The success of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) in Delhi has brought the issue of corruption back into focus. The anti-corruption drive, however, seems limited to bribery and processes involving financial transactions. One dominant form of corruption governments appear to overlook is ‘conflict of interest’.

It is high time we recognise that conflict of interest needs to be tackled through tough rules and laws. Conflict of interest occurs when an individual or entity indulges in multiple roles, one affecting the other. The occurrence of conflict of interest in policy making, regulation, rule-making and setting of standards has serious implications for the public.

The appointment of Petroleum Minister Veerappa Moily as the Minister for Environment and Forests as well is a case of conflict of interest of the highest kind. As Petroleum Minister, Moily plays the role of a project proponent, while as Environment Minister he adjudicates as a regulator the projects proposed by him. This makes him both the regulator and the regulated. In fact, this kind of conflict of interest is nothing new for the Environment Ministry.

Chairmen and board members of power companies routinely don the role of regulators in panels of the ministry that approve power projects. The most glaring was the case of former power secretary P. Abraham who chaired the appraisal committee on river valley and hydropower projects, while continuing to be on boards of at least half a dozen hydropower firms. All such companies walked through the green channel without any hassles. Jairam Ramesh removed Abraham, but the ministry did not learn anything. Such conflicts still continue in the ministry’s panels.

Rigged panels Conflict of interest assumes great significance when it comes to statutory regulatory bodies that deal with public health and food safety issues. Vested interests are always working to get rules or standards that work in their favour. This is what happened when the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) was set up to act as an ‘independent’ food safety regulator five years ago.

Industry representatives were nominated to scientific committees to set standards for a number of parameters ranging from pesticide content to food labelling. The membership of these panels read like Who’s Who of food industry – Nestle, Pepsi, Coca Cola, Britannia, Marico, ITC, GSK, Hindustan Lever and so on. It was only after being exposed in the press that the Supreme Court took note of it and directed FSSAI to purge its panels. Till then the Authority did not even have a rudimentary conflict of interest policy in place.

Like the Environment Ministry, the FSSAI too has not learnt any institutional lessons. Industry consultants and scientists working on industry projects continue as members of its scientific panels. The same is the case with the regulatory process for genetically modified food crops.

Scientific panels are infested with scientists working on seed industry projects or enjoying their grants and at the same time regulating projects of the same sponsors. In one case, a scientist in the regulatory body approved a research project proposed by his wife. Another recent case is of the expert panel that the health ministry set up to decide follow-up action after a damning parliamentary report on human clinical trials. The Ministry chose an expert who is head of clinical trials division of a corporate hospital!

Serious implications Conflict of interest can be particularly dangerous in the health sector. The case of HPV vaccine trials probed by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on health clearly showed how vested interests in collusion with scientists can influence public policy. The same interests are in play outside the government.

The Indian Academy of Paediatrics is a body of doctors which recommends vaccine schedules for paediatricians and participates in government vaccine policy making. Its annual report in 2012 made a shocking revelation that IAP’s Committee of Immunisation was almost fully funded by vaccine makers — Sanofi Pasteur, GSK, Merck, Pfizer and Serum Institute. In such as situation, can thousands of paediatricians who depend on the academy’s wisdom really go by what it recommends? How can hapless parents know these schedules are not influenced by vaccine makers?

Parliament panels

The malaise extends to our parliamentary panels too. We have Sachin Tendulkar — who endorses a computer security product — as member of the Standing Committee on IT. We had Vijay Mallya — whose UB group had a sizeable stake in a fertiliser firm — as member of the Standing Committee on Fertilisers. The Prime Minister appointed an empowered Group of Ministers on pictorial warnings for tobacco products, which had among its members a Cabinet Minister who is better known as ‘beedi king’ .

The time has come to put an end to such misuse of public policy and regulatory instruments and to codify a stringent legal framework to govern ‘conflict of interests’. Taking a bribe is a criminal act, but acting in ways that undermine public interest is a more serious crime.

(The author is a science journalist based in Delhi.)

Related Topics
comment COMMENT NOW