Bootstrapping India
 Main Page       Feedback? MehtaRahulC@yahoo.com

Why is corruption in India's Govt. lawyers much higher compared to govt lawyers of West?

    Contents
  1. Introduction
  2. Cuases why India's Govt lawyers are more corrupt/nexused
  3. cause #1 : Lack of Grand Jury System
  4. cause #2 : Several govt lawyers in US are elected
  5. cause #3 : Procedure to appoint govt lawyers in India are NOT broad based
  6. cause #4 : Lack of procedures to recall
  7. cause #5 : Crime records in India are NOT indexed
  8. cause #6 : Lack of transfers
  9. Summary
  10. How can corruption/nexuses in India's govt lawyers reduce?

Introduction

The purpose of this article is to enumerate and discuss ONLY
  1. factors which increase corruption/nexuses in govt lawyers in India, and are absent in West.
  2. factors which which decrease corruption/nexuses in govt lawyers in US/West, and are present in India.
The purpose of this article is NOT to enumerate factors that are present/absent in BOTH countries. Hence a large number of factors, such as moral values, greed etc will get dismissed as non-issues. Why? Becuase greed is present in US/West as well as India. And moral values are at same level in India as well as West.


Key reasons why corruption/nexuses in Govt lawyers in India is more than that in US/West

Following are the key reasons why prosecution in India is more nexused and less efficient :
    Factors related to prosecution system

  1. Lack of the Grand Jury System : The Grand Jurors DO NOT have long tenures and are seldom repeated. So Grand Jurors are relatively nexusless. Hence a prosecutor under Grand Jury System cannot behave recklessly. In India, there is NOT Grand Jury System, and only supervision a public prosecutor has is by District Collector, senior officers in Law Ministry and Law Minister. Typical govt lawyer has nexuses with all of them, as they are well known and have a long tenure. So effectively, there is no supervision.

  2. Many prosecutors in US are DIRECTLY elected, while ALL prosecutors in India are appointed. The election factor reduces corruption.

  3. In many districts and states in US, govt lawyers are appointed, but appointment procedures for govt lawyers in US are decentralized and broad based, and this reduces nexuses/corruption. While appointment rules in India in for govt lawyers are very narrow based and centralized.

  4. Lack of procedure to recall govt lawyers : In several districts in US, the citizens have a procedure to expel the govt lawyer before his term ends if the citizens believe that his performance is NOT satisfactory. No district in India has any procedure what-so-ever by which citizens can expel a govt lawyer.

  5. Lack of Indexes : India's MPs/MLAs/Ministers and senior officers have NOT drafted laws which enable junior officers to index and cross-index the crime records. While crime records in US are extensively indexed. Lack of indexing in crime records has drastically reduced efficiency of prosecution in India.

  6. Lack of transfers in govt lawyers : The nexuses in govt lawyers in US (their nexuses with private lawyers and criminals) as well as India have been more than their respective buerocracy due to lack of procedure of transfers. Which is why I propose that junior govt lawyers in India should be cadre-based (like IAS/IPS etc) and should be transferred every 2-3 years. No such mechanism exists anywhere in world today (except perhaps Japan).

    Factors outside prosection system

  7. Courts in India are defunct : the courts in India seldom punish corrupt prosecutors. So fear of courts prevents US/West prosecutors from indulging into bribery. Such fear is less in India and hence higher corruption in govt lawyers in India.

  8. Police in US/West are less corrupt/nexused and more efficient than policemen in India. This causes a negative impact on performance of govt lawyers, as govt layers are heavily dependant on policemen. The defunctness of policemen cripples the govt lawyers.

Why govt lawyers in India are more defunct/corrupt compared to those of US --- cause#1 : Lack of The Grand Jury System

Every district in US has a Grand Jury, which consists of about 30 citizens. The Grand Jurors are NOT chosen at random, but are selected. This does make Grand Jury more nexusprone than Jury (which is why the Grand Jury System that I have proposed involves selection of Grand Jurors by a random mechanism). But since the Grand Jurors have short tenure and are NOT repeated, the Grand Jurors are much less nexused than ordinary govt/court officers and politicians who have long career and are well known.

