By Paridhi Jain

Abstract

With the number of candidates sitting for competitive examinations increasing exponentially each year, their efficacy is being questioned like never before. The recent controversy around the perusal of unfair means in the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET) has posed a question on the purported meritocracy of these examinations. Amidst all this, the union government has introduced the Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Bill in the Lok Sabha. The object of this bill is to obviate cheating in public examinations. The bill’s introduction poses a larger question: how cheating in competitive examinations is a larger public policy question that needs to be answered effectively. This article provides a legislative comment on the impugned bill and underscores its inextricable link with public policy.

Introduction

In recent years, the credibility and efficacy of competitive examinations in India have been intensely scrutinized. With the number of candidates appearing for these exams growing exponentially, concerns about the fairness and integrity of the process have reached unprecedented levels. The National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET), one of the country’s most critical examinations, has recently been embroiled in controversy due to widespread reports of cheating and the use of unfair means. This has sparked a broader debate about the meritocratic foundations of these exams, designed to provide equal opportunities based on skill and knowledge. The question of whether these examinations genuinely uphold the principles of meritocracy or whether they have been compromised by systemic failures is now at the forefront of public discourse. In response to these concerns, the Union Government has introduced the Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Bill in the Lok Sabha. The primary objective of this bill is to curb malpractices and ensure the sanctity of public examinations. However, the introduction of this legislation also raises a critical question: how should cheating in competitive examinations be addressed as a matter of public policy? The issue extends beyond merely preventing dishonest practices; it touches on the very integrity of the education and recruitment systems that are foundational to the nation’s social and economic fabric.

The Bill

Even though the bill will not apply retrospectively to cover the recent cancellation of the NEET exam due to cheating allegations, it nevertheless is a novel initiative by the union government to formalize and tighten the regime around cheating in competitive examinations. It was introduced by Dr. Jitendra Singh who is the Union Minister of State (Independent Charge) Science & Technology; MoS PMO, Personnel, Public Grievances, Pensions, Atomic Energy and Space. While introducing the bill he deemed it to be a deterrent of ‘nefarious elements’ like cheating, solver gangs, and impersonation methods, etc. in competitive examinations.

Various stakeholders that could potentially be a part of unfair means have been addressed in the bill. The key provisions of the will include-

1. Definition of Unfair Means: The bill delineates what constitutes unfair means, which includes actions such as leaking question papers, tampering with answer sheets, unauthorized possession of exam materials, and collusion to facilitate cheating. It also criminalizes the creation of fake examination-related documents and the conduct of fraudulent examinations.

2. Penalties and Punishments: The bill introduces stringent penalties for those found guilty of engaging in or facilitating unfair practices. Offenses under this bill are categorized as cognizable, non-bailable, and non-compoundable, ensuring that they are treated with the utmost seriousness. Individuals found guilty can face imprisonment ranging from three to ten years, with fines that can extend up to one crore rupees. Service providers involved in the examination process who are found complicit can also face severe penalties, including being barred from conducting future examinations.

3. Accountability of Service Providers: The bill places significant responsibility on service providers, who are crucial in the conduct of public examinations. These providers, which include various agencies, organizations, and institutions involved in the examination process, are held accountable for reporting any instances of unfair practices. Failure to do so or direct involvement in such practices can lead to heavy fines and disqualification from future engagements.

4. Organized Crime Provisions: Recognizing the potential for organized criminal activities around public examinations, the bill includes specific provisions to tackle such organized efforts. These provisions allow for the attachment and forfeiture of property involved in such crimes and impose stringent penalties, including long-term imprisonment and substantial fines, on those found guilty.

5. Investigative and Enforcement Powers: The bill grants investigative powers to officers not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police, ensuring that cases are handled with the appropriate level of authority and seriousness. The Central Government also retains the power to refer cases to central investigative agencies if necessary.

