The Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA) is a constitutionally-mandated body to investigate suspected cases of corruption and abuse of authority by public office holders. It carries out its own investigations and on that basis files court cases against suspected individuals. The importance of such a body for a country that consistently ranks among the most corrupt in the world cannot be emphasized enough. CIAA could indeed make a big contribution in reducing corruption in our public bodies. But like many public enterprises in poor countries an all-too-common malady seems to afflict CIAA: political score-settling. It is hard to read its selective activism any other way. It recently initiated investigations into over 40 high-ranking public servants, including former and incumbent government ministers. It suspects them of accumulating a 'disproportionate' amount of property through the abuse of their authority. Interestingly, Chief CIAA Commissioner Lokman Singh Karki is believed to be heading these investigations himself, with the support of one other commissioner. The five other commissioners in the anti-graft body, apparently, are clueless about it. The more you look into the new CIAA cases, the more suspicious you become.Otherwise it's inconceivable that Ganesh Thapa, the former head of the national football governing body, who has already been punished by FIFA with a prolonged ban, would not be among those being investigated. Or how Gopal Bahadur Khadka, who, as the head of the national oil monopoly has accepted to illegally awarding an oil contract to a private importer, is now under investigation, not over the contract, but over his property details. Curiously, none of former Nepali Congress ministers has made the hit list; nor has a single former Madheshi minister. Commission Chief Karki must come clean on this selective justice. More than a few eyebrows were raised when Karki was picked as the new CIAA chief two years ago. He was someone who was held accountable by a government commission for suppression of peaceful protests during the 2006 people's movement. Rumors were rife at the time that Karki had possibly the strongest lobby backing him: India. Having such a controversial figure atop a vital agency like CIAA, we had written at the time, was going to invite all kinds of problems in the future.
The worst fears over Karki are now being vindicated. As it is, of the many cases that CIAA files with the Special Court and the Supreme Court every year, only a tiny fraction lead to successful prosecution. In recent times it has lost almost all its high-profile cases: those involving Pokhara University, Purbanchal University and the Cricket Association of Nepal being three of the most notable ones. It is clear that something is badly amiss in CIAA and the way it brings cases against public office-holders. The parliament must seek clarification from its officials on why it selectively targets people and why even those with proven record of corruption have been left off the hook. Perhaps the occupants of the chief anti-graft body in the country forget that they too are public officials and are accountable to the public.
Related story
Most Needed Jewellery
