INTRODUCTION:

Corruption is a global evil. Corruption in India is the main problem since Independence. Mostly underdeveloped and developing countries are greatly effected by corruption. Corruption is closely associated with bribery which means given or take profit for some illegal work. Corruption has progressively involved in every sphere of Indian society. Corruption is a cancer that is not restricted to any particular political party. It infects the whole system. An honest politician has become an oxymoron. In India, people with an honest image are very few. In India, There are a bunch of scams oftenly in the Indian administration i.e. Bofors scam, Hawala Case, Fodder Scam, Taj Corridor scam, Satyam Scam, Commonwealth games scandel etc. According to the Corruption Perception Index 2009 Report released by Transparency International, Indias rank is 84th among 180 countries effected with corruption. The corruption methods also improve with the development of the nation. There are many causes of corruption in India. Nexus between Bureaucracrats, Politicial and criminals is the main cause of corruption in every country. Lack of ethical qualities and morality among administrators and politicans, complete lack of public corruption, illiteracy among people, poor economic infrastructure all these are corruption to tighten grip over the people. Complex laws and procedures to eliminate corruption discourage the people for taking steps against corruption. Corruption prevailed at large scale during election times and votes are bought with the help of bribary. Corruption has a worst impact on our economy and could malign our image in international scenario. Best example of this is Commonwealth games scam. Commonwealth games is a global phenomena and recently exposed scam has maligned the image of India in the global scenario. We will have to have planned measures to fight corruption. Bureaucracy should be made more citizen friendly, accountable and transparent. More and more courts should be opened for speedy justice. Lokpals and Vigilance Commissions should be more powerful and of independent nature so as to provide speedy justice. Other measures are - strict laws should be made; political interference should be minimized; power to make policies in public interest should be vested with independent commission; people should have a right to questioned the elected representatives and get answer; funding of elections should be banned and there should be State funding of election expenses for candidates and persons with criminal records should be denied tocontest elections. More areas of public interest should be covered under Right to opposition against allowed Information, which will empower the citizens to ask for more information. Stringent actions will be taken against corrupt officials. Immediate function which needs to be done is to literate the people. Whistle blowing is an honourable technique against corruption, recently in news. Whistle blower is a person who raises a concern about wrong doing occurring in an organization. Whistle blower frequently faces reprisal from organization. Whistle blowing policy should be made mandatory with clear cut guidelines for prosecuting intimidation of or retaliation against complainant and an act for the protection of Whistle blower should be made. The life and future of the nation is secure only when the nation is corruption free. Corruption is destruction and it cannot control unless citizen of country become an active partner to control it. Co-operation of the people to tackle this problem is must. dedicated

HISTERY
Merely shouting from the house tops that everybody is corrupt creates an atmosphere of corruption. People feel they are in a climate of corruption and they get corrupted themselves. The words of Jawaharlal Nehru, spoken shortly after Indias independence from British rule, seem particularly apt given the overtly Gandhian style of todays anti-corruption crusader, Anna Hazare. But for most Indians, Hazares movement has produced few surprises: there is a long-standing popular critique of the countrys apparently growing crisis of corruption that cuts across nearly every strata of society. Popular resignation about the permanence of corruption is partly explained by the political purchase of corruption as an idea and a term. Accusations of corruption have historically been wielded as a political weapon a means of tarnishing rivals in the right circumstances. During Indias very first General Election in 1951-2, newspapers and party offices, particularly those of the Congress party, were bombarded with allegations about corrupt electoral candidates. The system of food and civil supply was subject to commodity controls and rationing a legacy of the war years which had generated complex systems of patronage. These involved deeply entrenched black markets in lucrative industrial and agricultural concerns. This was the background to what was later known as Permit-Licence-Quota Raj the linking of business interests with political brokers. It is partly this nexus that underpins the protests in postliberalization India. But it wasnt just the circumstances of war that generated concerns about graft in the 1940s and fifties. More broadly, the problem of corruption seemed to correspond to phases of rapid political transformation. The first, officially coordinated anti-corruption drives, described as such, took place under the auspices of provincial Congress governments in the late 1930s, while the British still ruled at Indias centre. The Congress juxtaposed its democratic principles against corrupted systems of colonial despotism. The Congress governments of Bihar and Uttar Pradesh in those years also aimed to project themselves as realistic alternatives to the Raj regimes which took the notion of public service seriously. The Special Police Establishment, which undertook to prosecute (albeit quite ineffectively) instances of government servant corruption, followed from 1941. And in March 1947, on the eve of independence, the Government of India passed the Prevention of Corruption Act. In the wake of Partitions mass migrations, seizure of evacuee property and mob violence, state governments across India sought to clean up their administrations. In Uttar Pradesh, this operation was described by the early 1950s state government as an efficiency drive to root out useless officers. Conveniently, many of them were actual or intending evacuees to Pakistan. It took a massive (pending) regime transition to initiate official drives for anti-corruption at that time. On the streets too, independence helped to generate citizens movements in the late 1940s to protest against corrupt local rationing or police officers. The vernacular and English newspapers, previously muzzled by the British, were replete with corruption scandals, especially those linked to black marketeers. But there was something more profound happening in early postcolonial India, just as there is today. The larger discussions of corruption reached
2

