Ethics Theory, TLP-UPSC Mains Answer Writing
Q. 5. Non-performance of duty by a public servant is a form of corruption. Do you agree with this view? Justify your answer. (150 words, 10 marks)
Introduction
According to Transparency International, corruption is defined as “the abuse of entrusted power for private gain.” Non-performance of duty by public servants represents a critical dimension of corruption that undermines governance effectiveness and public trust.
Body
Agreement with the View: Non-Performance as Corruption
- Breach of Public Trust: Public servants are entrusted with specific responsibilities and are compensated from public funds to fulfill these duties. Example: A teacher who regularly remains absent from school violates the social contract with students and society.
- Indirect Financial Loss to the State: Non-performance leads to wastage of public resources and salaries paid without corresponding work output. Example: Revenue officials who delay tax collection cause financial losses to the government exchequer.
- Denial of Public Services: Citizens are deprived of their rightful services, creating barriers to accessing government benefits and programs. Example: A Block Development Officer who fails to implement welfare schemes denies benefits to intended beneficiaries under Schemes such as MGNREGA or Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana.
- Erosion of Administrative Efficiency: Non-performance creates bottlenecks in governance machinery and hampers policy implementation. Example: Delayed file processing in government offices affects timely decision-making and service delivery, impacting Digital India initiatives.
- Moral Hazard and Systemic Impact: Non-performance sets a precedent for others and gradually corrupts the entire administrative culture. Example: When senior officials are negligent, it encourages similar behavior among subordinates.
Counter-Arguments: Limitations of the View
- Definitional Ambiguity: Corruption traditionally involves active wrongdoing for personal gain, while non-performance may be passive negligence. Example: An officer facing personal health issues may be unable to perform duties without corrupt intent.
- Systemic Constraints: Non-performance might result from inadequate resources, poor infrastructure, or systemic failures rather than individual corruption. Example: A doctor in a remote health center cannot perform effectively without medicines and equipment.
- Lack of Criminal Intent: Legal definitions of corruption often require mens rea (guilty mind) and specific intent to gain improperly. Example: Incompetence due to lack of training differs from deliberate misconduct for personal benefit.
- Institutional Failures: Non-performance may reflect broader governance failures, unclear job descriptions, or inadequate supervision. Example: Employees may not perform due to ambiguous role definitions or lack of performance monitoring.
However, Despite these limitations, non-performance is a form of corruption as it misuses public trust and resources for personal convenience. The harmful impact on citizens and governance makes it a serious corruption issue that needs immediate action.
Measures to Address Non-Performance
- Strengthening Accountability Mechanisms: Regular performance appraisals and monitoring systems can identify and address non-performance promptly, as envisioned under the Annual Performance Appraisal Report (APAR) system.
- Capacity Building and Training: Mission Karmayogi (National Programme for Civil Services Capacity Building) focuses on continuous skill development to ensure public servants are equipped to perform their duties effectively.
- Clear Job Descriptions and Performance Standards: Well-defined roles and measurable targets help establish clear expectations and accountability, supported by the Central Secretariat Manual of Office Procedure.
- Incentive and Penalty Systems: Performance-based rewards through schemes like Performance-Related Incentive Scheme (PRIS) and appropriate disciplinary measures under CCS (Conduct) Rules can motivate effective service delivery.
- Citizen Feedback and Social Audits: Public participation in monitoring government services through platforms like MyGov and social audits under MGNREGA creates external pressure for performance improvement.
Conclusion
Non-performance constitutes passive corruption, violating public trust and wasting resources. While different from active corruption, it equally undermines governance effectiveness and requires comprehensive accountability measures.
