Fighting Corruption in Bharat 2025: A Needonomics Lens on the Three Proposed Bills
Prof. Madan Mohan Goel, Proponent of Needonomics & Former Vice-Chancellor
Corruption continues to be one of the deepest-rooted challenges facing Bharat. It not only undermines economic progress but also corrodes democratic institutions, social trust, and the moral fiber of governance. Needonomics School of Thought (NST) firmly believes that Bharat requires zero tolerance against corruption of all kinds, at all levels, from top to bottom.
The cause of corruption is not merely systemic loopholes but also the culture of greed—what NST calls “Greedonomics.” To cure this, Bharat require Needo-governance, which is deeper, stronger, and more fundamental than the often-celebrated concept of “good governance.”
Current Context: The Three Proposed Bills of 2025
On August 20, 2025, Union Home and Cooperation Minister Shri Amit Shah introduced in the Lok Sabha three significant Bills:
- The Constitution (One Hundred and Thirtieth Amendment) Bill, 2025
- The Union Territories (Amendment) Bill, 2025
- The Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill, 2025
A common provision in these Bills is the automatic removal from office of elected representatives if they remain under arrest for more than 30 days.
At first glance, these measures appear tough on corruption, signaling zero tolerance. However, they lack critical judicial safeguards. The provisions bypass charge sheets, bail hearings, trials, and judicial verdicts. Such an approach risks undermining the principle of “innocent until proven guilty,” the right to due process, and the constitutional separation of powers.
Need for Impartial Debate and Introspection
NST emphasizes the importance of open, impartial, and well-informed debates to understand the intricacies of these provisions. In a democracy, justice cannot be secured by shortcuts.
The burden of proof must always rest with the prosecution, not on the accused. If laws are not carefully designed, these provisions could enable politically motivated arrests, weakening democracy itself.
NST reminds policymakers that constitutional morality—not elected autocracy—must guide reforms. Therefore, while Bharat must aim for zero tolerance against corruption, it must also ensure:
- Safeguards against political misuse of laws.
- Protection of federal balance between Centre and States.
- Impartiality of enforcement agencies.
Role of Judiciary and Enforcement Agencies
The Supreme Court of Bharat has often raised concerns regarding the functioning of central investigative agencies. Despite numerous arrests in corruption cases, conviction rates remain abysmally low.
This reality creates a vicious cycle: trial by media, prolonged incarceration, and eroded public trust. Arrests without timely convictions do not amount to genuine deterrence. Instead, they convert the fight against corruption into a political weapon.
NST stresses that only impartial trials and timely convictions can restore faith in justice. The fight against corruption must be based not on the optics of arrests but on the substance of convictions.
Needonomics Prescription: Street- SMART Governance
To achieve real zero tolerance, Bharat must embrace Needo-governance, which NST defines as Street- SMART:
- S – Simple procedures that minimize bureaucratic red tape and delays.
- M – Moral appeal to nurture integrity and ethical behavior in public life.
- A – Accountability at every level of government, business, and society.
- R – Responsible use of state power, ensuring checks and balances.
- T – Transparency in decision-making, law enforcement, and public administration.
Such an approach recognizes that corruption cannot be eliminated by fear-driven punishments alone. It requires a moral revolution in governance, backed by efficient systems and ethical leadership.
Global Parallels: Learning from Anti-Corruption Models
While Bharat debates the 2025 Bills, it is useful to study how other nations have dealt with corruption—successfully and unsuccessfully. Needonomics insists that Bharat must learn without blindly copying and adapt global practices to its cultural and constitutional ethos.
Singapore: Strong Institutions with High Conviction Rates
Singapore is often cited as a model of zero tolerance for corruption. The Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) functions with remarkable independence and efficiency. What makes it effective is not just strong laws but swift investigations, high conviction rates, and political non-interference. Punishment is severe, but justice is quick and fair, minimizing chances of misuse.
Hong Kong: Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC)
Hong Kong established ICAC in 1974 to fight rampant corruption. It follows a three-pronged strategy:
- Law enforcement – impartial investigation and prosecution.
- Prevention – reforming administrative loopholes.
- Education – creating public awareness and ethical consciousness.
This blend of systemic reform and moral education resonates with the Needonomics principle of balancing law with moral appeal.
South Korea: Challenges of Political Weaponization
South Korea has strict anti-corruption laws, but its experience shows the danger of politicization. Former presidents and business leaders have faced corruption trials, but selective enforcement has often been alleged. The lesson for Bharat is clear: strong laws must be insulated from political vendetta; otherwise they erode trust in governance.
Nordic Nations: Transparency and Social Trust
In countries like Denmark, Finland, and Sweden, corruption levels are among the lowest globally. Instead of harsh punishments, these nations emphasize institutional transparency, equality, and trust in governance. Public officials face high ethical expectations, and citizens expect accountability at every level. This reflects NST’s Street- SMART model, especially Transparency and Accountability.
Lessons for Bharat 2025
- Swift, impartial convictions (like Singapore) are more effective than prolonged arrests without trials.
- Balanced approach (like Hong Kong’s ICAC) combining enforcement, prevention, and education is superior to punishment-only models.
- Safeguards against political misuse (learning from South Korea) are essential for democratic credibility.
- Transparency and moral trust (as in Nordic nations) must complement legal frameworks for corruption control.
In short, Bharat must design its anti-corruption framework not as a political sword but as a democratic shield.
Conclusion
The fight against corruption in Bharat 2025 must move beyond the rhetoric of arrests and symbolic punishments. Lessons from around the world reveal that corruption can only be curbed when laws are enforced impartially, convictions are timely, systems are transparent, and ethics are embedded in governance.
Singapore demonstrates the power of swift and impartial convictions, Hong Kong shows the value of combining law, prevention, and education, South Korea warns of the dangers of political misuse, and the Nordic nations prove that trust and transparency can be the most effective anti-corruption tools.
From the Needonomics lens, Bharat must adopt a balanced and indigenous approach:
· Strong laws that are insulated from political manipulation.
· Swift justice that upholds due process and constitutional morality.
· A culture of accountability and transparency at every level.
· Moral appeal that curbs “Greedonomics” and nurtures “Needonomics.”
Zero tolerance against corruption should not degenerate into zero tolerance against justice. Instead, Bharat must craft Needo-governance—governance that blends strength with fairness, law with ethics, and efficiency with morality. Only then can Bharat transform its anti-corruption drive into a democratic shield, not a political sword, ensuring that in the journey from 2025 to Viksit Bharat 2047, the nation moves from Greedonomics to Needonomics.