to the roots of what Indians thought about the state, and their own sense of national belonging or alienation. The recent criticisms of Anna Hazare bear this out. The writer Arundhati Roy points out the danger of creating another unaccountable anti-corruption oligarchy. Others argue that Hazares proposed Lokpal Bill could jeopardise constitutional protections for disadvantaged communities. Some Dalit organizations fear that Hazares Lokpal Bill, the drafting of which has not hitherto involved minority representation, may undermine some structures of reservations. Still others suggest that Anna Hazares style, and that of his supporters, smacks of demagoguery and aggressive nationalism. In some ways, this is business as usual: India has a complex and highly developed system of fundamental rights provisions within its Constitution, and the country is certainly no stranger to vibrant public debate. Ever since the 2010 protests by the India Against Corruption activists, and more forcefully since Hazares recent fast, the issue of corruption has led Indians to re-evaluate what the state really means to them. What is its role? How far are its agents accountable, and to what extent does it protect civic and democratic rights? Such questions reflect back on the colonial past. Most stark in both the anti-corruption protests, and the recent critiques of Anna Hazare is something which both sides share a profound distrust of the state itself. Hazares Gandhian style is not only significant in its evocation of the father of the nation, but also in its reflection of older critiques of the colonial system as being corrupt, and as a regime which encouraged and nurtured societal corruption. Despite running a byzantine structure of administrative rules and procedures, the British in India rarely referred to the problem of corruption as such. Integrity among government servants was expected, but it was poorly policed and based on the assumption that the (largely white British) superior administrator was ultimately the principal figure who could be corrupted in a serious way. He, unlike his Indian subordinate, had much to lose and more to maintain as far as the regime was concerned. When faced with elected Congress regimes attempted exposure of administrative and police corruption in the late 1930s, colonial officials fell back on arguments that what Congressmen described as corruption, might often be better defined as custom. The British Raj was run on a financial shoe-string, with officers thinly stretched over vast areas and populations. It was heavily dependent on armies of Indian subordinates, and could ill afford to consistently root out the customary arrangements which secured its authority in the locality. Powerful landowners might control the local police constable, or compel free labour among the landless poor. The Raj needed him to help maintain law and order, and pay revenue. A local revenue official might take a commission (or dasturi customary payment) to allow cultivators access to land records, or a railway official might accept a gift (or daalii) to arrange faster carriage for consignments of goods.

Index of Corruption by Indian states

CORRUPTION IN INDIA

CORRUPTION IN POLITICS:
Criminalization of Indian politics is a main problem. In July 2008 Washington Times reported that nearly a fourth of the 540 Indian Parliament members faced criminal charges, "including human trafficking, immigration rackets, embezzlement, rape and even murder".At state level, things are often worse. "I would go to the length of giving the whole congress a decent burial, rather than put up with the corruption that is rampant." --- Mahatma Gandhi May 1939 This was the outburst of Mahatma Gandhi against rampant corruption in Congress ministries formed under 1935 Act in six states in the year 1937. The disciples of Gandhi however, ignored his concern over corruption in post-Independence India, when they came to power. Over fifty years of democratic rule has made the people so immune to corruption that they have learnt how to live with the system even though the cancerous growth of this malady may finally kill it. The recent Tehelka episode surcharged the political atmosphere of the country but it hardly exposed anything, that was unknown to the people of this biggest democratic polity.
Politicians are fully aware of the corruption and nepotism as the main reasons behind the fall of Roman empire, the French Revolution, October Revolution in Russia, fall of Chiang Kai-Shek Government on the mainland of China and even the defeat of the mighty Congress party in India. But they are not ready to take any lesson from the pages of history.

