2000-2011.

DISPOSAL OF THE CASES.

TABLE –V.

Year

Disposed Cases

Acquitted Discharged Abated Convicted Total

1 2 3 4 5= (1+2+4)

2000 2 0 0 0 2

2001 2 0 0 0 2

2002 1 0 0 0 1

2003 82 6 6 8 96

2004 179 15 2 36 232

2005 185 12 6 43 240

2006 255 6 - 22 283

2007 137 5 4 28 170

2008 99 3 1 17 119

2009 104 11 10 27 142

2010 129 10 7 63 202

2011 140 23 5 87 250

Total 1315 91 41 331 1737


106182 221

164

291 312

427

77

144 14984

87 4311

29

3872

80

204 269

416

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Charege sheet filed cases Court disposal Pending

267


FIGURE- XV.



FIGURE –XVI.


6.2. G. Government Referred Cases to Lokayukta and Upalokayukta.

The Karnataka Lokayukta has the power to investigate the cases where a

complaint involving a grievance or an allegation is made in respect of action of the

public servant. However, the Lokayukta or an Upalokayukta may investigate any

action taken by or with the general or specific approval of a public servant, if it is

referred to the institution by the State Government. The information relating to the

government referred cases was sought from the Karnataka Lokayukta in order to

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Acquited

Discharged

Abated

Convicted

2005 20062007

20082009

20102011

185255

13799 104 129 140

126

53 11

10 23

6 0 4 1 10 7 5

8 36 4322 28

17 27

Acquited Discharge Abated Conviction

268

ascertain the political will and active role of the State Government in the prevention of

the corruption. The above table shows the number of cases referred by the State

Government, disposal and pendency of such cases.

GOVERNMENT REFERRED CASES TO LOKAYUKTA AND UP-LOKAYUKTA.

TABLE- VI.

Year No of Govt.,

referred cases

registered

Disposed Pending

1 2 3 4= (2-3) 2000 9 7 2

2001 24 21 3

2002 14 13 1

2003 11 8 3

2004 10 9 1

2005 11 5 6

2006 6 5 1

2007 6 4 2

2008 12 3 9

2009 2 1 1

2010 6 0 6

2011 17 1 16 Total 128 77 53


The above Table-6 shows that since 2000 to 2011 only 128 cases have been

referred by the State Government to the Lokayukta institution against the complaint

registered by aggrieved persons. It is evident from the above Table that in the year

2001 the State Government has showed significant interest in referring the cases to the

Lokayukta institution. The government had referred 24 cases out of which 21 cases

were disposed by the Lokayukta institution.

In 2009, the government referred only 2 cases to the Lokayukta institution, in

spite of the serious allegations of corrupt activities of the government in the State

during this period. This is also evident from the above Table that the large number of

the government referred cases is still pending before Lokayukta institution. Keeping in

view the urgent need to dispose of these pending Government referred cases

expeditiously, the Lokayukta institution has to be taken appropriate steps. The Figure-

17 &18 below shows the registration of the government referred cases, disposal of

such cases and pending of government referred cases.

269


FIGURE- XVII.



FIGURE- XVIII.


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

11 6 6 12 2 6

5

54

31

0

6

12

91

6

No of Government refered cases registered Disposed of Government refered cases

pending of Government refered cases

11

6 6

12

2

6

175

5 4

3

10

1

6

1 2

9

1

6

16

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Cases Reffered by Government Disposal of Govt., Referred Cases

pending of Govt., Reffered

270

DISPOSAL OF THE GOVERNMENT REFERRED CASES.

TABLE- VII.

Year Action

recommended by

Lok/uplokayukta

U/S 12(3)

Action taken by

CA by

conducting

enquiry by CA

Closed under

other reasons

after 12(3) sent

and after GO

received

Action taken on

12(3) is pending

before

competent

authority

1 2 3 4 5

2000 2 0 1 1

2001 9 1 1 7

2002 8 2 0 6

2003 3 1 0 2

2004 3 0 1 2

2005 4 0 0 4

2006 1 0 0 1

2007 1 0 0 1

2008 1 0 0 1

2009 1 0 0 1 2010 0 0 0 0

2011 1 0 0 1

Total 34 4 3 27


The above Table-7 indicates the disposal of the cases referred by the State

Government to the Lokayukta Institution. During the year 2000-2011, the Karnataka

Lokayukta has recommended action against corrupt officials in 34 cases. In response to

these recommendations, the competent authorities have initiated action against corrupt

officials in 4 cases by conducting departmental enquiries. Colum 5 of the Table-7

indicates the government’s unwillingness and shows the want of political will in

complying with the recommendations recommended by the Lokayukta institution. It is

clear from the Table-7 that the number of pending reports with competent authorities is

going up. This is possibly an indicator of increased effort of the government to protect

the corrupt officials and encourage corrupt activities. The following Figure-19 shows

the disposal of the Government referred cases.

271

DISPOSAL OF THE GOVERNMENT REFERRED CASES.

FIGURE-XIX.4


6.2. H. Suo moto Cases initiated by the Lokayukta and Upalokayukta.

It is very essential to evaluate the Suo moto case profile of the Karnataka

Lokayukta institution as the power is endowed with Lokayukta institution after a long

and hot circus between Karnataka Lokayukta, and the State Government. In addition to

the registration of the complaints from the citizens, the ride and trap cases of

Karnataka Lokayukta constitute significant effort of Lokayukta institution in fight

against corruption in Karnataka. These rides and trap cases can be initiated either on

the basis of citizen’s complaints or by using its Suo moto power5.

When the Suo moto power was removed from the amendment Act 6 , The

Lokayukta institutions senior officers strongly termed that this will seriously cripple

the core functioning of the Lokayukta institution and reduce it to irrelevance. Replying

to the lengthy debate in the legislative assembly on the resignation of Lokayukta

Justice, the then Chief Minister spelt out the government’s intention to amend the

4. Section 12(3) of K.L Act provides the provision for sending investigation report of the allegation

against public servant to the competent authority. It says that “If, after investigation of any action

involving an allegation has been made, the Lokayukta or an Upalokayukta is satisfied that such

allegation is substantiated either wholly or partly, he shall by report in writing communicate his

findings and recommendations along with the relevant documents, materials and other evidence to the

competent authority.” 5. See Supra note 3.

6. When the Karnataka Lokayukta Act was enacted in 1984, the Lokayukta and the Upalokayukta were

both given Suo motu powers to investigate cases. But within six months of the act the Suo motu powers

of the Lokayukta, was removed.

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5

2005

2007

2009

2011

Action taken under 12(3) is pending before competent authority

cases closed under other reasons after report sent U/S 12(3) and GO recived

Action taken by CA by conducting enquiry by CA themselves

Action recommended by Lok/Up-Lokayukta U/S 12(3)

272

Karnataka Lokayukta Act for strengthening the statutory institution endowed with Suo

moto power and same was accorded with the Karnataka Lokayukta (amendment) Act,

2010.7 The brief profile of Suo moto cases are as follows:

PROFILE OF SUO MOTO CASES.

TABLE- VIII.

Year No of Suo Moto cases

registered

Disposed Pending

1 2 3 4= (2-3)

2000 14 14 0 2001 8 8 0

2002 19 19 0

2003 2 2 0

2004 12 12 0

2005 600 505 95

2006 2530 2214 316

2007 967 747 220

2008 577 355 222

2009 201 85 116

2010 73 49 24

2011 305 185 120 Total 5308 4195 1113


It is evident from the above Table-8 that the numbers of Suo moto cases are on

fluctuated way. During 2000- 2011 the Karnataka Lokayukta has registered 5308 Suo

moto cases and the Table-8 apparently exhibits that 2006 had recorded highest Suo

moto cases registered with Karnataka Lokayukta. In the year 2010, the Karnataka State

Government was well known for its corrupt officials and politicians. However, the

number of the cases initiated under Suo moto power has decreased in these years.

During the year 2006-2010, the number of registration of the cases under Suo moto

power has gone down slightly in comparison to the same during last few years.

7. Mr.Santhosh Hegde had resigned as Karnataka Lokayukta on 23

rd June 2011 in disgust against the

non-cooperation by the State Government in his crusade against corruption. Addressing a press

conference after resignation, Mr.Santhosh Hegde cited three reasons for his resignation: non-

appointment of the Upalokayukta for the past six months because of which thousands of complaints had

piled up; reinstating officers suspended following the Lokayukta's recommendation to the same post

after a few months; and a recent recommendation made to the Chief Secretary by a Minister to suspend

the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Karwar, who, on the directions of the Lokayukta, had seized eight

lakh tonnes of iron ore illegally transported to Belekeri port. After 10 days he withdraws the resignation

heeding appeals by the top political leaders. see The Hindu. "Santhosh Hegde resings a Karnataka

Lokayukta" The Hindu . Bangalore. (24th

June 2010).

273

During 2009-2011, the absolute number of the Suo moto cases is registered with

the Karnataka Lokayukta. This ordinarily should have gone up and thus the relative

change would have gone up in view of increased corrupt activities among its

government functionaries. However, facts emerging from the Karnataka Lokayukta

regarding number of Suo moto cases registered with Lokayukta institution during

2008-2011, certainly amount to the institutional inefficiency and it requires urgent

effective action on the part of Karnataka Lokayukta to ensure proper utilization of Suo

moto power. Even though, the working and functioning of the Lokayukta institution in

terms of Suo moto power is not up to the expected level, the performance of the

institution in disposing the registered Suo moto cases is quite satisfactory. The Figure-

20 and 21 below show the handling of Suo moto cases corrupt activities of the public

servants.

