Tough stance against paper leak culprits long overdue

A lot of heat and dust, considerable activity, rising expectations but to no avail. That is the gist of the political developments that occurred on Friday. The day’s agenda was set by none other than Prime Minister Narendra Modi himself on the previous night, when he announced through a video message that stricter actions against paper leaks are to come in Friday’s Cabinet meeting.

He asserted, “More strict actions against paper leaks will come in tomorrow’s Cabinet!” In another tweet, he urged Sonam Wangchuk, who broke his fast, to maintain the daily routine as advised by doctors and to regain his previous weight as soon as possible. Good vibes. The Cabinet met and decided to amend the Prevention of Paper Leak Act, 2024, imposing stricter penalties on the guilty. Now, the maximum jail term would be 10 years from the current three to five years. It also proposes a fine of up to Rs 10 crore. This is a good decision, given the gravity of the crime; those who play with the careers and lives of the country’s future torchbearers should be dealt with harshly.

Firstly, examination papers that are leaked, if undetected, is gross unfairness, as undeserving candidates get selected and the deserving ones are left out. Second, it also injects incompetence into the system, which is already suffering from a great deal of that malady. Detection of leakage also results in massive trauma and hardships for the aspirants and their families. The government also reached out to the leadership of the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP). Union Ministers J P Nadda and Jitendra Singh met CJP national spokesperson Saurav Das.

The CJP persists with its demand of Dharmendra Pradhan’s resignation, reforms in the education system, Rs one crore compensation for families of students who died by suicide following the alleged NEET paper leak, and withdrawal of all police cases and legal action against peaceful protesters who participated in the movement. And this is where the shoe pinches, for the moot issues raised by the protestors are the system’s efficiency and accountability. How can Pradhan shirk away from his responsibilities? Generals get accolades for winning wars, and face flak and ignominy when they lose. Lt Gen A A K Niazi became the face of Pakistan’s defeat in the 1971 war with India.

Similarly, political leaders are, or should be, held responsible for their failures; and in the case of Pradhan, the list of failures is long, ranging from leaked tests to the divisive UGC Regulations.

Notwithstanding the Prime Minister’s decision on stricter legal provisions against paper leak culprits, the government appears adamant in keeping Pradhan in the Cabinet. Its tenet that any minister’s dismissal would be an admission of guilt has become some kind of totem; the government is sticking to it like a religious emblem, totally unmindful of the future of the youngsters.

This position is not sustainable, neither theoretically nor strategically. For accountability in a parliamentary democracy is not synonymous with confession of guilt; it is a means of preserving public trust and demonstrating that responsibility accompanies authority. By refusing to acknowledge the principle of ministerial responsibility, the government risks creating a bad situation for itself and the people.