The 2G judgement is an indictment of every institution and individuals involved in them. It exposes the fact that the bureaucracy works at cross purposes. The 2G judgement could not establish criminality but because of the earlier Supreme Court decision it was not conclusively rejected. The prosecution conducted by the CBI could not muster sufficient evidence. The time has come to start a debate on the CBI’s autonomy and professionalism as well as its expertise in probing corruption cases. Is the CBI prone to victimisation and are corruption investigations politicised? Vijay Mallya put up a defence on these lines in London against his extradition. He may well end up successful. The CBI failed to secure prosecution sanction against a Congress leader on what appeared to be a mere technicality. A great deal of rhetoric is in the air about the canker of corruption in the country and the CBI is expected to eradicate it. But a former CBI head was removed himself on charges of corruption. It seems that there is no systemic remedy against corruption in this country. Demonetization has hardly been effective in serving its purpose. It is not enough to say that the UPA was corrupt. The allegation has to be proved. Hullabaloo in parliament will not do.
The Congress is now attacking the NDA about a Rafael deal scam. The Prevention of Corruption Act is not well defined. If there is corruption everywhere, how can you identify it? The CBI’s lack of professionalism is proven in many cases. The Sharda and Rose Valley scams have touched some but not all who are said to have been mired in them.