| |
EDITORIAL
The Death Of Trust
Has corruption become distinctively an Indian way
of life?
 When
Indira Gandhi famously said "Corruption is a global phenomenon",
what she really meant was: there is nothing particularly Indian about
it. True, the party that is still subordinated to the Gandhi mystique
is the custodian of a hoary history of "power is equal to corruption".
The legacy of India's Grand Old Party can only be matched by the legacy
of Japan's Liberal Democratic Party. Well, India, in terms of political
culture, has come a long way from the Age of the Congress. New-century
India is getting familiar with a new kind of politics-politics after the
end of the Congress century. But certain things really don't change, though
nobody has yet come out with a defence that can rival Mrs G's politically
convenient cynicism. Rather, corruption seems to have become distinctively
Indian-and intimate.
Take some of the most recent images of national
character. First, that grainy image of a party president reducing himself
to a blackmarket commodity with a price tag of Rs 1,00,000. Then, the
hero of the stockmarket turning into a villain. And now, the disgust and
disgrace as personified by the excise-and-customs chief. Is it the bloated
manifestation of a national trait? Power enhances greed. And the citizen
will continue to be permanently cheated. Power in this case, mind you,
is no longer synonymous with the government alone. The much-maligned politician
or the petty clerk is not the only thief, and success is not always noble,
or morally sustainable. Suddenly, for the average Indian citizen, the
bureaucrat, the businessman and the politician are not worth his trust-or
confidence. For him, there is no fair deal, and for the corrupt, there
is always life after the disgrace (an occupational hazard) and, thank
God, no punishment is eternal. Corruption, in the Indian context, may
not have become a religion. It certainly has become a way of life.
Desert Storm
Sharjah's cricket barons and
their opaque balance sheets
It would be unfair
to see the government's decision not to allow the Indian cricket team
to visit Sharjah through a purely politically prism. Leaving aside the
interplay between Indo-Pakistani diplomacy and sporting ties, there is
cricketing logic in staying away from Sharjah. Whatever the Cricketers'
Benefit Fund Series (CBFS)-the privately owned entity that organises matches
in the emirates-may say, Sharjah's cricket has long been under a cloud.
In its report on match-fixing, the Central Bureau of Investigation made
the very point. This led to the CBFS setting up a Clive Lloyd-led committee
to enquire into the allegations. It would have been prudent for the CBFS
to suspend tournaments at least till the panel finished its work. Nobody
is suggesting, yet, that rigging in Sharjah has official sanction. Nevertheless
certain facilities, particularly an extremely porous dressing room, do
raise eyebrows. Lloyd's report may suggest corrective measures. Why anticipate
it?
 Whether
it's Sharjah, Toronto or Singapore, the new dispensation at the International
Cricket Council (ICC) has taken a negative view of irregular venues where
chosen promoters-rather than cricketers and the cricket fraternity-benefit.
As the financial hub of cricket's new economy has India been treated fairly
at these events? Documentation suggests that the guarantee money paid
to the Board of Control for Cricket in India is only a fraction of the
earnings from (largely Indian) advertisers, sponsors and television rights.
Since the ICC has no control over such tournaments it cannot make an assessment
of the revenues. If the CBFS is serious about establishing its bona fides,
it should make public its account books. Just how profitable is cricket
in Sharjah and who are its beneficiaries? Every cricket lover has a right
to know.
|
|
METRO TODAY
Web
Exclusives