Are the existing corruption laws sufficient?

On February 4, trial court dismissed Dr. Subramanian Swami’s petition seeking prosecution of present Home Minister, P. Chidambaram in 2G spectrum. According to trail court, the decision taken by a public servant didn’t come under criminal culpability simply because it caused the loss of public exchequer. Some of the key points of judgment are: 

• The decision of the spectrum price was taken by both the Telecom Ministry and the Finance Ministry in unison. P. Chidambaram agreed with A. Raja that the spectrum price would be same as discovered in the year 2001 and also, told Mr. A. Raja that there is no need to revisit it. This decision was subsequently conveyed to the Hon'ble Prime Minister. 
• There is no material on the record to show that incriminating act on the part of Home Minister. 
• There is no evidence on record to suggest that there was an agreement between him and Mr. Raja to subvert the telecom policy 
• Mr. P. Chidambaram was party to only two decisions, i.e., keeping the spectrum prices at 2001 level and dilution of equity by the two companies which is not sufficient for criminal proceedings. 

One positive side of the judgment is that now government can function more freely in coming budget session of the parliament which I believe is very essential for the country. 

Justice O.P. Saini is one of eminent judges of the country. It’s really tough to comment on his judgement. Also, I am not in any position (in terms of procedures of law) to do so. Let’s not focus on the 2G case only but look for a bigger picture. This verdict has surely raised some serious deficiencies of our law system. 

With existing laws, is it possible to prosecute any public servant in the majority of corruption cases? How one can show the criminal intent of somebody especially in a high profile cases? It can only be achieved by sting operations or cash tracking which is highly unlikely in majority of cases. The bar set for criminal culpability in corruption cases is so high that majority of corrupts will fall under it. Also, remember, Swami’s petition was only for the inquiry. What will happen to the trail in high profile cases? Is there any hope that justice can be delivered in high profile cases? It’s time to introspect our laws about corruption. Nobody is denying that we need to save the public servants against frivolous complaints and need to give them enough safety cover so that they can take a prudent decision. But in doing so, a system shouldn’t be made that encourages corruption and malpractices. It’s time to make stringent laws so that justice can be delivered. It’s time to bring transparency and accountability in the system. This is important not only to avoid financial loss due to corruption but also to keep up the morale and confidence of the citizens.