Donors, despite their aid, have come under fire in Nepal from time to time. On Sunday, Surya Nath Upadhayay, chief of the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA), added his bit when he said that donors kept their own interests uppermost and imposed conditions along with aid. Because of this, he alleged, they do not make their expenses transparent. He also criticised the donors for financing training programmes for high-level government officials abroad. Upadhayay also accused other government anti-corruption agencies, such as the Revenue Investigation Department and the Rastra Bank, of not implementing the laws on corruption, and said at the same time that the public had over-expectations of CIAA.

The issues raised by the CIAA chief are pertinent. Saying that, one also tends to wonder whether those in high positions of authority — in this case, the chief of a constitutional organ with the authority to investigate cases of abuse of authority even of ministers — have done enough by pointing out problems. There may be other anti-graft agencies, but they have a limited role; however, CIAA is the premier all-encompassing one in a position to act even against officials of other anti-graft agencies. In this context, how far it has fulfilled its constitutional role is debatable. If there has been abuse of authority, for example, in foreign-aided projects and programmes, CIAA should prove its mettle by initiating action.

CIAA is often criticised for its inability to catch the big fish. And Upadhayay himself had triggered a public controversy by staying on in the job when a government-appointed commission had implicated him (though cleared later on by the court) in corruption. What seems to be lacking, however, is that CIAA bosses simply have to assert their authority. Unfortunately, the CIAA chief himself had supinely accepted the serious accusation that CIAA had been useless, and he even went on record that he faced no problems discharging his official duties because of the creation of RCCC, the unconstitutional anti-graft agency (now disbanded) encroaching on CIAA’s territory. As for donor conditionalities, once they are accepted, the government is supposed to fulfil them, otherwise it should have the courage even to refuse aid. Whether Nepali politicians and officials have abused their authority with respect to foreign aid, and whether the huge money meant for people through INGOs, NGOs and so-called private companies is being properly used, CIAA can do a lot to strike terror into the hearts of wrong-doers. It is time for CIAA to wake up and act rather than wail.