Seen from the perspective of the spectacle on display during the recent Delhi Commonwealth Games, and the extraordinary success that marked the efforts of our sportspersons, the Games were an extraordinary success, belying earlier fears and anxieties caused by the shoddiness and the corruption that marked the preparations up to the last mile. It is fair to say that Indians, by and large, appreciate both aspects of the sporting extravaganza we have just staged: there is justifiable pride in the show that was put up as well as deprecation of the manner in which the whole thing was eventually put together. Not surprisingly, there is a strong feeling in the country that a thorough investigation should lead to the castigation and judicial trial of those who may be guilty of siphoning of public funds earmarked for creating facilities for the Games, and those who presided over cost overruns extending to thousands of crores of rupees. The inquiry ordered by the government right after the CWG was done suggests that those in authority are in step with the national mood. However, the BJP, the principal Opposition party, has demanded a probe by a joint parliamentary committee (JPC). Going a step further, Nitin Gadkari, the party president, has sought to link the Prime Minister’s Office to the corruption that is widely believed to have dogged the Games at every stage of the preparation.
It is a pity the charge has been flung without a shred of evidence, and can be fairly said to fall in the category of hollow propaganda. The demand for a JPC probe, however, calls for some reflection. Plainly, it is not unreasonable. After all, thousands of crores of public money are suspected to have been siphoned off by unscrupulous elements associated with the Games preparation. Urban development minister S. Jaipal Reddy, who headed the group of ministers that was hastily constituted by the Prime Minister to oversee all the Games work in the final stages, is reported to be not averse to the idea of a JPC probe as he believes that the government was entirely transparent in its conduct. The demand would, of course, have weight even if Mr Reddy thought differently. The problem with the idea of a JPC probe lies elsewhere, however. Both in the UK, where the institution of scrutiny by a JPC was started, and in this country, JPCs have a poor record. In India, the last such inquiry was in the Bofors affair and not much came of it, although much time and expense was devoted to the project. Inordinate time is typically wasted on procedures. While the chairmanship is meant under the rules to rest with the ruling dispensation, Opposition groups spend months arguing for one of them to head the probe body. This is, typically, done to extract propaganda mileage. Political interests of parties take precedence over the passion to get at the truth. At a more fundamental level, a JPC is virtually toothless, not possessing magisterial powers. In sum, it becomes a platform for parties opposed to the government to engage in nothing more than grandstanding while the matter at hand does not move forward a millimetre.
In the circumstances, a variant of a JPC probe can be attempted. An inquiry by a joint select committee of Parliament attached to the ministries of sports as well as urban development could be conducted and its findings forwarded to an appropriate judicial forum. Such a probe, and the one ordered by the government to be conducted by a retired Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG), could feed off one another at an institutional level. This is a matter of devising appropriate mechanisms.