Leaving aside the obvious politically complex trajectories and state of affairs and looking from the prism of governance, Nagaland and Jammu & Kashmir share a common trait presently. The two are the only states in India yet to table their respective Comptroller and Auditor General of India’s (CAG) Audit Reports for last year.
The political setting and status of Jammu & Kashmir has been ‘altered’ since then, even as the state has been under presidential rule from June 2018; hence, there compelling rationale for the non-tabling of the reports.
However, Nagaland has none whatsoever - neither a paradigmatic policy shift nor change of guards at the political level.
As per information on CAG’s website, ‘Report No.1 of 2018, State Finances, Government of Nagaland’ and ‘Report No.2 of 2018, Social, Economic, Revenue & General Sectors, Government of Nagaland’ were dispatched to the State Government on July 20, 2018.
Since then, three sessions of the 13th Nagaland Legislative Assembly have been summoned, the latest being the two-day session on August 6 and 8; however, the House seems to be in no hurry to either table or discuss the reports.
Unless tabled in the State Assembly, the reports remain inaccessible for the public.
What explains the government’s caginess? Are the unflattering reports over the years behind the disinclination?
Remember, when the reports are tabled and made public, the usual headlines that follow are ‘Anomalies galore,’ ‘incomplete projects’ or in other uncomplimentary terms.
It is a different matter that the annual reports seldom make a dent and are given decent burial on the floor of the House without any follow-up actions. But this time around, the Government does not even have the proclivity.
Ideally, once the CAG’s reports are sent to the Governor, who in turn causes them to be tabled before the House, the Reports stand permanently referred to State Standing Committees on Public Accounts (PAC) or other relevant Committees, which undertake the necessary follow-up actions, including examination and hearings of the reports. As per the CAG, the outcomes, including the summarised Committee's hearings; the action taken by the executive; and recommendations to improve administrative practices and procedures, are then submitted to the Legislature.
This present case put into scrutiny the lofty goals set by the People’s Democratic Alliance (PDA) Government led by Chief Minister Neiphiu Rio for its ‘subjects on "good governance, transparency and a culture of meritocracy.” “Comprehensive zero-tolerance policy towards corruption” is a refrain frequently reiterated.
The subsequent lack of actions on the ground, including the non-tabling of CAG report belies such assertions. The remark by the outgoing State Governor PB Acharya on the eve of his departure in July, in this regard, is striking. Noting that corruption is the biggest disease in the state, he observed that the present PDA government is bent upon on tackling corruption but it is yet to prove that “they take action against the corrupt people.”
While Lokayukta was created and digital initiatives are feasible, unless they are accompanied by changes on the ground, it remains, at best, mere eye-wash and coaxing tactics.
True, for many reasons, security or otherwise, often unadulterated sharing of Government information is not encouraged. However in the present case, apart from presumably pointing anomalies which may put some ‘concerned authorities’ in sticky situations, there are no other justifiable concerns. Such ‘auditing’ is imperative for course correction, engendering probity and improving governance.
The action towards accountability, transparency and good governance should not start with censorship of information and the government’s delaying tactics can be construed as doing so. Releasing the CAG reports is an important first step to dispel such contention.