PROFILE OFSUOMOTO CASES.

FIGURE- XX.


PROFILE OFSUOMOTO CASES.

FIGURE- XXI.


0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

600

2530

967 577 201 73 305

505

2214

747

35585 49

185

95

1

2

9

1 616

Suo moto cases registered Suo moto cases disposed Suo moto cases pending

600

2530

967

577

20173

3050

0

0

0

00

00

0

0

00 0

0

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

274

Disposal of Suo moto cases initiated by Lokayukta and Upalokayukta:

The Table-10 below shows the manner in which the Suo moto cases are disposed

off. In 363 cases the actions have been recommended by Karnataka Lokayukta under

Section 12(3) to the competent authorities. In response to these recommendations, the

competent authorities have entrusted enquiry of the cases to the Lokayukta in 296

cases and in 18 cases the competent authorities themselves have initiated actions by

conducting departmental enquiry. The following Table-9 and Figure-22 shows the

manner of disposal of the Suo moto cases registered with Karnataka Lokayukta

institution.

DISPOSAL OF SUOMOTO CASES.

TABLE- IX.

Year Action

recommended

U/S 12(3)

Action taken by

CA by entrusting

enquiry to

Lok/Uplokayukta

Action taken by

CA by

conducting

enquiry by CA

Action taken

on 12(3) is

pending before

competent

authority 1 2 3 4 5

2001 1 0 1 0

2002 9 8 1 0

2003 1 1 - 0

2004 8 8 0 0

2005 22 13 5 4

2006 21 18 3 0

2007 45 37 5 3

2008 21 17 3 1

2009 34 34 0 0

2010 37 35 0 2

2011 164 125 0 39 Total 363 296 18 49


DISPOSAL OF SUOMOTO CASES.

FIGURE- XXII.


0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Action taken on 12(3)is pending

before competent authority

Action taken by CA by

conducting enquiry by CA

themselve

Action taken by CA by

entrusting enquiry to Lok/Up-

Lokayukta

Action recommended U/S 12(3)

275

6.2. I. Reports Details Sent by the Lokayukta to the CA under Section 12(1),8

12(3),92(5)

10 of Karnataka Lokayukta Act.

The Karnataka Lokayukta institution is the recommending authority to the

government against grievances and malpractices of the public servants. After enquiry

of the cases, the Lokayukta institution can recommend possible recommendations to

the concerned government department and it is up to the government department to

implement or initiate action according to the report. The success of the Lokayukta

institution and possibility of the prevention of corruption is significantly rooted in this

power of the Karnataka Lokayukta.

The Table-10 below shows the various reports sent by Karnataka Lokayukta,

reports pending before Lokayukta and Upalokayukta and compliance reports sent by

competent authorities to the Lokayukta and Upalokayukta.

REPORTS DETAILS SENT BY THE LOKAYUKTA TO THE CA UNDER SECTION 12(1),

12(3), 12(5) OF K.L., ACT, 1984.

TABLE- X.

Years Reports sent by Lok/Upalokayukta to

the CA , U/S 12(1) 12(3)

12(5)

Reports pending before CA, sent by

Lok/Upalokayukta U/S

12(1) 12(3) 12(5

Compliance reports sent by CA to Lok/Uplokayukta

U/S 12(1) 12(3) 12(5)

1 2 3 4

12(1) 12(3) 12(5) 12(1) 12(3) 12(5)

2001 13 68 1 5 3 0 8

2002 12 72 0 2 5 0 10

2003 11 118 2 5 5 1 6

2004 7 71 1 2 6 1 5

2005 6 109 1 4 12 0 2

2006 12 133 2 5 13 0 7

2007 21 190 3 11 27 0 8

2008 22 147 1 8 18 1 14

2009 12 227 1 11 24 1 1

2010 2 186 0 1 37 0 1

2011 1 202 0 0 51 0 1

Total 119 1523 12 54 201 4 63


8. Section 12(1) of K.L Act provides that the Lokayukta Institution should send a report of investigation

of the grievance to the competent authority. The Section 12(1) of the K.L Act, 1984 mandates that after

investigation the Lokayukta or an Upalokayukta is satisfied grievance resulted in injustice or undue

hardship to the complainant or to any other person, the Lokayukta or an Upalokayukta shall, by a report

in writing, recommend to the competent authority concerned that such injustice or hardship shall be

remedied or redressed in such manner and within such time as may be specified in the report. 9. Supra not 5.

10. Section 12(5) of K.L Act provides that the Lokayukta Institution may send a special report relating

to non-compliance of its report sent under Section 12(1) and 12(3) of the K.L Act to competent

authority for its action.

276

It can be witnessed from the above Table-10 that among three categories of the

reports under Section 12, i.e., 12(1), 12(3) and 12(5), reports sent under Section 12(3)

stood at first place. Under this Section between 2001-2011, 1536 cases have been sent

and it constitutes 92 percent of the total cases sent during 2001-2011 under Section 12

of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984. The following Figure-23 shows the overall

profile of the reports sent by the Karnataka Lokayukta to the Government.

REPORTS SENT BY LOKAYUKTA UNDER SECTION 12

FIGURE- XXIII.


REPORTS SENT BY LOKAYUKTA UNDER SECTION 12 OF K.L., ACT

FIGURE- XXIV.


0

50

100

150

200

250

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

6 12 21 22 12 2 1

109133

190

147

227

186202

1 2 3 1 1 0 0

Reports sent by Lok/Upalokayukta to the CA , U/S 12(1)



0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Reports sent by

Lok/Upalokayukta to the

CA , U/S 12(5)

Reports sent by


CA , U/S 12(3)

Reports sent by


CA , U/S 12(1)

277

PENDING REPORTS BEFORE COMPETENT AUTHORITIES, SENT UNDER SECTION 12

FIGURE- XXV.


PENDING REPORTS BEFORE COMPETENT AUTHORITIES, SENT UNDER SECTION 12

FIGURE-XXVI.


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Reports pending before CA, sent

by Lok/Up-Lokayukta U/S 12(1)

Reports pending before

CA, sent by Lok/Upalokayukta

U/S 12(3)

Reports pending before

CA, sent by Lok/Upalokayukta

U/S 12(5)

4 5

118

11

1 0

1213

27

18

2437

51

00

0

1

10

0

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Reports pending before CA, sent by Lok/Up-Lokayukta U/S 12(1)

Reports pending before CA, sent by Lok/Upalokayukta U/S 12(3)

Reports pending before CA, sent by Lok/Upalokayukta U/S 12(5)

278

TOTAL REPORTS SENT BY LOK/UP-LOKAYUKTA TO THE CA, U/S 12 AND TOTAL

REPORTS PENDING BEFORE CA, SENT BY LOK/UP-LOKAYUKTA U/S 12.

FIGURE- XXVII.


Compliance of the Reports.

After the report received from the Lok/Upalokayukta, the competent authority

receiving report is under obligation to take necessary action against corrupt officials on

the basis of Lokayukta or Upalokayukta report. The calculation of ultimate

effectiveness and success of this premier institution lies at the compliance reports sent

by competent authorities to the Lokayukta institution. It appears from the Colum 4 of

the Table 10 that the compliance reports sent by the competent authorities to the

Lokayukta institution are very meguer in number. The analysis is clear indication of

the respect given by the competent authorities to the premier anti-corruption institution

in the State.

116

147

214

169

240

188203

16 18

3827

36 3851

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Total reports sent by Lok/Up-Lokayukta U/S 12

Total reports pending before competent authority

279

TOTAL COMPLIANCE REPORT BY CA TO THE LOKAYUKTA REPORTS SENT U/S 12

FIGURE- XXVIII.


The recommendations based on thorough investigation is to be implemented

effectively with the objective of the improving the standard of administration and the

welfare of the common person in the State. Unfortunately, the Government of

Karnataka and various government departments are not eager for this. The Karnataka

Lokayukta institution, being mere recommendatory body has no teeth to proceed

further in such situation. This legislative lacunae has to be addressed adequately and

Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984 should suitably amended on the line that if the

government not complied the report then the layman will have the right to go to Court.

Otherwise, the objectives of the establishment will be failed and it will be the show

case toy of the State.

6.2. SURVEY FINDINGS.

Recognizing the need for information on the profile of corruption, the researcher

has adopted this chapter by conducting diagnostic study of corruption. The survey is

designed to measure to understand the opinion of general public on existing corruption

practices and how lack of values and ethics contribute to continuance of corruption in

Karnataka. The opinions and experiences are very potential for the development of a

well-informed anticorruption strategy. Survey data reflect the opinions and real

experiences of the people who interact with the State and executing authorities.

The survey encompassed interviews with 226 Karnataka people. As it is

practically not possible to assess the opinion of mass population during the research,

2

78

14

1 1

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

280

the researcher has confined the strength of the respondents to above number.

Interviewer spent 30 days questioning citizens about their perceptions of corruption

and Lokayukta institution. Many respondents had little or no understanding of the

concept of corruption at the beginning of the survey. As is the case with many surveys,

interviewees were educated to a certain extent by the survey process. The survey is

comprehensive, comprising 78 questions, some of them with multiple parts and several

additional demographic parts. The citizens’ perceptions of corruption were surveyed

from almost every conceivable angle.