The history of corruption in post-Independence India starts with the Jeep scandal in 1948, when a transaction concerning purchase of jeeps for the army needed for Kashmir operation was entered into by V.K.Krishna Menon, the then High Commissioner for India in London with a foreign firm without observing normal procedure. Contrary to the demand of the opposition for judicial inquiry as suggested by the Inquiry Committee led by Ananthsayanam Ayyangar, the then Government announced on September 30, 1955 that the Jeep scandal case was closed. Union Minister G.B.Pant declared "that as far as Government was concerned it has made up its mind to close the matter. If the opposition was not satisfied they can make it an election issue. Soon after on February 3,1956 Krishna Menon was inducted into the Nehru cabinet as minister without portfolio. In 1950, A.D.Gorwala, an eminent civil servant was asked by Government of India to recommend improvements in the system of governance. In his report submitted in 1951 he made two observations: One, quite a few of Nehru's ministers were corrupt and this was common knowledge. Two, even a highly responsible civil servant in an official report as early as 1951 maintained that the Government went out of its way to shield its ministers (Report on Public Administration, Planning Commission, Government of India 1951) Corruption charges in cases like Mudgal case (1951), Mundra deals (1957-58), MalaviyaSirajuddin scandal (1963), and Pratap Singh Kairon case (1963) were levelled against the Congress ministers and Chief Ministers but no Prime Minister resigned. The Santhanam Committee, which was appointed by the Government in 1962 to examine the issue of corruption in its report submitted in 1964 observed: There is widespread impression
7

that failure of integrity is not uncommon among ministers and that some ministers, who have held office during the last sixteen years have enriched themselves illegitimately, obtained good jobs for their sons and relations through nepotism and have reaped other advantages inconsistent with any notion of purity in public life. The following comments of Nehru on the memorandum of charges against Pratap Singh Kairon submitted to the President of India by the non-Communist opposition in Punjab suggest his approach on corruption - The question thus arises as to whether the chief minister is compelled to resign because of adverse findings on some questions of fact by Supreme Court. The ministers are collectively responsible to the legislature. Therefore, the matter was one, which concerned the assembly. As a rule therefore, the question of removing a minister would not arise unless the legislature expressed its wish by a majority vote. (Pathology of Corruption by S.S.Gill) Thus, we find that while Nehrus tolerance of corruption among his ministers legitimized this malady, his daughter Indira Gandhi institutionalized it by holding both the posts of the Prime Minister and party president. By doing so she was herself controlling the party funds, which gave birth to the money power in politics. The famous V.P.Malhotra (Chief Cashier of State Bank of India) case in which he got a telephone call believing from Indira Gandhi to pay Rs,60 lakhs to one Nagarwal remained a mystery. Corruption cases like Fairfax, HBJ Pipeline, and HDW Submarine deal came up since then. The famous Bofors deal is well known. Narsimha Rao was the first Prime Minister being prosecuted in corruption charges. Cases like Rs.2500 crore -Airbus A-320 deal with France involving kickback (1990), Harshad Mehta security scam (1992), Gold Star Steel and Alloys controversy (1992), JMM bribery case, Hawala scam of Rs. 65 crore and Urea scam (1996) also came up during the period of Narsimha Rao Government. In the present context corruption is so much linked with power that our politicians have adopted a cynical attitude toward political morality. Maneuvering the anti-defection law for electoral politics with the help of both money and muscle power and other unfair means for the sake of power have affected the political morality of all the political parties and as such none of them can claim themselves to be faithful to nation in true sense. It was pathetic to see an excellent orator of congress struggling to brush away the past of the congress in the recent Big fight programme of Star TV. The collapse of the Janata Party Government (1977-80), fall of V.P.Singh and Chandrashekhar Government (1990-91), turning his minority Government into majority by Narsimha Rao, split in Telugu Desam Party (1994), defection of Ajit Singh with his supporters to Congress (1993), defection of S.S.Vaghela from BJP, maneuvering defection by Kalyan Singh to keep the BJP led Government in power in UP are some of examples to prove that a sizeable number of our politicians are not immune to corruption.

