Thursday 21 April 2011

Talking the talk


Dr Kaushik Basu (Chief Economic Advisor, Ministry of Finance, Government of India) has raised some hackles with one his working papers on corruption.

In his paper, Dr Basu argues that for bribes paid to get routine work done (he calls these "harassment bribes"), Law should reserve all punitive action for the bribee and none for the briber. He points out that the under the current legal system, the quantum of punishment could be same for the bribee and the briber. The change in law "will cause a dramatic drop in the incidence of bribery," thinks Dr Basu"The reasoning is that once the law is altered in this manner, after the act of bribery is committed, the interests of the bribe giver and the bribe taker will be at divergence." 

The idea may seem radical to legal luminaries, but I'd wager that a lot of us laymen didn't even know that paying a bribe and taking a bribe are equal crimes in the eyes of the Law. In fact, it seems hugely unfair that a person who has often no option but to pay up in order to get things done should be held as guilty as the parasite who doesn't move his butt until his palms are greased. So, to a layman like me, Dr Basu's idea seems logical and one that should be implemented.

However, the idea has faced flak from several quarters. Some newspapers have carried stories under headlines that do little justice to the idea ("Legalise corruption: Chief economic advisor"). Social media has been abuzz with messages trying to interpret and misinterpret what Dr Basu had meant (an example here).

The problem, in my opinion, is with Basu's choice of words rather than the idea itself. Take, for instance, the title of his paper:
Why, for a Class of Bribes, the Act of Giving a Bribe should be Treated as Legal

At first glance, this could seem like an ominous prescription. If the objective of presenting the idea through a paper is (in Dr Basu's words) "to minimize the risk of misinterpretation," this title probably doesn't live up to the objective. Rather it is an open invitation to those who specialise in misinterpretation.

Maybe a title like the one below could've worked better:
Why, for a Class of Bribes, Law should treat the Bribe Taker and the Bribe Giver Differently

Headlines and titles are often taken at their face value in today's haven't-got-a-whole-minute world. In any communication, the first line is more important now than it ever was.

Pic source: www.thehindu.com