(The disclosure of officials’ assets has sparked a new debate on transparency and accountability.)
Dr. Priyanka Saurabh
The public disclosure of the property details of Haryana’s IPS officers has once again sparked widespread debate about administrative transparency, accountability, and ethics. When the public is exposed to the fact that many senior law enforcement officers possess assets worth crores of rupees—land, plots, houses, farmhouses, or other investments—it naturally arouses both curiosity and questions. These questions are not just about statistics, but about the trust the public places in administration and governance.
In a democratic system, public office is not only a symbol of authority but also of responsibility and ethical conduct. Police and administrative officers, in particular, represent the power of the state. They enforce the law, control crime, and protect the rights of ordinary citizens. Therefore, when their financial status becomes a topic of discussion, the public wants to understand how this wealth was acquired, whether it is completely legal, and whether there is an effective system of oversight.
Making property details public is certainly a positive step. It increases transparency in governance and empowers citizens to access information about those in power. A fundamental principle of democracy is that power should not be hidden from the public. In India, it has been a tradition for many years that senior government officials disclose details of their movable and immovable assets to the government. But when this information is made public, its importance increases, as society itself can monitor it.
However, simply revealing the figures does not solve the problem. The real question is whether these details are thoroughly vetted. Is it ensured that the declared assets match reality? Are the sources of income completely clear? If this process becomes a mere formality, the objective of transparency remains unfulfilled. Transparency is meaningful only when it is accompanied by accountability.
It should also be kept in mind that it would not be fair to view all government officials through the same prism. There are many officers in the country who have set examples of honesty, simplicity, and service. They have not compromised on their duties even in difficult circumstances. There are also many officers who work in remote areas for years, striving to bring about positive change in society. Therefore, it is essential to approach any discussion with a balanced perspective. It would not be fair to blame the entire system based on a few cases.
But on the other hand, it is also true that public suspicion of the administrative system has grown over the past few decades. Numerous cases of corruption have eroded public trust. When ordinary citizens navigate offices for everyday tasks, hear complaints of bribery, or grapple with administrative complexities, they develop a sense that the system needs reform. In such an environment, when news of massive wealth acquisitions emerges, suspicion deepens.
This is why asset disclosures should not be viewed merely as news, but also as an opportunity to improve the system. The government and relevant institutions should ensure regular and independent audits of asset declarations. If any discrepancies are found, impartial action should be taken. This will boost the morale of honest officials and send a clear message to those involved in corruption.
Another important aspect is strengthening ethical values within the administrative system. Laws and rules are essential, but rules alone cannot sustain the entire system. Equally important are a sense of service, a sense of responsibility, and the dignity of public life among officials. When a person reaches a high position, society places greater expectations on them than on ordinary citizens. These expectations extend not only to efficiency but also to character and conduct.
The role of the media is also crucial in this context. Newspapers and other media have a responsibility to uncover facts, but also to present them responsibly. Instead of sensationalizing news, it is crucial to understand its broader social and administrative context. If the media promotes balanced and factual discussions, it will foster a healthy debate in society.
The role of civil society is equally important. Democracy is not run solely by the government or officials; it also requires the active participation of the public. If citizens are aware, ask questions, and demand transparency, the system will naturally become more accountable. Laws like the Right to Information Act are a result of this thinking and have played a crucial role in making governance more open.
It is also worth considering that officials working in government services today face numerous challenges. Working amid ever-increasing expectations, political pressure, administrative complexities, and social change is difficult. Therefore, it is more useful to approach the system from a perspective of reform rather than just criticism. Strengthening the administration requires addressing all aspects—transparency, training, technological improvements, and ethical leadership—simultaneously.
The digital age has further enhanced the possibilities for transparency. Corruption can be reduced if property details, administrative decisions, and financial processes are more systematically made available online. This system has proven quite effective in many countries. India is also taking steps in this direction, but much remains to be done.
Ultimately, it is essential to understand that democracy is founded not only on law but also on trust. Public trust is what gives legitimacy to government and administration. If this trust is weakened, the foundation of the system itself weakens. Therefore, any step that strengthens transparency and accountability also strengthens democracy.
The issue of the assets of Haryana’s IPS officers must be seen in this broader context. It is not just a story about a few names or figures. It reflects the relationship that exists between the public and the administration. If this opportunity is used to make the system more transparent, accountable, and ethical, this news can become not just a topic of discussion but also the beginning of positive change.
In a democracy, asking questions is not wrong; in fact, it is what keeps the system alive. It is crucial that questions are answered with honesty and transparency. Only then will public trust be strengthened.
(Dr. Priyanka Saurabh, PhD (Political Science), is a poet and social thinker.)
