When Manmohan Singh Made a Rare Request to the CAG
Dr Manmohan Singh at swearing in ceremony in 2004. Image credit @RahulGandhi
CAG’s reports have historically been focal points of intense scrutiny, particularly from political parties, which often begins even before the reports are finalized.
By P SESH KUMAR
New Delhi, October 9, 2025 — There appears to be a perception that the CAG, as an institution, may have grown somewhat soft in critically examining major initiatives and interventions involving substantial outlays—running into thousands of crores of rupees—under the central sector and centrally sponsored schemes of the Union Government through rigorous, all-India performance audits.
Additionally, a section of the political spectrum (and the media) feels that the CAG has been more enthusiastic in pursuing performance audits of schemes implemented by States where the ruling party at the Centre is not in power, compared to those governed by the same party. While the CAG need not engage publicly in this discourse, perceptions do matter, and the institution would do well to adopt a sound media strategy to dispel such (mis)conceptions.
I have discussed this and related issues in my book—CAG: WHAT IT OUGHT TO BE AUDITING? (White Falcon Publishing).
CAG’s reports have historically been focal points of intense scrutiny, particularly from political parties and the media. This scrutiny often begins even before the reports are finalized, reflecting the significant role these audits play in holding the government accountable. Interestingly, the reactions of political parties to CAG reports exhibit a notable pattern: parties in opposition eagerly seek out these reports to highlight governmental shortcomings, while those in power tend to downplay or challenge the findings.
Opposition’s Vigilance
When in opposition, political parties are keen to access CAG reports, sometimes even before their official release, to capitalize on potential governmental lapses. A pertinent example is from the early 2000s, when Dr. Manmohan Singh the then the Leader of the Opposition (now no more) in the Rajya Sabha, demonstrated exceptional interest in the draft reports concerning audit of disinvestment of Central Public Sector Enterprises (CPSEs) through strategic sales.
Despite the established protocol that CAG reports are first presented to Parliament before becoming public, Dr. Singh sought access to these drafts directly from the CAG’s field office. Both my predecessor and I (heading the field office conducting the audit) received calls from his office in 2001 and he personally asked for the copy of the draft report, whatever the latter may have meant. This eagerness underscores the opposition’s strategy to (mis)use even draft audit findings to question the ruling party’s decisions and policies.
Role Reversal Upon Ascension to Power
The stance of political parties often undergoes a dramatic shift once they transition from opposition to governance. The Indian National Congress (INC), which was proactive in scrutinizing CAG reports during its time in opposition, faced similar scrutiny when it formed the government.
During the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) administration (2004–2014), several high-profile CAG reports highlighted significant controversies, such as the one on 2G Spectrum Allocation (2010) where the CAG reported a presumptive loss of ₹1.76 trillion due to irregularities in the allocation of 2G spectrum licenses. This report led to widespread public outcry and became a major point of contention for the then opposition parties, particularly the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
There was the report on Coal Block Allocation (2012) too. Termed “Coalgate,” this report estimated undue benefits of ₹1.86 trillion to private entities due to non-transparent allocation of coal blocks. The BJP, again then in opposition, leveraged this report to mount a vigorous campaign against the UPA government, leading to significant parliamentary disruptions.
In both instances, the INC, then as the ruling party, contested the CAG’s findings, arguing against the methodology and conclusions drawn. This defensive posture starkly contrasted with their previous advocacy for transparency and accountability when they were in opposition. So much so, there was no report of the PAC even as more than 12 years have elapsed since the reports were laid on the table of the Parliament.
BJP’s Shift in Stance
The BJP’s responses to CAG reports have similarly been influenced by its position in the political hierarchy. As the principal opposition party during the UPA tenure, the BJP was assertive in demanding accountability based on CAG findings. However, upon ascending to power in 2014, the BJP’s reactions mirrored those of its predecessors when confronted with critical CAG reports. On an earlier disinvestment report of 2005, then Minister of BJP Government (now no more) dismissed it saying that CAG was used to sleeping and hallucinating.
In another instance, during the Rafale deal controversy, the opposition, led by the INC, demanded a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) probe, citing concerns over the procurement process. The BJP-led government, however, dismissed these demands, asserting that due process had been followed.