The questionnaire was structured to monitor and evaluate the knowledge of

respondents, attitudes and practices relating to corruption and corrupt practices. The

survey was designed to provide specific data to be used by researcher in developing

evaluation plans, such as public awareness of the existence of Karnataka Lokayukta

and its purpose, Karnataka Lokayukta’s impact in terms of reporting corruption,

sensitivity and involvement of citizens in governance, public perceptions regarding

other anti-corruption institutions, media use and awareness and perceptions of the role

of NGOs in fighting corruption. The overall goal of the survey was to measure the

perceived degree of bribery and corruption in Karnataka so as to inform and direct

policy makers and anti-corruption institution i.e. Karnataka Lokayukta in the State.

The study has the following objectives:

(a) To find out ordinary people’s perceptions of the extent of corruption in the

State, their experiences in dealing with bribery and their recommendations as to

how to curb corruption.

(b) To find out the most perceived corrupt institution and categories of individual

perpetrators of bribery and corruption as an early warning system for remedial

action.

(c) To find out the underlying reasons for corruption so as to assist design policies

to address the canker.

(d) To find out the public’s perceptions on government’s commitment to the fight

against corruption.

(e) To assess the public’s knowledge of key institutions in the fight against

corruption as a way of soliciting their support and motivate them to take up

corruption cases.

281

6.3. A. The Respondents Characteristic.

This section provides information on the characteristics of the people

interviewed in this survey, such as age, occupation and gender. With reference to

following tables, such information is indeed crucial for identification of target groups

of anti-corruption prevention programs. Furthermore, depending upon the extent of

understanding of corruption, target groups can be identified for future advocacy and

educational programs.

6.3. A (a).Size of the Sample.

The Chapter is based on the random survey conducted in the State of Karnataka.

Given the sensitive nature of the subject of corruption, some respondents were

unwilling to answer questions resulting in non-response for some of the respondents.

This is despite the consistent reassurances to the interviewees on study confidentiality.

The sample population of 250 was spread across the State, against which 226

responded. The respondents whose consent to be answered for the reliable information

on corruption have made this thesis effective.

The fieldwork was conducted between 25th

May to 25th

October 2012. The

concept and methodology for the study were finalized after extensive consultations

with my guide and those familiar with the surveys covered. The difference in the actual

turn out of participation could be attributed to the lack of awareness about corruption,

lengthy and difficult questionnaire, sensitivity of the subject, time constraint, etc.

6.3. A (b).Sex of the Respondents.

SEX OF THE RESPONDENTS.

TABLE-I

Sex NO

Male 128

Female 98

Total 226

Source: Primary data.

282

SEX OF THE RESPONDENTS.

FIGURE- I.


Out of 226 respondents, the majority of respondents 128 (79%) were male and 98

respondent (21%) of the sample were female.

6.3. A (c).Occupation of Distribution.

As depicted below in Table-1, the students constituted the largest number of

respondents 33.62%, followed by general public 26.10%, and private employees

23.00%. The share of government employees is at 17.25%.

OCCUPATION OF DISTRIBUTION.

TABLE- II.

Occupation Number of Respondents Percentage

Students 76 33.62%

Government Employees 39 17.25%

General Public 59 26.10%

Private sector Employees 52 23.00%

Total 226 100%

Source: Primary data

Male

57%

Female

43%

283

OCCUPATION OF THE RESPONDENTS.

FIGURE- II.


6.3. A (d).Age Distribution.

The age of the respondents are grouped into three categories as follows: Below

25 years, 26-40 years and above 40 years. Majority of the respondents belonged to the

age group of 26-40 years with 51.72%. Respondents aged below 25 years comprised

33.0 % and aged above 40 years comprised only 14.77%.

AGE DISTRIBUTION.

TABLE- III.

Age Number of Respondents Percentage

Below 25 82 36.28%

26-40 years 112 49.55%

Above 40years 30 13.27%

Age not stated 02 0.88%

Total 226 100%


AGE DISTRIBUTION

FIGURE- III


34%

17%26%

23%

Students Government Employess

General Public Private sector Employess

Below 25

36%

26-40 years

50%

Above 41

years

13%

Age not stated

1%

284

6.3. B. Corruption, Government and Civil Society.

The surveys provide information on both actual experiences with corruption and

on perceptions of the level of corruption. The patterns of corruption as perceived by

households, enterprises, and public officials will be explored in this Section. Even

though perceptions of the level of corruption may be different from the reality, an

understanding of these perceptions is still important since perceptions form the basis

for decision-making.

6.3. B (a).How do you describe the general situation since independence?

The first several questions in the survey attempted to draw out respondents’

general perceptions about the situation in India as well as in Karnataka. It was put in

following question, “How do you describe the general situation since independence?”

More than a 28.76 % of the respondents perceive that there has been somewhat

significant progress and 43.80 of the respondents viewed that very significant progress

in the general situation. Another 19.23% had a less optimistic viewpoint and a

noteworthy segment perceived little or no progress.

GENERAL SITUATION SINCE INDEPENDENCE.

TABLE- IV.

Description Number of Respondents Percentage

Very significant progress 99 43.80%

Somewhat significant progress 65 28.76%

Little progress 18 7.96%

No progress 25 10.83%

Not responded to question 19 8.40%

Total 226 100%


GENERAL SITUATION SINCE INDEPENDENCE.

FIGURE- IV.

43.80% 28.76%7.96% 10.83% 8.40%

General situation since Independence

285

6.3. B (b).How are you satisfied with the overall situation?

SATISFACTION WITH POST INDEPENDENT PERIOD.

TABLE- V.

Description Number of respondents percentage

Very satisfied 26 11.50%

Somewhat satisfied 65 28.76%

Somewhat dissatisfied 71 31.41%

Very dissatisfied 46 20.35%

Respondents not respond 18 7.96%

Total 226 100%


The above question, “How are you satisfied with the overall situation in

Karnataka?” elicited a more positive response. The 11.50% and 28.76% of the

respondents are very satisfactory or somewhat satisfied. The 31.41% and 20.35 % are

somewhat or very dissatisfied with this post-independence period. Around 8% of the

respondents have not answered this question. Even though, the State has marked vital

developments in various sectors, it is very clear from the above analysis that the

majority of the respondents are very comfortable with post-independence period.

SATISFACTION WITH POST INDEPENDENT PERIOD.

FIGURE- V.


6.3. B (c).Which of the following is the most important problem facing in the

society in recent days?

In subsequent survey the respondents were given a list of problems facing in the

State, and were asked to select what they believe are the most important problem.

Poverty, illiteracy, unemployment, corruption, terrorism, public instability, food

security and caste system and these are all, were the most commonly listed problems.

0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%

286

MOST IMPORTANT PROBLEM OF THE SOCIETY.

TABLE- VI.


Poverty 14 6.19%

Illiteracy 9 3.98%

Unemployment 44 19.46%

Corruption 24 10.61%

Terrorism 2 0.88%

Political instability 9 3.98%

Food security 10 4.42%

Caste system 28 12.38%

Above all 86 38.05%

Total 226 100%


Certain burning issues were listed in the questionnaire and respondents were

asked to choose the most important issue among these burning issues of the society.

Majority of the respondents (19.46%) of the respondents graded unemployment as the

major problem of the contemporary society. The second place acquired by the caste

system with 12.38% respondents support. The problem of corruption is at third place

with 10.61% respondents’ consent. According to survey findings, the fourth place goes

to poverty, for which 6.19% of the respondent recognized it as the prominent problem

of the society. Food security (4.42%), Illiteracy (3.98%), political instability (3.98%),

Terrorism (0.88%) are some of the other problems stated in the questionnaire. The

following Figure-6 shows the findings of the survey on the major problems of the

society in recent times.

MOST IMPORTANT PROBLEM OF THE SOCIETY.

FIGURE- VI.

0.00%

5.00%10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%30.00%

35.00%

40.00%

287

6.3. B (d).What is your perception as to the seriousness of problem of corruption

in recent days?

To the question on whether corruption was a serious problem in Karnataka, out

of 226 respondents, 79 respondents, constituting 35.46% reported that corruption is a

very serious problem in the country. The second largest number (71) of the

respondents which constitute 28.07% of the total respondents too opined that problem

of corruption is very serious problem. However, 4 respondents, constituting a small

portion of 1.97% responded that corruption is not a serious problem. Another 13

respondents, that is, 6.40 %, did not respond or had no opinion on the issue. Table-7

and Figure-8 below gives a picture of this finding. Majority of the respondents view

corruption as a serious problem in the country. This reveals that corruption is rife in

the country, thus requiring some drastic action.

SERIOUSNESS OF PROBLEM OF CORRUPTION.

TABLE- VII.

Description Respondents Percentage

Very Serious problem 71 28.07%

Serious problem 79 35.46%

Somewhat serious problem 46 21.67%

Not a serious problem 4 1.97%

Not a serious problem at all 13 6.40%

Don’t know 13 6.40%

Total 226 100%


SERIOUSNESS OF PROBLEM OF CORRUPTION.

FIGURE- VII.


28%

36%

22%

2%6% 6%

Very seirous problem Serious problem

somewhat serious problem Not a serious problem

Not a serious problem at all Don’t know

288

6.3. B (e). How would you compare the level of corruption present versus past?

When asked whether corruption is increased or decreased over the last few years,

about 40% of the majority respondents reported that corruption has increased a lot in

the last few years while 17.25% of the respondents reported that it has increased. Thus,

a total of 56.18% of the respondents felt that corruption has increased in the past few

years. Only 7.96% of the respondents reported that corruption has either decreased or

decreased a little. However, 3.98% of the respondents felt that corruption has remained

the same over the last few years while 33 respondents out of 226 which constitute

14.60% had no opinion or refused to respond to the question. The following Table-7

and Figure-9 shows the frequencies of the answer to this question.