The prosecutors in US cannot charge a person without approval of Grand Jury. In India, prosecutor can decide to charge a person at will. This increased their power to file false cases, which prosecutors in India do routinuely to harass innocent persons mainly for political/caste rivalaries and to extract bribes. In addition, Grand Jurors have several powers over govt lawyers, which puts under check. In India, ONLY individuals who supervise govt lawyers are District Collectors, officers of Law Ministry and Law Minister. A typical state has 20-30 districts and a typical district will have 50-100 govt lawyers. Hence some 1000-2000 govt lawyers are supervised by Law Minister and his officers. Such centralization makes the whole process of supervision nexused, and so there is NO effective supervision on govt lawyers in India that would deter them from forming nexuses.


Why govt lawyers in India are more defunct/corrupt compares to those of US --- cause#2 : A large number of govt lawyers in US are elected, while ALL govt lawyers in India are appointed.

In India, ALL district prosecutors are appointed by the state's Law Minister appointed by the state's Chief Minister. In short, the Law Minister appoints only those lawyers with whom he has nexuses or with whom a strong MLA has nexuses. In India, nepotism is more than rampant when it comes to appointing in govt lawyers.

The CM in India's states has administrative powers to appoint 100s of district top-officers in various dept. So 1000s and 1000s of individuals inside govt and outside govt queue up to form nexuses with CM. As a result, CM in India are highly nexused individuals. Likeiwse, the Lae Minister in a state has partial power to decide appointments of 100s and 1000s of govt lawyers. So a large number of lawyers, criminals etc also queue up to form nexuses with them. And so persons CM/LM choose to appoint govt lawyers are strongly based on the nexuses CM/LM have. This increases the defunctness of prosecution.

Whereas in US, the prosecutors in many districts are elected. As a result, they are independent from Governors and otherofficers. And their nexuses with Governors and other officers are weaker. This has been one reason why procesution in US/West is less nexused than that in India.


Why govt lawyers in India are more defunct/corrupt compared to those of US --- cause#3 : The procedure to appoint govt lawyers in US is more broad based.

In India, ALL district prosecutors are appointed by the state's Law Minister appointed by the state's Chief Minister. In short, the Law Minister appoints only those lawyers with whom he has nexuses or with whom some MLA has nexuses.

The CM in India's states has administrative powers to appoint 100s of district top-officers in various dept. So 1000s and 1000s of individuals inside govt and outside govt queue up to form nexuses with CM. As a result, CM in India are highly nexused individuals. And so persons they choose to appoint Law Ministers and govt lawyers are based on the nexuses CM and law Ministers have. This increases the nexuses and hence defunctness of prosecution.

Whereas govt lawyers in many districts in US are DIRECTLY elected. And when appointed, they are indirectly appointed NOT by governors but by the district mayor after approval of municipal councilors. So one Mayor has power to appoint 1-10 or a few govt lawyers, unlike a CM of India who has power to appoint 100s of govt lawyers.

This reduces the role nexuses play in the appointment of govt lawyers.


Why govt lawyers in India are more defunct/corrupt compares to those of US --- cause#4 : Lack of procedure of recall

Not all, but several districts in US, citizens have procedures by which they can recall/expel a govt lawyer, without lobbying before top level authorities like Governors. This puts a powerful check over govt lawyers. No such recall procedures exist in India.


Why govt lawyers in India are more defunct/corrupt compares to those of US --- cause#5 : Lack of indexes in crime data

The MLAs/MPs in India have NOT made any laws in India which would require and enable the junior govt officers to index all the crime data with indexes of the accused, suspects, convicts etc. To begin with, MLAs/MPs have NOT made procedures that would provide each citizen of India a nationa-ID that can be used as index on crime data.

So the govt lawyers in India have no way to obtain historical data about suspects, accused, witnesses etc. In absence of information, the efficiency of even committed govt lawyers cant perform efficiently.