CORRUPTION IN ADMINISTRATION:
A 2009 survey of the leading economies of Asia, revealed Indian administration to be not just least efficient out of Singapore, Hong Kong, Thailand, South Korea, Japan, Malaysia,
8

Taiwan, Vietnam, China, Philippines and Indonesia..further it was also found that working with the India's civil servants was a "slow and painful" process. Officials often steal state property. In Bihar, more than 80% of the subsidized food aid to poor is stolen. In Government Hospitals, corruption is associated with non availability of medicines (or duplicate medicines), getting admission and consultations with doctors. In 70s, political leaders of India began instructing their subordinate administrative officials to collect illegal funds from the people by hook or crook and supply them. This gave free hand to the administration to oppress and exploit people in all the ways they could, like delays in working until a bribe was paid to them, illegal arrests until a protection fee was paid to the police, wrong billing by public utility companies if the officials are not bribed, etc. Since, common people don't have enough resources to pay bribes for everything and to save themselves, cunning persons began taking undue advantages of the system wherever they can like thefts of electricity, encroachment of public properties, getting benefits of social welfare schemes without being eligible, etc. - to get benefits of the corrupt system. This has resulted in overall corruption of minds in the country. Ram Bansal became the target of the administrative and police officials with accusations on him that he was flaring the matter and instigating the poor family to protest. To begin with, the City Magistrate threatened him with dire consequences if he did not end the protest fast and remove the protest camp from the office campus which was replied in negative. Then came Police Circle Officer (City) Dr Vivek Ranjan with a large police contingent and called the author to end the protest immediately. He abused the author in his filthy language - a cheat instigating the poor family for personal gains, etc. This was reported to the City Magistrate who justified it saying that it was the language of the police included in their training for duties. After failure of this trial, the protest continued peacefully. At about 5 pm, the administrative a police officials came again with over 100 police constables and a lot of vehicles to arrest the peaceful protesters whose number was only 10 - five on fast and 5 more persons sitting in the camp as their supporters. A gross misuse of public authority and funds by the corrupt officials to save the corrupt official of the education department. Some media persons were called in by the protesters and the official crowd dissipated gradually without any action. Then, the administrators called in a medical team who examined all the five on the fast. At about 9 in the night, a large police contingent under leadership of City Magistrate Umesh Misra and CO (City) Vivek Ranjan again appeared on the scene, told the fasting protesters that the Doctor has declared them in critical condition. The author asked for the medical report which was not provided and all the five fasting protesters were arrested and were taken to a government hospital and admitted under tight police custody. Since the protesters were feeling healthy, they refused to take any medical treatment and food in the hospital and continued with their fast. Back in the protest camp with only 3 women there at that time, the police personnel pushed the poor women out damaged the cloth covering and looted all the belongings of the protesters in
9