LEVEL OF CORRUPTION PRESENT VERSUS PAST.

TABLE- VIII.

Description Number of respondents Percentage

increased 39 17.25%

Increased a little 22 9.73%

Increased a lot 88 38.93%

Somewhat Higher 17 7.52%

About the same 09 3.98%

Decreased 01 0.44%

Decreased a little 17 7.52%

Don’t Know 33 14.60%

Total 226 100%


LEVEL OF CORRUPTION PRESENT VERSUS PAST.

FIGURE- VIII.

17%

10%

39%

7%

4%0%8%

15%

Increased

Increased a litlle

Increased a lot

Somewhat Higher

About the same

Discreased

decreased a little

289

6.3. B (f).What is your perception as to the corruption levels in the days to come?

When asked whether corruption is increased or decreased over the days to come,

32.30% of the respondents reported that corruption will increase a lot in the subsequent

years, while 11.06% of the respondents reported that it will increase a little. Thus, a

total of 43.36% of the respondents felt that corruption will increase in the years to

come. Only 10.61% of the respondents reported that corruption will either decreased a

lot or decreased a little. However, 15.48% of the respondents felt that corruption will

remain the same in future days. Interestingly, majority of the respondents’ i.e.32.51%

had no opinion or refused to respond to the question. Following Table-8 and Figure-10

shows the frequencies of the answer to this question.

CORRUPTION LEVELS IN THE DAYS TO COME.

TABLE- IX.


Will increase a lot 73 32.30%

Will increase a little 25 11.06%

Will be the same 35 15.48%

Decrease a little 06 2.65%

Decrease a lot 18 7.96%


Total 226 100%


CORRUPTION LEVELS IN THE DAYS TO COME.

FIGURE- IX.


wil increase a

lot, 32.30%

will increase a

little, 11.06%will be the

same, 15.48%

Decrease a

little, 2.65%

Decrease a

lot, 7.96%

Don’t

Know, 30.53%

290

6.3. B (g). How often do you encounter bribery and corruption either as a victim

or a witness in your day to day activity?

The respondents were asked how often they encountered bribery and corruption

either as victims or witnesses in their everyday life. To this question, 11.06% of the

respondents who answered the question reported that they encountered bribery and

corruption very frequently while 35.84% of the respondents reported that they

encountered bribery and corruption frequently. Yet another 31.41% encountered

bribery and corruption occasionally and 7.07% rarely. Only 14.60% had never

encountered bribery and corruption in their day to day activities.

ENCOUNTER BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION EITHER AS A VICTIM OR A WITNESS.

TABLE- X.


Very frequently 25 11.06%

Frequently 81 35.84%

Occasionally 71 31.41%

Rarely 16 7.07%

Not at all 33 14.60%

Total 226 100%


ENCOUNTER BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION EITHER AS A VICTIM OR A WITNESS

FIGURE- X.


very frequently

Frequently

Occasionally

Rarely

Not at all

291

6.3. B (h).Perception of corruption in key institutions.

PERCEPTION OF CORRUPTION IN KEY INSTITUTIONS

TABLE-XI.

Departments NO of Respondents Percentage

Health 06 2.65%

Police 47 20.79%

Education 19 8.40%

Political parties 76 33.62%

Revenue 38 16.81%

Judiciary 05 2.21% custom 05 2.21%

Reg.,and stamp 12 5.30%

NGO’s 10 4.42%

Private sector 08 3.53%

Total 226 100%


The respondents were asked to indicate to what extent they perceived a number

of selected institutions, mainly service providers, to be affected by corruption. Ten

public institutions were examined these were: Health, Police, Education, Political

Parties, Revenue, Judiciary, Custom, Registration and Stamp, NGO’s, and Private

Sector. Table-11 presents the composite scores to stand for the proportion who thought

a given department is involved in corruption. Results suggest a predominant opinion

that corruption pervades all the services, although at varying degrees of involvement. It

is, however, perceptible that political parties and police departments are overall viewed

the most corrupt departments (33.62 % and 20.79% respectively), while Judiciary

(2.21%), Custom and health department are the least corrupt (2.21% and 2.65%

respectively). Nevertheless, these departments are not free from the corruption. The

Stated differences show fairly wide variations in the level different institutions are

perceived to be involved in corruption.

PERCEPTION OF CORRUPTION IN KEY INSTITUTIONS.

FIGURE- XI.


Health

Police

Education

Political parties

Revenue

Judiciary

Custom

Reg., and stamp

NGO's

292

The above figures generally illustrate that the public institutions in the State are

perceived to be both widely and severely compromised in terms of involvement in

corruption.

LEVEL OF CORRUPTION IN KEY INSTITUTIONS.

TABLE- XII.

Sector Not

corrupt

at all

Somewhat

corrupt

corrupt Very

corrupt

Extremely

corrupt

Don’t

know

Total

Health 8

(3.55%)

112

(49.55%)

35

(15.4%)

14

(6.19%)

15

(15.92%)

40

(17.69%)

226

100%

Police 16

(7.07%)

54

(23.89%)

61

(26.9%)

52

(23%)

36

(15.92%)

07

(3.09%)

226

100%

Education 22

(9.73%)

86

(38.05%)

34

(15%)

28

(12.38%)

34

(15.04%)

22

(9.73%)

226

100%

Political

parties

19

(8.40%)

34

(15.04%)

40

(17.6%)

52

(23%)

63

(27.87%)

18

(7.96%)

226

100%

Revenue 13 (5.75%)

44 (19.46%)

82 (36.2%)

41 (18.14%)

22 (9.73%)

24 (10.61%)

226 100%

Judiciary 16

(7.07%)

87

(38.49%)

42

(18.5%)

11

(4.86%)

09

(3.98%)

61

(26.99%)

226

100%

custom 15

(6.63%)

52

(23%)

69

(30.5%)

28

(12.38%)

14

(6.19%)

48

(21.23%)

226

100%

Reg.,and

stamp

13

(5.75%)

56

(24.79%)

41

(18.1%)

23

(10.17%)

55

(24.33%)

38

(16.81%)

226

100%

NGO’s 24

(10.61%)

56

(24.79%)

46

(20.3%)

06

((2.65%)

14

(6.19%)

79

(34.95%)

226

100%

Private

sector

16

(7.07%)

49

(21.68%)

44

(19.4%)

13

(5.75%)

23

(10.17%)

81

(35.84%)

226

100%


LEVEL OF CORRUPTION IN KEY INSTITUTIONS.

FIGURE- XII.


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 08 16 22 19 13 16 15 1324 16

112

54

86

34 44

87

52 5656

49

35

6134

40

82 4269

4146

44

1452

28

52

41

11 28

23 613

15

3634 63 22

914

55

14 23

Not corrupt at all Somewhat corrupt corrupt

Very corrupt Extremely corrupt Don’t know

293

The above Tabel-12 shows that the police department stood at first place in

corrupt activities in the State. The respondent number of 54 (23.89%), 61(27%), and

52 (23%) opined police department as somewhat corrupt, corrupt and very corrupt

respectively. The next place to the police department is equally shared by political

parties and revenue. Out of the sample size of 226, (27.87%) respondents felt that the

political parties are extremely corrupt and stood at top place in corrupt activities.

Besides, 23% and 17.69% of the respondents felt that political parties are very corrupt

and corrupt respectively. 34 respondents felt that the political parties are somewhat

corrupt. Only 8.40% of 226 respondents felt that the political parties are not corrupt at

all.

A total of 36.28% respondents reported that the revenue department is extremely

corrupt while 19.46% and 18.14%respondents reported that revenue is somewhat

corrupt and very corrupt respectively. Only 5.75% respondents felt that the revenue

department is not corrupt at all. Registration and Stamp department came third as the

category of institutions that are perceived to be corrupt. Out of the 226 respondents, 56

(24.79%) and 23 (10.17%) of the respondents felt that the registration and stamp is

extremely corrupt and very corrupt, respectively. Furthermore, out of the sample size

of 226, 112 (49.55%) of the respondents felt that health department is somewhat

corrupt while 6.19% and 15.48% of the respondents felt that the health system is very

corrupt and corrupt respectively.

6.3. B (i). What is your perception on concept of corruption?

PERCEPTION OF THE CONCEPT OF CORRUPTION.

TABLE- XIII.


Abuse of Power 41 18.14%

Illicit self-enrichment 38 16.81%

Bribery 16 7.07%

Maladministration 04 1.76%

Undue Influence 02 0.88%

Taking Money without receipt 22 9.73%

Gifts/ Offers in return for favours

06 2.65%

Kick back 02 0.88%

Above All 95 42.03%

Total 226 100%


294

PERCEPTION OF THE CONCEPT OF CORRUPTION.

FIGURE-XIII.


For the purpose of trace out the respondent perception on concept of corruption

through survey, 8 broad forms of corruption were identified. The survey pressed

further to find out the type of corruption that the respondents encountered in their day

to day activities. Abuse of the power came up first with 18.14% of the respondents

reporting this as corrupt act. This is the clear sign of vast discretionary power

conferred on administrators are grossly violated for private use. This is followed

16.81% of the respondents who reported illicit enrichment is the core form of

corruption. In addition, 9.73% reported taking money without receipt is the apparent

pecuniary form of corruption. This is a source of leakage for Government revenues and

should be checked as payments without receipts go into private pockets. While 7.07%

of the respondents reported that bribery is the inspired form of offer for corrupt

activities. Kickbacks, undue influence and maladministration and gifts did not seem to

be very prominent as shown in the Table-13 and Figure-13 above. Interestingly,

majority of the respondent by preferred all form of activities as perception of

corruption, seconded that problem of corruption is multifaceted and varied by situation

to situation. Above Table-13 and Figure- 13 summarises the findings of the

respondents.

