Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and its Major Issues

SC called CBI, a parrot in a cage, and CJI expressed doubts about its credibility, saying this is no longer trusted. Attempts to secure its independence have been rejected or withdrawn by successive governments. CBI is in news for many reasons and that is why this topic is important for examination. Aspirants need to go through this article in detail and enhance their preparation for upcoming exams like SSC, UPSC, Banking, and others.

Central Bureau of Investigation: An Introduction

• The CBI was established in 1941 as a special police agency to investigate procurement corruption cases during World War II.
  
• The  Santhanam Committee on Anti-Corruption subsequently recommended the establishment of the CBI. As a result, it was established in 1963 by the decision of the Federal Ministry of the Interior.
  
• A special police force created in 1941 (to deal with alarm cases) was also integrated into the CBI. It was then transferred to the Ministry of Human Resources and now enjoys the status of Associated Services.
  
• CBI is not a public corporation. Its powers derive from the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, of 1946.
  
• The CBI investigates corruption, economic, and other serious organized crimes such as terrorism. The National Investigative Agency (NIA) was primarily deployed to investigate cases of terrorist attacks, terrorist financing, and other terrorism-related crimes following the 2008 terrorist attacks in Mumbai.  
  
• CBI is managed by a Director assisted by a Special/Additional Director. CBI Directors were given two-year terms by the CVC Act of 2003. Under the CVC Act of 2003, the central government appoints its CBI director on the recommendation of her three-member committee with the prime minister as chairman, the Opposition leader, the Chief Justice of India, or a judge of the Supreme Court appointed by him.
  
• If not recognized by the House of Representatives as an opposition leader, the leader of the largest single opposition party in the House shall be a member of this committee.  
  
• CBI Academy is located in Ghaziabad, UP, and started its operation in 1996. Also, he has three regional training centres in Kolkata, Mumbai, and Chennai. CBI’s oversight of investigations of violations under the Anti-Corruption Act of 1988 rests with the Central Commission for Oversight (CVC), and other matters with the Office of Personnel and Training in the Federal Division of Personnel, Pensions, and Complaints. (DOPT).

Important functions of CBI:

• Investigation of corruption, bribery, and misconduct by union officials
  
• Investigation of tax law violations and commercial law violations
  
• Investigate serious crimes with national and international repercussions committed by organized gangs of professional criminals.
  
• Coordinating the activities of anti-corruption authorities and various state police forces including all cases of public importance for investigation, as requested by state governments.
  
• Investigate conventional crimes such as murder, kidnapping, and rape at the request of state governments or by order of the Supreme Court/Supreme Court.
  
• Maintain crime statistics and disseminate crime information.
  
• CBI serves as the ‘National Central Office’ of INTERPOL in India. The central government may authorize the CBI to investigate such crimes within the state, but only with the state government’s consent.

Major Issues/Concerns:

Structurally Restricted:

• The CBI has been hampered both by the legal structure in which it operates and changes made by the government to the rules governing it. Over the years, these have gradually subordinated the agency to the federal government.
  
• To indict an MLA, Secretary of State, or MP, the CBI requires the approval of the Speaker of the State Legislature (for the MLA) or the Governor (for the Secretary of State). 
  
• In the case of MPs, sanctions are sought by her Lok Sabha chairman or Rajya Sabha deputy chairman.
  
• The opposition feels unfairly targeted as all of these sanctioning authorities have ties to current legislation. It is understood that agencies are not free to investigate themselves. It is up to governments, unions, states, or courts to decide who gets investigated.

 Withdrawal of Consent by Federal Policy:

• The agency’s work is further restricted by the increasingly hostile relationship between the center and state governments.
  
• Nine states have withdrawn her CBI general recognition. Most of these are opposition-controlled states, which the CBI claims are used by the Center to attack the opposition. In March 2022, Meghalaya, where the BJP is in the coalition government, withdrew its popular support.
  
• As CBI requires the state to give consent to investigate crimes within state jurisdiction, CBI will be given general consent rather than seeking consent on a case-by-case basis. 
  
• Withdrawal of consent means that the CBI cannot even investigate state-based central government officials without state government consent. However, this does not apply only to the NDA regime. Throughout the institution’s history, several states, including Sikkim, Nagaland, Chhattisgarh, and Karnataka, have revoked general consent.

No employment ban after retirement:

• Critics also point to how successive administrations have used the allure of retirement jobs to force CBI directors to follow their lines.
  
• In 2013, the UPA appointed former CBI chief Ashwani Kumar as Governor of Nagaland. Other former CBI directors served as members of the National Human Rights Commission under the UPA after retirement.
  
• The 2021 NDA government amended the DSPE Act to give five-year terms to CBI directors, but after the two-year term mandated by the SC expires, directors are free to extend their terms each year. Many saw this as an attempt to align the director with the government

Weak administrative capacity:

• As many of the investigators come from the Indian Police, the agency relies on the Ministry of Home Affairs for staffing. The CBI is also dependent on the Department of Justice and lacks some degree of functional autonomy.
  
• His CBI, run by her delegated IPS officers, is also vulnerable to the government’s ability to manipulate high-ranking officials as they depend on the central government for future positions.   

Outside the scope of the right to provide information:

• The CBI is contained in Schedule 2, Section 24 of the Right to Information Act. This provides an exception to obtaining information from intelligence and security organizations listed in Schedule 2 of the Right to Information Act, or information they provide to the government.   
  
• CBI was not included in the organizations included in the exempt category. It wasn’t until much later in 2012 that the CBI was called.
  
• CBI was originally excluded from the scope of RTI. The CBI was not considered one of the organizations dealing with India’s strategic interests.
  
• However, the Intelligence Bureau (IB), Research and Analysis Division (RAW), and organizations that gather information and address strategic issues have been exempt from the outset.    CBI was not included in RTI’s exclusion list as it was not considered to collect or maintain information of strategic importance to the country.
  
• However, the CBI also investigates all types of cases and these cases include those of strategic importance to India, so much of this information would be public if covered by the RTI. It says it will be a domain. The government at the time agreed to this.

Role of the Judiciary in reforming CBI:

• The struggle to free law enforcement agencies such as the CBI and the Department of Law Enforcement (ED) from government and political party control has been going on since the 1990s. 
  
• The landmark 1997 Supreme Court Vineet Narain decision (Vineet Narain & Others vs. Union Of India & Anr) dealt extensively with this issue. The Supreme Court set his term as CBI director to be two years.
  
• This mandatory term was intended to protect the CBI Director from executive pressure, which would result in a change of post if he did not comply with the will of the executive branch. 
  
• The Government of Rajiv Gandhi stipulated in the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act (DSPE) Act, 1946, to which the CBI was empowered, that the CBI, through what is known as a “personal directive,” could investigate the officers of the Joint Chiefs. It introduced a provision prohibiting the above level without government approval. It was suppressed by the Vineet Narain incident but was reinstated by the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government.
  
• After being dropped again by the Supreme Court in 2014, the Modi government introduced Section 17A of the Anti-Corruption Act through an amendment.
  
• This change long predates the reintroduction of the “single policy” and prevented the CBI from investigating public officials without the consent of the government concerned. 
  
• High judicial bodies have often reprimanded investigators for their negligence and ethical deviations. This creates a kind of fear among those involved in the investigation and prevents the authorities from losing public trust. The Supreme Court’s scrutiny of several key cases has improved the integrity of its investigations.
  
• CBI officials fear that the judiciary may intervene if investigators are proven by victims to have been arbitrary and dishonest.