CAG presented a ‘redacted’ report (a first of its kind), which many alleged, did not examine and report on pricing issues adequately.
Though CAG occupies a pivotal position in upholding governmental transparency and accountability, the political appropriation of CAG reports presents significant challenges that necessitate strategic responses to preserve the institution’s integrity and efficacy.
One of the foremost actions the CAG can undertake is to bolster the confidentiality of its audit processes. The premature disclosure of draft reports can lead to misinterpretations and political exploitation, undermining the objective analysis intended. Implementing stringent access controls, coupled with comprehensive training for personnel on the importance of maintaining confidentiality, is essential.
Additionally, enhancing cybersecurity measures can safeguard digital documents from unauthorized access, thereby preserving the integrity of the audit process. CAG is already seized of these matters- one would like to believe.
Effective communication with the public is another critical area. Developing a robust communication strategy that elucidates the CAG’s mandate and the context of its findings can mitigate misrepresentations. Proactive engagement with the media following the official release of reports ensures that the information disseminated is accurate and comprehensive.
Educational initiatives aimed at informing citizens about the audit process and the significance of impartial oversight can further enhance public understanding and trust.
Recent initiatives of press briefing on significant internal initiatives like MOUs with IIT, ICAI and IIM besides unveiling of CAG- connect- an ambitious IT initiative to exploit the potential of AI and data analytics in professionalizing its audit processes and the INTOSAI meet in Hyderabad last month, are welcome pointers in this direction.
Maintaining unwavering independence and impartiality is fundamental to the CAG’s credibility. Ensuring that audit selections and findings are based solely on objective criteria, free from external influences, reinforces the institution’s neutrality. Regular training programs that emphasize ethical standards and the importance of impartial evaluations can fortify this stance among audit personnel.
Timeliness in completing audits (which continues to be a challenge) and effectively disseminating reports is crucial to minimizing opportunities for political entities to exploit delays. Implementing project management tools can assist in monitoring audit progress, ensuring adherence to schedules, and facilitating prompt public dissemination.
E-Way Bills, Delayed Truths: CAG’s Audit That Arrived Too Late
Collaborative engagement with legislative oversight bodies, such as Public Accounts Committees (PACs), can amplify the impact of audit findings. Regular workshops and briefings can ensure that these bodies comprehend the nuances of reports, leading to informed discussions and effective remedial actions.
Leveraging technology in this area too, to enhance transparency is another avenue, the CAG can explore. Effectively utilizing digital platforms can streamline audit processes and make information more accessible to the public, thereby promoting accountability.
The oscillating reactions of political parties to CAG reports underscore the intricate interplay between audit institutions and political entities in India. While in opposition, parties often champion CAG findings as tools to demand accountability and transparency from the government.
Conversely, when in power, the same parties may seek to downplay or contest these findings to preserve their administrative standing. One could see this trend continue with the recent reports of CAG on Delhi Government which were laid in the Assembly in February 2025.
This cyclical behaviour not only politicizes the audit process but also challenges the CAG’s role as an impartial watchdog.
To navigate this complex environment, the CAG must reinforce measures to safeguard the confidentiality of its audit processes, ensuring that reports are not prematurely disclosed or misinterpreted for political gain. Developing a robust public communication strategy can further elucidate the CAG’s mandate and the context of its findings, fostering informed public discourse and mitigating potential misrepresentations.
Moreover, maintaining unwavering independence and impartiality is paramount; the CAG’s credibility hinges on its ability to operate free from external influences. Timely completion and dissemination of reports, coupled with constructive engagement with legislative oversight bodies, can enhance the impact of audit findings and promote governmental accountability. Leveraging technology to streamline audit processes and enhance transparency can also play a pivotal role in reinforcing the institution’s integrity.
Hopefully, the CAG would have drawn up plans to fortify its position as an unbiased Supreme Audit Institution, ensuring that its reports serve the public interest and contribute meaningfully to India’s democratic framework, irrespective of the prevailing political climate.
(This is an opinion piece, and views expressed are solely those of the author only)
Follow The Raisina Hills on WhatsApp, Instagram, YouTube, Facebook, and LinkedIn
About The Author