0 20 40 60 80 100

Abuse of Power

Illicit self-enrichment

Bribery

Maladministration

Undue Influence

Taking Money without receipt

Gifts/ Offers in return for favours

Kick back

These are all

Percentage

NO. Respondents

295

6.3. B (j). What is your perception as to the level of Government commitment to

fight against corruption?

GOVERNMENT COMMITMENT TO FIGHT AGAINST CORRUPTION.

TABLE- XIV.


Very good 27 11.94%

Good 22 9.73%

Somewhat good 51 22.56%

Not good 33 14.60%

No Commitment at all 71 31.41%

No Opinion 22 9.73%

Total 226 100%


GOVERNMENT COMMITMENT TO FIGHT AGAINST CORRUPTION.

FIGURE-XIV.


The respondents were asked about the commitment of the government in fighting

bribery and corruption in order to find out the political will of the government against

problem of corruption. The bulk of the existing literature, reports, studies and research

suggest that a connection exists between political will and corrupt activities. Only a

small percentage of 11.94% and 9.73% of respondents felt that the government has

very good and good commitment in fighting corruption respectively. An additional

22.56% said that the government was somewhat well committed. With this, the total

44.23% of respondents have reported that the government was generally well

committed in the fight against corruption. However, 14.60% and 31.41% of the

respondents felt that the government has no commitment and not at all committed,

respectively, bringing the total to 46.01%. Unfortunately, significant number of the

respondents (9.73%) has denied to answering this question. The above mentioned

very good

Good

Somewhat good

Not good

No commitment all

No Opinion

296

Table-14 and Figure-15 shows the respondents view on the Government commitment

on prevention of corruption.

From above analysis, in addition to various existing research work, the present

research work also specifically concluded that there is a higher level of link between

corruption and political helm. This is the clear indication that the government which

has no commitment to prevent the problem of corruption might increase the worst

effects of corruption and may also have the detrimental effect on general public.

6.3. B (k). Whether problem of corruption completely be eradicated?

Respondents are generally optimistic about reducing corruption in the future.

They were asked to what extent they thought corruption in Karnataka can be reduced.

The question was to find out the trust of the people had in the existing anticorruption

strategies. The considerable amount (48.66%) of the respondents expressed their

positive sense of hope for eradication of corruption by saying that the problem of

corruption can be eradicated completely (13.27%) or to a large extent (35.39%).

Besides, 19.91% of the respondents have also showed their opinion on the eradication

of the corruption to a small extent. Slightly 11.50% of the respondents were very

pessimistic about the prospects of reducing corruption. The below, Table-15 and

Figure-15 gives the full picture of the respondents view on eradication of corruption.

ERADICATION OF CORRUPTION.

TABLE- XV.


Yes completely 30 13.27%

To a large extent 80 35.39%

To a small extent 45 19.91%

Not possible to remove

corruption at all

26

11.50%


Total 226 100%


297

ERADICATION OF CORRUPTION.

FIGURE- XV.


6.3. B (l).Which institution do you trust most to fight corruption in the State?

TRUSTED ANTI-CORRUPTION INSTITUTION IN THE STATE.

TABLE- XVI.


C B I 80 35.39%

C V C 09 3.98%

Executive 06 2.65%

International Institutions 06 2.65%

Judiciary 15 6.63%

Legislature 07 3.09%

Lokayukta 83 36.72%

Respective Departments 20 8.84%

Total 226 100%


TRUSTED ANTI-CORRUPTION INSTITUTION IN THE STATE.

FIGURE- XVI.

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

40.00%

Yes completely To a large

extent

To a small

extent

Not possible to

remove

corruption at

all

Don’t Know

C B I

C V C

Executive

International

InstitutionsJudiciary Legislature

Lokayukta

Respective

Departments

298

The respondents were also asked to identify the institutions that they most trusted

to fight corruption in this country. The respondents were asked to choose only one

category of institutions. Above Table-16 provides the details of the responses.

Out of the total of 226 respondents, 36.72% trusted the Karnataka Lokayukta to

take steps to curb corruption in Karnataka. This is followed by the Central premier

accountability institution Central Bureau of Investigation with 35.39%. The respective

departments (8.84%) of the public servants are measured as effective anti-corruption

institutions in the State. The Judiciary, the Central Vigilance Commission, Legislature,

Executive and International Institutions came next in that order with 6.63% of the

respondents trusting the Judiciary, 3.98% of the respondents trusting the CVC, 3.09%

of the respondents trusting Legislature and 2.65% trusting Executive and international

institutions equally.

6.3. B (m). How best you are you familiar with the Lokayukta?

It was also interested in finding out the extent to which the people of Karnataka

knew about the Lokayukta Institution. The survey, therefore, asked the respondents

whether they were familiar with the Karnataka Lokayukta. Out of the total sample size

of 226, majority of 166 (73.45%) were familiar with the organization. Relatively, very

meagre amount of the respondents viewed that they are neither familiar (17.25%) or

nor aware (9.29%) of the Lokayukta Institution. The following Table-17 shows the

opinion of the respondents.

FAMILIARITY WITH THE LOKAYUKTA.

TABLE- XVII.

Knowledge of Lokayukta Number of Respondents Percentage

Yes 166 73.45%

No 39 17.25%


Total 226 100%


Despite the fact that Lokayukta institution is a relatively recently emerged anti-

corruption institution in the State, almost nearly ¾ of the respondents indicated that

they are aware of the Institution. It is clear from the above Table that the measures

taken by Lokayukta institution to date to inform the public of its existence have borne

299

fruit. Paradoxically, the Majority of the respondents who have expressed their

unawareness about the Lokayukta institution is unfortunate. Therefore, it is evident

from this finding that further outreach efforts will be necessary to communicate

Lokayuktas mission and message to all Karnataka citizens. The Table-17 shows the

familiarity of the respondents with Karnataka Lokayukta.

FAMILIARITY WITH THE LOKAYUKTA.

FIGURE-XVII.


6.3. C.CAUSES OF CORRUPTION

6.3. C (a).Why the people engaging in corruption?

CAUSES FOR CORRUPTION.

TABLE-XVIII.

Reasons NO. Respondents Percentage

Social Reasons 17 7.52%

Political Reasons 23 10.17%

Economic Reasons 25 11.06%

Administrative Reasons 20 8.84%

Psychological Reasons 14 6.19% Above all the reasons 127 56.19%

Total 226 100%


In addressing corruption, the importance of the motivations and reasons for

corrupt behaviour cannot be overstated. An understanding of the underlying reasons

will help towards the creation and adoption of a suitable remedial strategy that might

require a conscious, energetic and persistent effort in imparting information at the

74%

17%

9%

Yes No Don’t know

300

ground level about the detrimental effects of corruption thus empowering government

to adopt suitable measures to curb corruption.

The respondents were asked for the reasons why people get involved in

corruption, that is, why people are corrupt. This was a multiple answer question and

respondents were asked to choose the reasons listed in the questionnaire. For the

purpose of this question, the various reasons were titled as Social, Political, Economic,

Administrative and Psychological reasons. The predominant reasons for the problem of

corruption are consolidation of all the reasons. Out of 226, 127 of the respondents

viewed that corruption is not a result of particular reason, instead it is a combination of

all the reasons.

If we look into the individual profile of the causes of corruption economic

reasons consisting the facts such as low salary, devaluation of rupee, inflation and

creation of artificial scarcity comes at first place with 11.06%, followed by political

reasons ranked 2nd

places with 10.17%. The administrative reasons ranked 3rd

with

8.84%, followed by social and psychological reasons at 7.52% and 6.19% respectively.

Figure-18 below gives the full picture of this analysis.

CAUSES FOR CORRUPTION.

FIGURE- XVIII.


Social Reasons

Political Reasons

Economic Reasons

Administrative Reasons

Psychological Reasons

Above all the reasons

301

LEVEL OF OPINION ON CAUSES FOR CORRUPTION.

TABLE- XIX.

Description Strongly

agree

Agree Disagree Strongly

Disagree

Don’t know

Social Reasons 23

(10.17%)

118

(52.21%)

31

(13.71%)

11

(4.86%)

43

(19.02%)

Political Reasons 95

(42.12%)

83

(36.72%)

22

(9.73%)

15

(6.63%)

11

(4.86%)

Economic Reasons 46

(20.35%)

102

(45.13%)

28

(12.38%)

33

(14.60%)

17

(7.52%)

Administrative Reasons 26

(11.50%)

126

(55.75%)

19

(8.40%)

16

(7.07%)

39

(17.25%)

Psychological Reasons 30

(13.275)

89

(39.38%)

37

(16.37%)

27

(11.94%)

43

(19.02%)


LEVEL OF OPINION ON CAUSES FOR CORRUPTION.

FIGURE- XIX.

Source: Primary data

The next statement put to the respondents to seek their gravity of consent on the

reasons suggested that the majority of the respondents either agree (52.21%) or

strongly agree (10.17%) with the statement that social reasons are root causes for

corruption. While 13.71% and 14.86% of the respondents disagreed and strongly

disagreed respectively for the question. However, interestingly, significant number of

respondents (19.02%) expressed their unawareness over the question. The

administrative reasons also got considerable recognition from the respondents. Out of

226 respondents 152 respondents treated these reasons as strong grounds for problem

of corruption by strongly agreeing (11.50%) and agreeing (55.75%) respectively.

