In recent years, it is an open secret in India that politics and corruption are two sides of the same coin. Whether it be the Ministry of Finance and its Coal Block Allocation Scam (2012-2014) or the Health Ministry and its Uttar Pradesh NRHM Scam (2010-2012), just to name a few. Yet, when thinking of corrupt practices, the Ministry of External Affairs rarely comes to mind for an average Indian citizen. It is a common perception that the MEA cannot afford to engage in corrupt practices, as its primary role is to represent India to other nations, hence it strives to uphold India’s image to other nations. But alas, the mask of a dedicated and patriotic organization working for the betterment of a nation can be easily removed behind closed doors. The same can be said about the Indian Consulate in SãoPaulo, Brazil, where employees faced a hostile environment under the Consul General, and when an employee finally spoke up, he faced retaliation, which set of a chain of events and brought deeper issues to light. The employee in question is Rohan Mehta, and this study aims to assess the allegations of corruption within the Ministry of External Affairs and critically examine whether India’s whistleblower protection laws provide adequate safeguards for those who speak out.
What Rohan did by revealing the unethical practices in the Ministry of External Affairs can be characterized as “whistleblowing”-the activity of a person, often an employee, revealing information about activities within a private or public organization that are deemed illegal, immoral, illicit, unsafe, unethical, or fraudulent. While morally it can be seen as the right thing to do, it comes with its fair share of dangers, including retaliations such as harassment, threats, or even outright assassinations of the whistleblowers to ensure their silence. Hence, laws are put in place to protect whistleblowers in most democratic nations. An example is the Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989[1] from the USA. The Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989 is a law that protects federal government employees in the United States from retaliatory action for voluntarily disclosing information about dishonest or illegal activities occurring within a government organization. According to this law, a federal employee can report misconduct to the Office of the Special Counsel (OSC) and, if the said employee is subjected to retaliatory actions, can report the suspected acts of reprisal to the OSC, which would further investigate the charges.If we look at our country, India also has Whistleblower Protection Act, 2014 and Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) which can be considered the equivalent of OSC as both are the mechanisms of whistle-blower protection. While the CVC is advisory in nature as it only supervises and recommends action, Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on the other hand is the body which conducts probes and prosecutes. But the first problem begins here. While the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) is an independent body, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) works under the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, which renders the point of investigating corruption as moot since the CBI is supposed to investigate their superiors, with permission.
In Rohan’s case, despite the existence of a formal whistleblower protection act, whistleblowers face many precarious situations for their actions. The first and foremost example can be from his time working in the Indian Consulate of Sao Paulo. For background information, Rohan worked as a Software engineer in private sector before quitting his job and started working for the Ministry of External Affairs through the CGL exam. The Combined Graduate Level (CGL) Exam is conducted by the Staff Selection Commission (SSC) to recruit candidates for various Group B and Group C posts in the Indian government which includes various ministries, including Ministry of External Affairs. While higher posts from Group A like Ambassadors, High Commissioners or senior officials in the Indian Foreign Services (IFS) are recruited via the UPSC (Union Public Service Commission) Exam, the other posts from Group B and C can be recruited from the CGL exam.Unlike officers in the Indian Foreign Service (IFS) recruited through the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) examination, Rohan served as an Assistant Section Officer (ASO), first at the Indian Embassy in Moscow and later at the Consulate of India in São Paulo.
[1]Pratt, Mary K., and Ben Cole. “What Is Whistleblower Protection Act?: Definition from TechTarget.” Search CIO. TechTarget, 3 Oct. 2023. Web. 22 June 2025.