The general lack of integrity is still a cause for concern, despite the focus on probity that we have fortunately witnessed in recent times.
I am reminded of an incident more than a decade ago when
a senior state level politician filed a motivated complaint, accusing me of dishonesty and
seeking an enquiry to probe charges. A direct confrontation
that followed set the matters right with doubts being raised on the
politicos capability to even understand what honesty or integrity meant. The
matter ended with a confession of the reasons behind the complaint followed by profuse
apologies, apologies that the politico continued with for years.
And that set me thinking –
why is it so easy to accuse someone of dishonesty, more so within the
governmental setups, a scenario that is witnessed in the form of a plethora of
vigilance cases, enquiries and charge sheets that engulf the environment. It is
sad that even a deviation from a laid down norm or a mistake is regarded as
malafide, a scenario suited to throttle initiatives.
It is not only about honesty. Honesty
is truthfulness, integrity goes much further. While honesty is about
acceptance of the truth in its absolute form always, integrity is about doing
the right thing under all circumstances. Integrity therefore is also about an impeccable
conduct and behavior for that is the right demeanor to possess.
Yet the blatant absence of it and
why? During my over four decades of serving with the government, the majority
of the officials I interacted with comprised of those who would do the right
thing only if there was no pressure whatsoever from influential quarters to do
otherwise. The silent minority who would do no wrong despite pressures also
comprised of two categories, one who did no wrong and delivered, while the bulk did no wrong and
also had no concern for delivery. The majority and the bulk of the minority,
both lacked integrity.
The system unfortunately
continues to regard everyone as devoid of honesty or integrity despite
occasional signs of being proven otherwise. To that extent the legacy left by
the british continues uninterrupted.
The widely prevalent belief that
regards check-posts as an appropriate deterrent for dishonest practices is also
misplaced. The more the number of check-posts and those who police, the greater
the ingenuity of those on the wrong side is my firm belief. If mere policing could reduce crime and
corruption, the job was simply confined to increasing the number of policemen. Our
rank inability to provide a corruption free society, a society where every
interaction of the common man with the sarkari tantra is not laced with graft,
despite the over powering presence of the watchdogs says it all.
And why not, the society and the
system generally lay no emphasis on the need for honesty and integrity. Never
in my career spanning over four decades have I witnessed a forum called by my
superior where issues related to honesty and integrity were discussed.
Trust deficit is a mild word,
lack of trust is most appropriate. Yes a system that does not trust its own
constituents can only propagate lack of integrity and that is what has happened.
Viewing every action with suspicion has become the norm.
Inculcating integrity in the
human resource has to be the numero uno priority for organizations as well as
the society and putting this issue bang on the table would start the ball
rolling.