23

95

4626 30

118

83102 126

89

3122

28 1937

1115 33

16 27

43 11 17 39 43

Social Reasons Political Reasons Economic Reasons Administrative

Reasons

Psychological

Reasons

Strongly agree Agree disagree Strongly disagree Don’t know

302

Yet all form of causes asserted as the causes for corruption, potentially enormous

instigation for the corruption are the political reasons. The political causes and

corruption phenomena are in a direct connection. Out of the sample size of 226,

42.12% respondents strongly agreed that the political causes are extreme causes for

problem of corruption and it is stood at top place in corrupt activities in terms of strong

consent of respondents.36.72% respondents agreed for political facts as corruption

roots and 9.73% respondents disagreed for the question. Further 6.63% respondents

strongly disagreed that the political causes are the supportive causes for corruption.

Only 4.86% of the 226 respondents felt that they don’t know anything about these

reasons.

6.3. C (b).Why are you paying the bribe while dealing with Government

Departments?

PAYING THE BRIBE WHILE DEALING WITH GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS.

TABLE- XX.


To avoid problems with

authorities

32 14.15%

To speed up things 149 65.92%

For a contract or other favor 14 6.19%

Other Purpose 31 13.71%

Total 226 100%


PAYING THE BRIBE WHILE DEALING WITH GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS.

FIGURE-XX.


0 50 100 150

To avoid problems with authorities

To speed up files

For a contract or other favor

Other Purpose

No of Respondents

Percentage

303

The survey asked further why the respondents had to pay a bribe. The majority

of the respondents (65.92%) paid a bribe to speed up things. This was followed by an

attempt to avoid problem with authorities (14.15%). Other respondents paid because

they wanted a service that was for a contract or other favour or some other purposes.

The findings show that the society is real source of the corruption. The people

themselves are polluting the principles of transparency, accountability and

responsibility by offering the bribe just for speed up their files. In this context, it is

worth to mention here that the emerging SAKALA scheme, recently introduced by the

government can certainly change the situation in the days to come.

6.3. C (c).Who are the perpetuators of problem of corruption in recent days?

The respondents were asked to indicate from a list of categories of individuals,

which category they perceived to be the common perpetrators of corruption. The

question required respondents to choose a category of individuals as applicable. The

below Table-21 and Figure-21 shows the responses that were received for this

question.

PERPETUATORS OF PROBLEM OF CORRUPTION.

TABLE- XXI.

Category of persons Respondents perception Percentage

Politicians 50 22.12%

Bureaucrats 16 7.07%

Citizens 75 33.18%

Business men 09 3.98%

Middlemen 15 6.63%

All 50 22.12%


Total 226 100%


304

PERPETUATORS OF PROBLEM OF CORRUPTION.

FIGURE-XXI.


The above Figure-21 and Table-21 reveals that the citizens are perceived to be

the most common perpetrators of corruption in Karnataka. Out of the total of 226,

75respondents felt that citizens are the first category of individuals that constituted the

most common perpetrators of corruption. This is followed by politicians who are

described by 22.12% of the respondents as the most common perpetrators of

corruption. Bureaucrats drew the attention of 7.07% of the respondents followed by

middlemen 6.63%. Slightly, the business community has also been recognised as

propagators of corruption by respondents of 3.98%. Further, quite interestingly the

similar analysis shows that 22.12% of the respondents perceived all categories of

individuals are perpetrators of the corrupt activities.

6.3. C (d). How much each one of the following reasons affects the decision not to

report a case of corruption to Karnataka Lokayukta?

The above question was intended to discover the reasons why one might not be

willing to report corruption. The question was introduced by, “Some people in

Karnataka are unwilling to report corrupt actions.” After reading a list of possible

reasons, respondents were asked to identify which they considered reasons for not

reporting corruption to the relevant authorities.

0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00%

Politicians

Bureaucrats

Citizens

Business men

Middlemen

All

Don’t Know

Percentage

305

REASONS AFFECTS THE DECISION NOT TO REPORT A CASE OF CORRUPTION TO

KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA.

TABLE- XXII.

SL NO Description Respondents Percentage

1 Not knowing where to report 13 5.75%

2 Cases can’t be proved 49 21.68%

3 The process is too complex and

long

17 7.52%

4 Corruption is a custom 24 10.61%

5 Bribe can be justified under the current economic situation

14 6.19%

6 Investigation cannot be made

against the report

14 6.19%

7 There would be no enforcement

even if the decision is made

64 28.31%

8 Concern about potential

harassment and reprisal

31 13.71%

Total 226 100%


According to the 5.75% respondents they don’t like to report the corruption cases

to Lokayukta institution as they do not know where to report. The second vital

obstacle to knock the door of Lokayukta institution is unsuccessful rate of

investigating authority. Out of 226 respondents, 21.68% of the respondents’ opined

that the cases will not be taken to the Lokayukta as the cases cannot be proved

successfully by the investigating authority. The strong reason, barring the respondents

to approach Lokayukta institution is the enforcement ability of the cases investigated

by the Lokayukta institution. Out of total 226 respondents, 28.31% of respondents

consented for this fact. Some other crucial deterrent facts for respondents to approach

Lokayukta institution are concern about potential harassment and reprisal (13.71%),

corruption is a custom (10.61%), bribe can be justified under the current economic

situation (6.19%), and investigation cannot be made against the report (6.19%).

306

REASONS AFFECTS THE DECISION NOT TO REPORT A CASE OF CORRUPTION TO

KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA.

FIGURE- XXII.


6.3. D. Consequence of Corruption.

6.3. D (a).What is your perception as to consequences of the corruption?

CONSEQUENCES OF THE CORRUPTION .

TABLE- XXIII.

Consequences NO

Respondent

s

Percentag

e

The transition process gets retarded 25 11.06%

The development of the private sector gets retarded 28 12.38%

The loss of confidence in one’s own abilities- the rule of money 20 8.84% The number of those citizens believing that honesty works-

declines

08 3.53%

Decline of the morality in the society 10 4.42%

Human rights get infringed 08 3.53%

Decline in moral standards 08 3.53%

It endangers the security of the State 07 3.09%

Degrade the status of the nation at International level 07 3.09%

Foreign investor will lose their interest to invest 04 1.76%

Above all 101 44.69%

Total 226 100%


There is a growing consensus that endemic corruption has severe negative

consequences for the quality of governance and efforts to attain sustainable

development. The statement has been examined in this part by seeking respondent’s

opinion on the negative impact of corruption.

0.00% 5.00%10.00%15.00%20.00%25.00%30.00%

Not knowing where to report

Cases can’t be proved

The process is too complex and long

Corruption is a custom

Bribe can be justified under the …

Investigation cannot be made …

There would be no enforcement …

Concern about potential harassment …

Percentage

307

It is clear from the above Table-23 that one of the most visible consequences of

corruption is its impact on a country’s economic development. Out 226 respondents

28 respondents constitute 12.38% of the respondents viewed that the development of

the private sector gets retarded by the problem of corruption. Corruption slows down

foreign direct investment because it is perceived as a form of taxation. In turn, the

investment that does take place may be economically misdirected by the corrupt

interests of the powerful.

As 11.06% respondents indicated the transition processes get retarded due to

rampant corruption. Corruption results in tax evasion and significant losses of revenue

for the State. Combined with waste public expenditures, this can lead to a lower

quality of infrastructure and public service in the short term and adverse budgetary

and monetary consequences in the long term.

The divergent views of the respondents on the question are as follows; The loss

of confidence in one’s own abilities- the rule of money (8.84%)Moral decline of the

society (4.42%), The number of citizens believing that honesty works-declines

(3.53%), Decline in moral standards (3.53%), Human rights get infringed (3.53%), It

endangers the security of the State (3.09%), Degrade the status of the nation at

International level(3.09%), Foreign investor will lose their interest to invest(1.76%).

The very interesting finding of the survey is that the corruption not only affects

particular area instead it has its devasting impact on the entire sector. The fact has

been proved by the large number of respondent (44.69%) by saying that the problems

of corruption include all the consequences listed in the questionnaire.

The findings shows that the way respondents view consequences of corruption

are broadly similar among income groups. There is also some difference of opinion

among the people. The people in the highest-income group stress the danger of decline

in foreign direct investment while no other income group names it among the most

dangerous consequences of corruption. The following Figure-23 outlines the

respondents view on consequences o corruption.

308

CONSEQUENCES OF THE CORRUPTION.

FIGURE-XXIII.


6.3. E. Eradicative Strategies.

An evaluation of the impacts of anti-corruption strategies assumes an

understanding of the nature and regulatory characteristics of the strategies and it is

necessary, therefore to discuss at this point the main approaches that have emerged.

The respondents were asked to make some recommendations to curb corruption. Based

on the study of various anti-corruption literature and reports of various international

anti-corruption organisations certain eradicative methods were outlined and the

respondents were asked to choose the effective methods. The various anti-corruption

measures prepared for the empirical research of this work are grouped under 4 parts as

indicated in the various Tables.

0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00%

The transition process gets retarded

The development of the private …

The loss of confidence in one’s own …

The number of those citizens …

Moral decline of the society

Human rights get infringed

Decline in moral standards

It endangers the security of the State

Degrade the status of the nation at …

Foreign investor will lose their …

It consist all the consequences

Percentage

309

6.3. E (a). Eradication of Corruption Strategy- Part-1.

ERADICATIVE STRATEGIES-1.