the darkness of the night. This was reported to the District Magistrate, Ghaziabad and Divisional Commissioner, Meerut through FAX messages on 25th March 2011 but nothing has been heard from them so far. Thus, all sorts of police misconduct against common people is not only tolerated but also promoted by the administrators of the country making the administration worse than that in India under British before 1947. The protesters continued their fast in the hospital making a telling effect on their health. Many offers from the administration side came up all with a single purpose of saving the corrupt official of the education department, which were rejected by the protestrs. This heated up the matter, and the administrative threats got converted into . Since, the officials of education department and of district administration did not heed to her over 50 pleas, she along with her 3 family members sat on a 'fast unto death' in front of office of the District Magistrate Ghaziabad on 21/03/2011. The district administration under leadership of City Magistrate - Umesh Misra, immediately came into action against the helpless poor rural family with threats of beating by police, arrests, etc. The family called a social worker Ram Bansal (a 62-year old Engineer and the Author of this page) to help in the peaceful protest. For the whole day on 23rd, the threats continued but were forcefully replied by Ram Bansal but the administrative and police officials did not relent. So, to put his full mite into the protest, Ram With this, Ram Bansal became the target of the administrative and police officials with accusations on him that he was flaring the matter and instigating the poor family to protest. To begin with, the City Magistrate threatened him with dire consequences if he did not end the protest fast and remove the protest camp from the office campus which was replied in negative. Then came Police Circle Officer (City) Dr Vivek Ranjan with a large police contingent and called the author to end the protest immediately. He abused the author in his filthy language - a cheat instigating the poor family for personal gains, etc. This was reported to the City Magistrate who justified it saying that it was the language of the police included in their training for duties. The protesters continued their fast in the hospital making a telling effect on their health. Many offers from the administration side came up all with a single purpose of saving the corrupt official of the education department, which were rejected by the protestrs. Thus, all sorts of police misconduct against common people is not only tolerated but also promoted by the administrators of the country making the administration worse than that in India under British before 1947.

CORRUPTION IN JUDICIARY:
Corruption is rampant in the judicial system of India. According to Transparency International, judicial corruption in India is attributable to factors such as "delays in the disposal of cases, shortage of judges and complex procedures, all of which are exacerbated by a preponderance of new laws".
10

A drastic overhaul of the judiciary has become imperative in view of the increasing cases of corruption involving High Court judges. The Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill tabled in the Lok Sabha is welcome, but the process of impeachment should be expedited. Corruption is eating into the vitals of our polity. No institution is free of this menace. The Supreme Courts observations on the rot in the Allahabad High Court are disturbing. A Bench consisting of Justice Markandey Katju and Justice Gyan Sudha Misra said on November 26 that most judges of this High Court are corrupt and collude with advocates. With a strength of 160 judges, the Allahabad High Court has a rich history. Remember the historic judgement of Justice Jagmohanlal Sinha on June 12, 1975 when he quashed Indira Gandhis election to the Lok Sabha from Rae Bareli? He declared her guilty of electoral corruption and disqualified her from contesting elections for six years. His bold judgement shook the country and led to the imposition of Emergency 13 days later. Sadly, many High Court judges are facing charges of corruption. The cases involving Justice Soumitra Sen of the Calcutta High Court, Chief Justice P.D. Dinakaran of the Sikkim High Court (formerly of the Karnataka High Court) and Justice Nirmal Yadav of the Uttarakhand High Court (formerly of the Punjab and Haryana High Court) are all at various stages. The charge that many former Chief Justices of India were corrupt has given a new twist to judicial corruption. The Supreme Court is seized of the matter (see box). There is also the Rs 23-crore Ghaziabad PF scam in which a Supreme Court judge (since retired), seven Allahabad High Court judges, 12 judges of the subordinate courts and six retired High Court judges are allegedly involved. The key accused, Ashutosh Asthana, died in jail mysteriously in October, 2009. He had provided vital documents to the CBI that established connivance of these judges. Recently, the Supreme Court rejected the CBIs plea for shifting this case to New Delhi. Corrupt judges in the higher judiciary can be removed only by impeachment. However, this method is cumbersome. The problem is not just a question of devising proposals for removal. The Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, prefaces impeachment by judicial inquiry. In Supreme Court Judge Justice V. Ramaswamys case, the inquiry indicted him but the impeachment motion fell through in Parliament in 1992.

The need for an institutional mechanism to deal with cases of misconduct against a High Court judge as also the question of interim arrangements on whether the judge be assigned work pending investigation has long been felt. A beleaguered judge continuing in office smacks of grave impropriety. Remember how Karnataka High Court Chief Justice P.D. Dinakaran continued to attend court, took decisions on the administrative side and even delayed his departure for Gangtok?

