Kathmandu, Jan 6: Nepal's ongoing struggle against corruption has faced persistent challenges due to an alleged nexus among political leaders, political appointees, and bureaucrats. However, the situation is expected to change now with the recent decision to empower the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA) with increased authority, including phone tapping and secret surveillance of corruption suspects. The State Affairs and Good Governance Committee under the House of Representatives unanimously endorsed a bill to amend the Corruption Prevention Act, which includes several provisions.
The decision will give the CIAA the much-needed rights that include rights to controlled investigation, undercover activities, telephone and media interception with court permission, access to electronic systems or devices, and ongoing monitoring of suspects to collect evidence. Once our parliament endorses the bill, which is most likely because the bill has been endorsed unanimously by the HoR committee, it will improve the CIAA’s anti-corruption efforts.
The allegations of rampant corruption in several government departments, where bureaucrats and public servants are accused of corrupt practices that have tarnished the government departments and tainted the government’s image, make it imperative for the anti-graft body to have increased authorities. This would curb the illegal and unethical acts taking place at various levels of public offices, ministries and departments.
Try these food items to whiten your teeth naturally!
However, while the added rights for the anti-graft body carry potential for enhancing investigations, they also pose a challenge regarding the utilization of such special rights, given the fact that the country has a system that is often compromised by the powers. These new rights can be rendered ineffective if our anti-corruption organization lacks autonomy and responsibility and faces pressures from the political class.
Cases of corruption in Nepal emerge from collusion between politicians, civil servants, and business interests. Corporate players often sway policy decisions or secure contracts through shady practices while misappropriating public resources alongside political leaders and government officials. Without expanded authorities and power to scrutinize private sector organizations, the CIAA's reach remains restricted, giving rise to corruption that will hit the nation’s coffers and initiatives for prosperity badly.
The CIAA lacks the mandate to investigate private sector affairs and the decisions of the Council of Ministers. Similarly, several incidents of corruption in Nepal take place at the policy level, meaning the government itself or ministers can influence cabinet decisions to bend or enact laws in their favor through cabinet decisions.
Another bothersome problem is the politicization of the CIAA itself. Appointments made to this organization often favor political ties over skills; this trend results in investigations that seem selective or biased—diminishing public trust and tarnishing its authority. Rather than serving as a neutral body, accusations frequently surface that suggest that the anti-corruption body is utilized for targeting political opponents while protecting those in power or in the ruling parties. For successful operation, enhancing the independence of the CIAA along with fair, transparent appointments is important. The new measures allowing phone tapping alongside other surveillance measures may necessitate a wider debate.
While such measures can play a key role in unearthing complex corruption networks, they also risk breaching privacy if the authorities misuse these rights. Critics that include legal professionals have warned that unchecked monitoring rights granted to the anti-graft body could be abused against critics instead of being used for anti-corruption efforts.
Nonetheless, if applied judiciously, these newly given powers could lead to significant outcomes in combating corruption. Controlled investigations and undercover efforts have the potential to dismantle the corruption networks, while responsible use of secret surveillance can reveal wrongdoings taking place at a higher level that often go unnoticed. Meanwhile, a seven-year imprisonment penalty placed on officials misusing phone tapping and surveillance measures represents a move towards emphasizing the importance of privacy, accountability and responsibility.
Success for the CIAA depends on how it can function with the new rights that grants more teeth to the nation’s constitutional anti-graft body. Confronted with allegations of conducting investigations on corruption cases in a feeble manner, the CIAA can act smoothly towards curbing corruption if it undertakes its responsibilities with no pressure coming to it from anywhere, especially from a nexus of influential leaders and powerful bureaucrats.