TABLE- XXIV.

SL NO Description Number of respondents

evaluated as effective

Percentage

1 Meritocracy in appointments 21 9.29%

2 A law ensuring transparency in

political Party financing

51 22.56%

3 Civil society monitoring of public

sector activities

28 12.38%

4 Simplification and clarity of

administrative rules

16 7.07%

5 A law on free public access to

Government information

48 21.23%

6 Privatisation of more public services 26 11.50%

7 Decrease of the number of public

officials, increase salaries

26 11.50%

8 Legalisation of Corruption 10 4.42%

Total 226 100%


ERADICATIVE STRATEGIES-I.

FIGURE- XXIV.

A sizeable number of respondents, evaluated the first part of the anti-

corruption measures, evaluated that law ensuring transparency in political Party

financing (22.50%) has the effective measures against corruption and at second place

they also recommended the law on free public access to government information

(21.23%). Yet another substantial number of respondents recommended the civil

society monitoring of public sector activities (12.28%). The privatisation of more

public services and decrease of the number of public officials and increased salaries

are acquired equal percentage at 11.50%. The meritocracy in appointments and

0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00%

Meritocracy in appointments

A law ensuring transparency in …

Civil society monitoring of public …

Simplification and clarity of …

A law on free public access to …

Privatisation of more public services

Decrease of the number of public …

Legalisation of Corruption

Percentage

310

simplification and clarity of administrative rules have shared 9.29% and 7.07%

respectively. Other recommendation included in this part was legalisation of

corruption as it was propounded by various authors. Fortunately, very negligible

amount of respondents (4.42%) have supported this measure as anti-corruption

strategy.

6.3. E (b). Eradication of Corruption Strategy-II.

ERADICATIVE STRATEGIES-II.

TABLE-XXV.

SL NO Description Very

Effective

Somewhat

Effective

Effective Not

Effective

Don’t

Know

1 Great access for citizens and

news media to Government Information

59

(26%)

105

(46.46%)

29

(12.83%)

25

(11.06%)

08

(3.53%)

2 Vigorous News Media Investigation

56 (24.77%)

58 (25.67%)

77 (34.07%)

18 (7.96%)

17 (7.52%)

3 Professional ethics for Public servants

32 (14, 15%)

67 (29.64%)

70 (30.97%)

22 (9.73%)

35 (15.48%)

4 More Emphasis on Moral Values in School

66 (29.20%)

72 (31.85%)

53 (23.45%)

16 (7.07%)

19 (8.40%)

5 Media Campaign to raise public awareness against

corruption

47 (20.79%)

69 (30.53%)

68 (30.08%)

14 (6.19%)

28 (12.38%)

6 More Research on

Causes/Consequences of

corruption

29

(12.83%)

48

(21.32%)

68

(30.08%)

30

(13.27%)

51

(22.56%)

7 Organisation of regular

conferences/seminars

27

(11.94%)

83

(36.72%)

46

(20.35%)

18

(7.96%)

52

(23%)

8 Participative Government

decision and implementation

process

31

(13.71%)

74

(32.74%)

47

(20.79%)

16

(7.07%)

57

(25.22%)

9 Opposite parties and Civil

Societies as watchdog role on

Govt., activities

51

(22.56%)

80

(35.39%)

62

(27.43%)

25

(11.06%)

08

(3.53%)


The second part of the eradicative strategies of corruption are Great access

for citizens and news media to government information, vigorous news media

investigation, Professional ethics for Public servants, more emphasis on moral

values in school, media campaign to raise public awareness against corruption, more

research on causes/consequences of corruption, organisation of regular

conferences/seminars, participative government decision and implementation

process and opposite parties and civil societies as watchdog role on government

activities.

311

ERADICATIVE STRATEGIES-II.

FIGURE-XXV.


The first question posed to the respondents was whether the access for citizens

and news media to government information, to what extent prevent the problem of

corruption. For this question, out of 226 respondents, 105 (46.46%) of the respondents

think that it is somewhat effective. This is followed by 59 (26%) of the total

respondents said that it is a very effective measure. 29 (12.83%) of the total

respondents are of the opinion that it is an effective tool for the prevention of

corruption. The least 8 (3.53%) out of total respondents does not as to its effectiveness

in prevention of corruption.

The second question was whether vigorous news media investigation can

prevent the corruption. For this 77 (34.07%) respondents are very positive of the

opinion regarding its effectiveness. There is slight difference of opinion regarding

very effectiveness (24.77%) and somewhat effectiveness (25.67%). The next question

was ,if imposing strict professional ethics on public servants would prevent

corruption, 70 (30.97%) respondents opined that it is an effective measure and 67

(29.64%) respondents says it is somewhat effective. The subsequent query was

pertaining to teaching of moral values in schools would eradicate corruption. The

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Opposition parties watchdog roles

on government activities

Increasing the ability of parliament

to oversee the activities of the …

More research on the causes, nature

and extent of the corruption

Organisation of regular conferences

Participative government decision

and implementation process

Recognition and fair reward to the

transparent departments

very effective

somewhat effective

Effective

Not effective

Don’t Know

312

question is seconded by 72 (31.85%) respondents as somewhat effective. In recent

days the media plays a vital role in creating awareness among public. To test the

reliability of this statement, the following question was posed if Media Campaign

would raise public awareness against corruption; there is a hairline of differences

regarding the effectiveness (30.08%) and somewhat effectiveness (30.53%). In

furtherance, if More Research on Causes/Consequences of corruption is an effective

measure to cure the corruption, we can see a difference of opinion among the

respondents. 68 (30.08%) respondents say it is effective, 48 (21.32%) of them says it

is somewhat effective and 29 (12.83%) says it is very effective. It is to be noted that,

unfortunate number of respondents (22.56%) does not know the effectiveness of the

research on corruption.

Organisation of regular conferences/seminars if held would minimise

corruption, the large number of respondents (32.72%) are of the opinion that it is

somewhat effective, 27 (11.94%) respondents says it is effective and 52 (23%)

respondents says they does not know. If public is made to participate in the

government decision and its implementation, will the corruption be prevented, 74

(32.74%) respondents says it would be a somewhat effective measure and 57

(25.22%) respondents doesn’t reveal anything. In the subsequent analysis, the role of

opposite parties and civil societies as watchdog agencies would be answered. 80

(35.39%) respondents says it is a somewhat effective measure, 25 (11.06%)

respondents says it is not an effective measure and only 8 (3.53%) respondents says

they doesn’t know about this concept.

6.3. E (c). Eradication of Corruption Strategy- Part- III.

The Third part of the eradicative strategies of corruption are protection of

Whistle Bowler, tougher legislation and harsher sentences, More resources to

investigation and prosecution, establishment of Special Anti-corruption Courts,

independent agency for prevention of corruption, dismissing corrupt convicted

officials from public office, increase the ability of Parliament to oversee the

government activities and recognition of fair reward to the transparent departments.

313

ERADICATIVE STRATEGIES-III.

TABLE- XXVI.


Effective

Somewhat

Effective

Effective Not

Effective

Don’t

Know

1 Protection of Whistle Bowler 25

(11.06%)

89

(39.38%)

56

(24.79%)

18

(7.96%)

38

(16.81%)

2 Tougher legislation and harsher

sentences

54

(23.89%)

71

(30.97%)

47

(20.79%)

34

(15.04%)

20

(8.84%)

3 More resources to investigation

and prosecution

38

(16.81%)

77

(34.07%)

61

(26.99%)

16

(7.07%)

14

(6.19%)

4 Establishment of Special Anti-

corruption Courts

33

(14.60%)

71

(31.97%)

64

(28.31%)

15

(6.63%)

43

(19.02%)

5 Independent agency for

prevention of corruption

46

(20.35%)

75

(33.18%)

54

(23.89%)

08

(3.53%)

43

(19.02%)

6 Dismissing corrupt convicted

officials from public office

39

(17.25%)

85

(37.61%)

51

(23.89%)

17

(7.52%)

34

(15.04%)

7 Increase the ability of

Parliament to oversee the

Govt., activities

36

(15.92%)

60

(26.54%)

69

(30.53%)

23

(10.17%)

38

(16.81%)

8 Recognition of fair reward to

the transparent departments

39

(17.25%)

100

(44.24%)

64

(28.31%)

14

(6.19%)

12

(5.30%)


Whistle Bowlers are those who help the government to curb corruption as they

give information regarding the corrupt activities. Obviously they would work for the

government only in case if they are protected. When this question was posed to the

respondents, 89 (39.38%) of them said this measure is somewhat effective and 18

(7.96%) of them said it is not effective and 38 (16.81%) of them said they have no

idea about this.

Any anti-social activities can be curbed if there is a tougher legislation and in

case of commitance, if the sanction is tougher. Whether this would prevent corruption

was the question. For this 71(30.97%) respondents said it is somewhat an effective

measure. There is slight difference between the opinion of the respondents who said

very effective (23.89%) and effective (20.29%). 34 (15.04%) of them said it is not

effective.

The act of corruption will come into picture only when it is investigated

properly and the wrongdoers are prosecuted. On the other hand, it can be investigated

by the police officers, only when the proper and necessary resources provided to them.

Obviously, it is a good measure to curb corruption. 77 (34.07%) respondents have

314

agreed to the fact that it is somewhat effective, around 27% of respondents say it is an

effective measure.

Courts are always the protector of the law and punisher of the wrongdoer.

