Problem of Corruption | Social Issue Essay, Article, Paragraph for Class 12, Graduation and Competitive Examination.

Problem of Corruption

Scheme of the essay:

Exposition: Corruption has become endemic in India.

Rising Action: Even if some are sentenced on the charge of corruption there will be no change.

Climax:

(1) Causes of corruption (a) Corruption emerges when an individual in authority violates the principle (b) When an official fails to keep the interest of the nation in mind. So, there are two categories of reasons for corruption (c) sociological institutional (d) the main cause is the interference of the govt. in economy.

(2) Cure Minimising govt’s. intervention in the economy is a sustainable way to reduce corruption.

Falling Action: There are of course moral, social, and humane reasons for reducing corruption.

Ending: Eliminate corruption by minimizing government intervention in the economy.

Beyond dispute, corruption is endemic in India. The flurry of resignations by members of the Union Cabinet and others is merely the latest episode in a long and unedifying history.

The outcome this time is not likely to be any different from the past. The headlines will soon disappear, even as investigations continue. There may or may not be convictions. And even if some individuals are sentenced on the charges of corruption, there will be no fundamental change in the system.

High-profile campaigns against corruption are usually short-lived and rarely accomplish much, in a society where such practices are deep-rooted and widespread. That is evident from India’s own recent history, as well as that of many other countries. If a government, and a society are serious about drastically cleaning the houses, it is important to recognise why corruption exists. Only when the source is identified it is possible to tackle the problem.

Corruption is generally considered to have occurred when an individual in authority violates the principle of arm’s length relations. In an ideal world, an official would make decisions based solely on rules, and consideration of the public interest.

When an official makes a decision that fails to fulfill either of those conditions for personal gain, a charge of corruption is justified. The matter is complicated by the neither comprehensive nor inflexible approach-they usually allows some discretion to the implementing official.

The problem, of course, is to determine when an official has crossed the line into corruption. Then, possibly there may be no direct payment as quid pro quo for an official making a corrupt decision. While straight bribes are by no means uncommon, often payment is more subtle and indirect, such as favours to be dispensed later. This could span the range of lavish gifts later, or a job offer for the official or a child, or even contributions to the political party – a claim being made by many of the accused now.

In countries like India, the reasons for corruption can be broadly divided into two categories sociological and institutional. Social norms in India, with their emphasis on family and personal ties, make the implementation of arms-length relations difficult.

But that is only a part of the larger problem, which is the result of policies pursued deliberately for over four decades. The pursuit of socialism, and the activist government such a political philosophy implied, created numerous avenues of corruption.

The larger the role of government, and the more the government intervenes in the economy, the more power officials – politicians and bureaucrats – have over a larger array of activities. The government has used virtually all instruments available to direct economic activity into areas that is deemed optimal.

For example, in the license-permit raj that came to be, officials determine which industries were essential and which firms would receive licenses and which investment was a high priority. Among the other largesse available was subsidised credit, access to tightly rationed foreign exchange, and tax incentives for preferred investments. All of these activities have substantial economic value in themselves, all licences and permits were extremely valuable.

Given the extensive use of these instruments, and the lack of a credible threat of retribution for abuse, the systemic corruption was almost inevitable.

The corruption that the system spawned came with a heavy cost. All too often, bribes and kickbacks are simply accepted as the cost of doing business. And they are. Corruption adds a serious burden on businesses and reduces their competitiveness.

There are large secondary costs of corruption when it results in distortions in investment and production decisions When investment decisions or government procurement are determined by bribes, there is a huge efficiency cost. The same argument applies to human beings as well. If connections and bribes rather than merit determine who gets employed, efficiency suffers.

There are hard, economic reasons to reduce the level of corruption, apart from the obvious moral social, and human ones. If the social fabric of India makes arms-length relations difficult to maintain, there is only one way that corruption can be reduced significantly. And that is by reducing the role of the government.

If officials no longer have largess to hand out, there will no longer be any reason to pay bribes. Of course, officials will always yield some power. However it is necessary to restrict the role of the government to those sectors where the market will not work efficiently, if left to itself, such as health, education, and environment.

Eliminating, or minimising government intervention in the economy is the best, and perhaps the only method of a sustainable reduction in corruption.