Solution? The citizens of India should force MPs to enact LM.03 procedure and using this LM.03 procedure, the citizens should pass laws to enact ID.01 procedure. This will enable the junior officers of India to index the crime data.


Why govt lawyers in India are more defunct/corrupt compared to those of US --- cause#6 : Lack of transfers

Unlike govt officers like policemen, collectors etc, the govt lawyers are NOT transferred. The lack of transfers has increased their nexuses with the local private lawyers, local intellectuals, local elitemen and local criminals. The problem in US is also the SAME --- that govt lawyers are NOT transferred and so they find it very easy to cultivate nexuses with other private lawyers as well as local criminals etc.

The problem in US is for Americans to solve, and I have NO proposals for them. As far as India, it is time we cultivate a IAS type National as well as State level cadres for govt lawyers, where individuals are the recruited using the same exams as in IAS/IPS and state cadres etc and then trasnferred every 3 years. The selected candidates should be required to go thru necessary law courses, and then they should be appointed as junior prosecutors in districts. The chief prosecutor of district should be elected/recallable by citizens, but the junior and middle level should compose of these individuals selected by written exams. And they should be transferred every 2-4 years like other govt officers. This will reduce their nexuses with local private lawyers, local intellectuals, local politicians, local criminals etc.


Why govt lawyers in India are more defunct/corrupt compared to those of US --- cause#7 : Courts in India are defunct

Given any person inside or outside govt, the fear of court action against him in future is a powerful deterant against wrong/illegal actions he may take and against careless he would otherwise show. The courts in India are far far more corrupt/nexused and defunct than courts in US (for reasons, please click here). So they do NOT deter govt lawyers from indulging into bribery etc. Whereas speed/nexuslessness of US courts forces govt lawyers in US to control their temptations.


Why govt lawyers in India are more defunct/corrupt compared to those of US --- cause#7 : Policemen in India are more defunct/corrupt

Given any person inside or outside govt, the fear of police action against him in future is a powerful deterant against wrong/illegal actions he may take and against carelessness he would otherwise show. The policemen in India are far far more corrupt/nexused and defunct than policemen in US (for reasons, please click here). So they do NOT deter govt lawyers from indulging into bribery etc. Whereas nexuslessness of US policemen forces govt lawyers in US to control their temptations.


Summary

The govt lawyers in India have much more nexuses and denser nexuses with private lawyers, MLAs/Ministers, criminals, elitemen etc compared to govt lawyers of US. This makes them far more corrupt and less efficient. This creates too many difficulties in the lives of us commons.

The prosecution in US is less nexused becuase
  1. US has Grand Jurors to supervise govt lawyers.
  2. Many Govt lawyers are DIRECTLY elected by citizens, and many are appointed by Distruct Mayors. In India, most govt lawyers are appointed by CM/PM and Law Minister of State/Central Govt.
  3. Since courts are defunct in India, govt lawyers in India are less afraid of forming nexuses with criminals and passing them unethical favors.
We, the commons of India, MUSt enact the above procedures. In addition, we should install procedure to transfer govt lawyers so that their nexuses with local private lawyers and local criminals reduce.

Solution : what can citizens do to improve India's prosecution?

  1. Steps 1-3 : The citizens of India should force Panchayat Members, MLAs and MPs to following laws : LM.01 , LM.02 , LM.03. These laws would enable citizens to take subsquent steps.

  2. Step 4 : The citizens should pass laws to enact procedure CT.06. This law will create a Grand Jury System in every district, which will be less nexused supervision than existing Maw Ministry.

  3. Step 5 : The citizens should pass laws to enact procedure PROSEC.02. To enact this law, the citizens would need to pass 1 law in Assembly and 1 law in District Panchayats (to see the draft of the laws, please click here. This procedure will enable the citizens to elect/recall chief district prosecutor. In addition, the procedure would also ensure that junior prosecutors are recruited strictly by written exams, and are transferred every 2-3 years.

These TRIVIAL steps will make India's prosecution far better than the prosecution of US/West.


If you have any questions, please mail it to MehtaRahulC@yahoo.com. Thousand thanks in advance.