Since, the Courts are already burdened with number of cases and in this era of

increasing number of corruption cases, there is an obvious necessity of Special Anti-

Corruption Courts. Respondents were positive regarding its effectiveness (28.31%)

and somewhat effectiveness (31.92%) and 43 (19%) of them have no ideas about this

strategy. There is another necessity for the independent agency for the prevention of

corruption similar to Lokpal. 75 (33.18%) respondents say it is somewhat effective

and 43 (19.02%) do not have any idea of such strategy.

Wrongdoer should be punished is the well-known principle of every matured

jurisprudence. They should be punished severely so as to deter them and others from

committing corrupt activities. If the corrupt convicted officials are dismissed from the

public office, which would really deter the other from committing the act of

corruption. Majority (37.61%) respondents agree that it is somewhat an effective

measure and 34 (15.04%) of them have no ideas.

The Parliament being the supreme legislative authority of the country should

take care of the implementation of the policies enacted by it. The prevention of

corruption laws are not exempted from this rule. Therefore, the respondent’s opinion

was sought on this regard in which there is no much difference between the opinion of

respondents regarding its somewhat effectiveness (26.64%) and effectiveness

(30.53%).

The common pleasing psychology of every human being is that their work

should be recognised and properly rewarded. The appreciation of the transparent and

accountable work of the public servants by this method can boost the strength of the

anti-corruption strategies. The opinion required by the respondents on this aspect

illustrates that 100 (44.24%) respondents says it is a somewhat effective measure and

14 (6.19%) of them says it is not an effective measure.

315

ERADICATIVE STRATEGIES-III.

FIGURE-XXVI.

6.3. E (d). Eradication of Corruption Strategy- IV.

The fourth set of survey question about the efficacy of different anticorruption

measures for prevention of corruption are, Increased Salary for Government servants,

Greater Internal Financial and Audit system, Assets Disclosure by Government

servants and Politicians, Great Transparency in Tender, Citizen Charters, SAKALA,

E-Governance , Brining Private Sector into Anti-corruption Laws

ERADICATIVE STRATEGIES-IV.

TABLE-XXVII.


Effective

Somewhat

Effective

Effective Not

Effective

Don’t

Know

1 Increased Salary for

Government servants

25

(11.06%)

83

(36.72%)

45

(19.91%)

63

(27.87%)

10

(4.24%)

2 Greater Internal Financial and

Audit system

45

(19.91%)

60

(26.54%)

53

(23.45%)

22

(9.73%)

46

(20.35%)

3 Assets Disclosure by

Government servants and

Politicians

62

(27.43%)

64

(28.31%)

63

(27.87%)

22

(9.73%)

15

(6.63%)

4 Great Transparency in Tender 58

(25.66%)

65

(28.76%)

48

(21.23%)

35

(15.48%)

20

(8.84%)

5 Citizen Charters 31

(13.71%)

77

(34.07%)

81

(35.84%)

17

(7.52%)

20

(8.84%)

6 SAKALA 63

(27.87%)

64

(28.31%)

70

(30.97%)

09

(3.98%)

20

(8.84%)

7 E-Governance 46

(20.35%)

75

(33.18%)

52

(23.00%)

17

(7.52%)

36

(15.92%)

8 Bringing Private Sector into

Anti-corruption Laws

52

(23.00%)

65

(28.76%)

54

(23.89%)

23

(10.17%)

32

(14.15%)


0% 50% 100%

SAKALA

Citizen Charters

E-Governance

Counselling for women

Protection for whistle bowler

Prohibition of Benami Transations

very Effective

Somewhat effective

Effective

Not Effective

Don’t know

316

The voluminous literature on the corruption emancipate that the economic

factors provide the fertility place for the corruption. The low level salary is such a

significant economic cause for the problem of corruption. There is an alleged

complaint that the top level Government officials tend to become corrupt as their

salary is much lower compare to private officials. Hence, it was presumed that

whether increase in the salary to the government servants might prevent corrupt

activities. To this question, 36.72% respondents have said it is a somewhat effective

measure and 27.87% of them have said it is not an effective method and 4.24% have

no idea. Surprisingly and impliedly, the vast number of respondents preferred for not

increasing the salary by saying that increasing salary for government servants is not

effective method.

Accounting and auditing systems play a unique and crucial role in combating

corruption. Clear and effective accounting procedures should help to reduce the level

of corruption by increasing the probability of acts of bribery being detected and

reported. The internal financial and audit system constitute a precious internal method

for the prevention of corruption in the government institutions. The periodical review

of the style and method of utilisation of the fund of the institution can be a good

barrier against a flow of corruption. As depicted in the above Table-27, 26.64% of the

respondents are of the opinion that it is somewhat effective measure and there is a

negligible difference between those who says it an very effective method 19.91% and

those who have no idea 20.25%.

India being the biggest democratic country in the world, people have been

considered as king. They have right to know the background of the representatives

whom they have elected and the executors who are at helm in the affairs of the

government. So it is expected that the politicians as well as government servants

should disclose their assets without fail. It is very interesting to note that the

difference between the opinions who are of the opinion that it is a very effective

method (27.43%), somewhat effective method (28.31%) and effective measure

(27.87%) are very meagre difference of opinion and they found to be one and the

same.

317

The public procurement is universally acknowledged as being highly vulnerable

to corruption, collusion, fraud and manipulation. The diligent and transparent tender

process can enhance the anti-corruption strategy of the State. In this context, the

question was posed among the respondents in this regard. To this question, 28.76%

respondents’ say it is somewhat an effective measure and 15.48% of them says it is

not an effective method.

The right to freedom of speech and expression has effectively been cemented

under Indian Constitution. In its broad sense, every citizen of the nation has

fundamental right to know about the governmental business. The concept of the

Citizens Charter can assure this basic right and it should be implemented in its letter

and spirit. The role of Citizen’s Charter is touch stone with the anti-corruption strategy

has been evaluated in this question. The consolidated opinion of the respondents

accepted this strategy as vital anticorruption strategy. The data shows that the

difference between the respondents who says it is somewhat an effective (34.07%)

and effective (35.84%) measure is very negligible.

The SAKALA is the innovative policy introduced by the Karnataka State

Government in order to provide the services at stipulated time. The scheme is asserted

as the magnificent tool against corruption in the State. The 151 services coming under

11 departments have been inserted under the scheme and the departments, while

providing services to the citizen, under the obligation to comply with time prescribed

under the Act. The effectiveness of this new scheme in eradication of the corruption

was tested through this question. Very interestingly, the question is seconded by the

significant number of respondents as very effective (27.87%), somewhat effective

(28.31%) and effective (30.47%). Out of 226, only 3.98% respondents have treated

this strategy as not effective and 8.84% respondents are unaware about the scheme.

The role of technology plays a vital role in the governance. The rapid

development of Information and Communication technology has provided a new

dimension for government activities in recent days. The introduction of E-Governance

can simplify the complex rules and procedures of the administrators which could have

resulted in corrupt activities. The respondent’s opinion was sought on this fact and

data reveals that the strategy is, to the maximum extent workable for addressing the

corruption issue. Out of 226 respondents, total 20.35% of the respondents assessed

318

this strategy as effective. Besides, 33.18% opined as somewhat effective, 23% as

effective, 7.52% as not effective and 5.92% of the respondents expressed their

unawareness about this strategy.

The most of literature on corruption apparently reveals that the corruption in the

private sector should be addressed. In recent times, the commercial activities have

enlarged the scope of the corruption to the private sector, which is not adequately

addressed by the present legal system. The respondents’ opinion on extending existing

anti-corruption laws on private sector was sought, out of 226 respondents, 23% of

respondents consented the strategy as very effective, 28.76% respondents as

somewhat effective and 23.89% respondents as effective. The 23 (10.17%)

respondents seconded the measure as not effective and 32 (14.15%) respondents are

expressed their ignorance.

6.4. CONCLUSION.

A Critical and Empirical evaluation of the concept of corruption, its causes,

consequence and impacts of anti-corruption strategies assumes an understanding of the

nature, scope, the gravity of the problem and effectiveness of the anticorruption

strategies. Of course, much has elaborately been written about the corruption and its

allied topic. However, the success of any adopted strategy to counter or resolve a

problem of corruption depends on its suitability to achieving the expected outcomes

and its flexibility to adapt suitably in response to the assessment of its impact at the

ground level.

The opinions of the respondents as to the concept, causes, consequences and

strategies, the gravity of the problem are complex and they may affect the final

outcome as anti-corruption strategies positively, negatively, indifferently or

unpredictably by a number of variables including attitudes, expectations, cultures,

social backgrounds, motivations and mores. Therefore, just as strategies affect human

behaviour, human behaviour also affects strategies and research into the impact of anti-

corruption measures seeks to shed light on the these interactions.

In the context of corruption as a concept has a moral, social, cultural and

economic connotation, a more refined understanding of the ways in which individuals

behaviours, experiences and attitudes interact with adopted strategies is required. The

319

surveys examine basic attitudes and practices with respect to corruption but as well as

differing in terms of scope and research methods these surveys tend to have a limited

focus and do not analyze key issues or the relationships between variables in detail.

Despite their limitations, it is useful to review some of their key findings and themes

since they give some indication of the levels of corruption experienced by responding

companies, the ways in which they have responded to the need to combat corruption,

both in terms of their attitudes towards regulatory measures. The findings reported in

this chapter are discussed in the last chapter of the thesis.

chapter-chapter --- vivviivi - shodhgangashodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/35901/10/chapter...

Documents