6. Protection for Public Servants: Public servants involved in the administration of public examinations are protected under the bill from prosecution for actions taken in good faith. However, they remain subject to administrative action if found to be negligent or complicit in any malpractice.

7. Model for State Legislation: While the bill primarily addresses examinations conducted by central authorities, it is also intended to serve as a model for states to adopt similar measures for their state-level public examinations. This provision aims to create a uniform approach across the country in tackling examination-related malpractices.

Analysis of the Bill

The bill indeed seems to be state-of-the-art in its operation and the harsh punishments it prescribes, however, it begs the quintessential question- is mere law enough to curb cheating? The students answer the question in the negative. Being the ones significantly, if not primarily, affected due to cheating in competitive examinations, they believe that without proper implementation, the situation would be back to square one. Their apprehension is rooted in the fear that the law will be misused and applied disproportionately due to which many perpetrators would leave scot-free. 

Their apprehension underscores the hurdles the government will have in effectively implementing the bill. This is because, while it is true that the fear of an exorbitant fine and jail time will dissuade many from doing such a thing, however with the apparent backlog rampant in the Indian judiciary, such cases can take a long time to be taken up, usually allows evidence to manipulated, witnesses silenced and perpetrators roaming free.

Larger Picture: Public Policy Concerns

Competitive exams have a larger role to play in society than what they are purported to. They essentially decide the future stakeholders who have a crucial role in the development of the country. Almost all crucial jobs in society like doctors, engineers, lawyers, judges, etc. are designated based on these examinations. The NEET paper leak is not a standalone issue, rather it is a reflection of cheating in competitive examinations as a larger and convoluted public policy issue. First and foremost, students who cheat undermine the validity of these examinations such that public confidence in this educational meritocracy collapses and resources including jobs as well as scholarships are siphoned off to those not deserving. The education system enables them to be identified and trained according to the different fields of societal development. Cheating interferes with this dynamic, bypassing the systems that contribute to human development and allowing unqualified persons into positions that degrade the quotas of our workforce! This leads to reduced national productivity and lower birth rates, whilst incorrectly skilled people fill places requiring higher competence.

In addition, cheating widens the social gap. Richer people could do so by utilizing better resources for deception, like private tuition members who may have access to exam papers or ways of bribing officials. This way a system is formed where the privileged help their own and stay on top, whilst those less fortunate are left to compete with new challengers but starting much further behind. The ensuing social stratification feeds into cycles of poverty and constrains intergenerational upward mobility, goals that contradict the broad national interest in equity or fairness underlying public policy.

It also has a significant effect on the human capital in the nation. Public examinations play a vital role in the process of identifying and nurturing human capital by assessing individuals’ competencies and determining their readiness for further education or professional careers. The slow but steady accumulation of individuals who occupy offices by bypassing the examinations will lead to the deterioration of the nation’s human resources which will have glaring effects on its other sectors such as the economy and development.

Conclusion

Cheating in public examinations is a public policy issue that needs to be addressed as such. So long as it is viewed from the lens of a remote problem in society, it cannot be holistically addressed. It is a very important policy concern of how to not let cheating take place in public examinations. Governments need to create strong disincentives for cheating and an effective prevention mechanism. These could include measures such as biometric identification to verify the identity of examinees, randomizing the provision of question papers, and increased surveillance at exam centres. To be clear, severe punishments for identified offenders may dissuade future cheaters and highlight the severity of cheating in general, but one needs to go beyond just proposing legal measures and implementing them. Cheating in public examinations is a societal problem as the root of it lies within our entire society, and therefore policy response must follow to address what we can call an issue. By dealing with this problem, policymakers can construct a fairer and more efficient educational system at large that aligns with the broader societal objectives of progress.

Author’s bio: Paridhi Jain is a student at Jindal Global Law School. She is interested in Public International law, Criminal Justice, and Debating.

Image Source: Competitive Exams: A Chapter, Not the Whole Story