“Corruption is protected by the need for government approval before dishonest officials may be prosecuted.” Analyze the assertion. (125 Words) [UPPSC 2020]
TeamSupreme
Resources & Suggestions
Mains Answer Writing Latest Articles
On: February 22, 2025
Comments:
0
Indo-US Relation: Areas of Cooperation & Conflicts
Key Areas: Defense, technology, trade, energy, and regional cooperation. Key Areas of Cooperation 1. Defense and Security Transition from buyer-seller to co-production and technology sharing. India as a Major Defense Partner (MDP) and inclusion in STA-1. Access to advanced technologies, ...
On: February 22, 2025
Comments:
0
भारत-अमेरिका संबंध: सहयोग और संघर्ष के क्षेत्र
मुख्य विषय: भारत-अमेरिका संबंधों की मजबूती, विशेषकर रक्षा, प्रौद्योगिकी और क्षेत्रीय सहयोग में प्रगति। सहयोग के प्रमुख क्षेत्र 1. रक्षा एवं सुरक्षा सहयोग भारत और अमेरिका के बीच रक्षा संबंधों का विस्तार। प्रमुख रक्षा साझेदार (MDP) का दर्जा और STA-1 ...
On: February 22, 2025
Comments:
0
India’s Disaster Management
The article discusses the growing tensions between the Centre and states regarding disaster relief funding in India. It emphasizes the need for a transparent and equitable disaster management framework. Key Disaster Threats India Faces Increasing Frequency of Extreme Weather Events ...
Requirement of Government Sanction and Corruption
1. Protective Shield: The need for government sanction to prosecute dishonest officials often acts as a barrier to addressing corruption. This requirement can be exploited to delay or block investigations. For example, in the case of Vijay Mallya, delays in sanctioning prosecution have been criticized for allowing financial misconduct to persist.
2. Bureaucratic Hurdles: Obtaining sanction involves bureaucratic procedures that can be manipulated. Recent instances, such as allegations against former Delhi Chief Secretary Anshu Prakash, highlight how such processes can obstruct timely justice.
3. Accountability Issues: The requirement can undermine accountability, allowing corrupt officials to escape consequences. In the Securities Scam of 1992, delays in sanctioning prosecution affected the speed of legal proceedings.
Conclusion: While the sanction process aims to prevent misuse of authority, it often becomes a protective shield for corruption, delaying justice and undermining accountability.