11

The government should fast-track all cases of moral turpitude, corruption and nepotism. The process of impeachment of a judge should be speeded up with a time limit for obtaining the Presidents sanction and impeaching him/her. The Centres decision to set up a National Judicial Oversight Committee (NJOC) to look into complaints against Supreme Court and High Court judges and impose minor penalties or recommend their removal is welcome. This has been provided for in the Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill 2010 tabled in the Lok Sabha on December 1. Significantly, the Bill is aimed at replacing the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968. The NJOC will consist of a former Chief Justice of India, a Supreme Court judge, the High Court Chief Justice, an eminent person to be nominated by the President and the Attorney-General of India (ex-officio). The NJOC will send every complaint to a scrutiny panel which, in turn, will examine it and report back to it within three months. Based on its recommendation, the NJOC will get the complaint examined by an investigating panel. Both the scrutiny and investigating panels can summon people and ask for public records. They will also have the power of search and seizure. It is debatable whether the executive should be given the power to retire judges. This power should remain in the hands of the judiciary itself to maintain the independence of the judiciary which is the cornerstone of the Constitution. Indeed, any amendment of the constitutional provision of impeachment will have to pass the test of judicial scrutiny. Otherwise, the Supreme Court will quash it as null and void for violating the basic structure of the Constitution. Justice Katju and Justice Misra have directed the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court to stem the rot. But can a Chief Justice alone help improve things without the force of law? They also referred to the syndrome of uncle judges. The Union Law Ministry admits that this menace has spread to many High Courts, including those in Chandigarh, Shimla and Jaipur. In its 230th Report (2009), the Law Commission has recommended that in order to eliminate the practice of uncle judges, the judges, whose kith and kin are practicing in a High Court, should not be posted in the same High Court. Union Law Minister M. Veerappa Moily should help check this menace. There is a need to change the method of selection of judges. The collegium system has failed to attract persons of impeccable integrity. The country deserves a more credible, transparent and broad-based institutional mechanism for selecting judges.

ANTI CORRUPTION EFFORTS: Right to information act:

It is a law enacted by the Parliament of India giving citizens of India access to records of the Central Government and State Government. The 2007 report by Transparency International puts India at the 70th place and states that significant improvements were made by India in reducing corruption.
12

Information as a term has been derived from the Latin words Formation and Forma which means giving shape to something and forming a pattern, respectively.Information adds something new to our awareness and removes the vagueness of our ideas. Information is Power, and as the Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee stated, the Government wants to share power with the humblest; it wants to empower the weakest. It is precisely because of this reason that the Right to Information has to be ensured for all. It will be interesting to mention that Press Council of India prepared a draft Bill in 1996 to make a provision for securing right to information. This draft Bill was named Right to Information Bill, 1996. The Institute of Rural Development, Hyderabad also prepared a bill in 1997. Both the bills initiated a national debate on the issue of Effective and Responsive Administration. The Govt. of India appointed a working group on January 2, 1997. The terms of reference of the Working Group included the examination of feasibility and need to introduce a full fledged Right to Information Bill. This group recommended that a legislation in this regard is not only feasible but is also vitally necessary. The Working Group recommended that the bill should be named as Freedom of Information Bill as the Right to Information has already been judicially recogonised as a part of the fundamental right to free speech and expression. As no right can be absolute, the Right to Information has to have its limitations. There will always be areas of information that should remain protected in public and national interest. Moreover, this unrestricted right can have an adverse effect of an overload of demand on administration. So the information has to be properly, clearly classified by an appropriate authority. Information is indispensable for the functioning of a true democracy. People have to be kept informed about current affairs and broad issues political, social and economic. Free exchange of ideas and free debate are essentially desirable for the Government of a free country. Right to know is also closely linked with other basic rights such as freedom of speech and expression and right to education. Its independent existence as an attribute of liberty cannot be disputed.

COMPUTERIZATION:
BHOOMI is a project jointly funded by the Government of India and the Government of Karnataka to digitize the paper land records and create a software mechanism to control changes to the land registry in Karnataka. The project was designed to eliminate the long-standing problem of inefficiency and corruption. Patterns of corruption vary from society to society and over time. This isparticularly the case when we consider the South, the Third World orthe developing countries. In order to understand the immense diversity of its origins, forms and effects across developing countries,
13

we shouldexamine the roles of both the internal 'stakeholders' in developing societies(such as politicians, business cliques and junior civil servants) as well asexternal actors (including western multinational companies and internationalfinancial institutions). In addition, reform strategies should take account of widely differing economic, legal and political contexts. Effective anticorruption strategies need to be tailored to the social environment in which corruption occurs. As a result of this variety in patterns of corruption, there are problems inevaluating the current diversity of corruption and anti-corruption efforts;many advocate a single universal strategy to fight corruption. The intentionof this chapter is to assess corruption and anti-corruption strategies inBotswana, Ecuador, Hong Kong and Tanzania, as well as attempts toreduce customs fraud in Mali and Senegal, in the light of such universalsolutions. The chapter starts by outlining the current framework of governance and economic and political liberalisation within which many developing-country reform efforts are situated. This new reform agendaneeds to be examined with reference to the huge upsurge in interest in reducing visible instances of public sector corruption in the late 1990s. Why has there been a 'corruption eruption' in recent years? The chapter subsequently outlines the key issues that need to be considered when combating corruption. A central section of the chapter considers the diversity of corruption and anti-corruption efforts found in the cases that were examined during the UNDP-PACT and OECD Development Centre Workshop. The concluding discussion focuses upon the major strategic choices required in designing a shortterm, effective anti-corruption effort and reconsiders the universal solutions proposed. The academic and policy-orientated debate on the character of corruption and the effectiveness of anti-corruption strategies has been changed markedly by events in developing countries and the former Soviet Block in the mid- and late-1980s Arguments about curbing corruption now take place in a new context: we are in anera of political and administrative reform, structural adjustment and what Samuel Huntington has called the Third Wave of democratisation in developing and transitional countries.

What are the solutions?

Reduce corruption for Govt services by use of technology such as E-Government and reduction of Government control. Transparency in Government contracting etc. Encourage people to vote. Educate the poor that the freebies given during elections are stolen money. Encourage citizens to say No to bribes. Whistleblowers play a major role in the fight against corruption (See the TI page here http://www.transparency.org/index.php/news_room/in_focus/2007/whistleblowers). India even today does not have a law to protect whistleblowers. However subsequent to the murder of whistleblower Sri Satyendra Dubey, Government of India after much pressure directed by an
14

order making the Central Vigilance Commission to hear and protect whistleblowers. The latest Administrative Reforms Commission also has suggested to encourage whistleblowing and to protect whistleblowers. But this benefit is not available to whistleblowers working to any officer working under state governments. An ongoing effort can be seen here http://fightcorruption.wikidot.com . http://www.corruptioninindia.org is another "not for profit" website dedicated to increase awareness against corruption in India and contains comprehensive info of corruption in India. On the evening of 27th - the seventh day of the fast, an honest and upright top-ranking official of Ghaziabad district administration - Chief Development Officer,Ajay Shankar Pandey came to the hospital to negotiate a solution. He offered not only to provide full justice to the victimized teacher but also punishment to the guilty in the case within 10 days. Influenced by the image and past performance of the officer, his offer was immediately accepted and the fast was ended. As a counter-point to Anna's over-hyped work re: the LP Bill (which appears likely to get some traction, given the mass mobilisation involved), let me extract the key reforms from my book, Breaking Free of Nehru (BFN) to outline what India actually needs to implement in order to remove corruption. A compensation mechanism for peoples representatives that will eliminate all reasonably foreseeable incentives for corruption, or will otherwise promote the freedom of citizens; andany matter related to the mechanisms of political representation, such as electoral laws. The security deposit for elections would be increased to Rs 5 lakhs from the current Rs 10,000, and forfeited when less than one-twentieth of valid votes are polled by a candidate. This lower forfeiture limit will allow many more candidates to contest, while the much higher security deposit will deter non-serious candidates. There is clearly some arbitrariness in these numbers which will need to be fine-tuned over time to ensure that the gate is kept open for serious candidates but shut out for frivolous ones.

15

CONCLUSION :

Be the change, you want to change in the world.

Stop corruption save india.

CONCLUSION :
16

Be the change, you want to change in the world.

Stop corruption save india.

17

CONCLUSION :

Be the change, you want to change in the world.

Stop corruption save india.

18