AIIMS, heal thyself

The recent events concerning the prestigious All India Institute of Medical Sciences are a matter of shame, writes Pankaj Vohra.

The recent events concerning the prestigious All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) are a matter of shame. The events have demonstrated how politics has crept in at every level and how the credibility of the institution once known for its autonomy and academic status has got eroded. While Health Minister

HT Image

A Ramadoss and Director P. Venugopal are in the middle of the latest controversy, the decline and fall of AIIMS has been gradual. The fault is not of the ministry alone but also that of ambitious faculty members who, to settle their rivalries with fellow colleagues, have used powerful politicians and influential people to meet their objectives.

The AIIMS story has in some form or the other been repeated in every important institution of the country. It is also about how merit has sometimes been overlooked to accommodate lesser mortals and how these lesser mortals, to consolidate their positions, have played with the careers of many meritorious doctors. The AIIMS story seeks to confirm that there is politics in every job as there is a job in every politics. The latest crisis may have got precipitated after the reservations issue came to the fore following HRD Minister Arjun Singh’s initiative in favour of OBCs. But there has always been a simmering discontent under the surface which had been waiting to erupt one day.

The supreme irony is that when AIIMS was regarded as one of the best medical institutes in the country, there were doctors and professors in institutions other than AIIMS working in central hospitals like Safdarjung and Willingdon (now Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital) as well as Delhi government’s Irwin and Maulana Azad Medical College (LNJP Hospital) that were as good, if not better, in some disciplines. But AIIMS continued to have a pride of place. Now it seems all-round deterioration has set in and the decline of other hospitals may have been faster than that of AIIMS. This raises the basic question that the Health Ministry should spend more energy in correcting the wrongs in hospitals under its control directly rather than going on to AIIMS, whose future is at stake now.

It is true that Dr Venugopal, the director, is a pioneer in his field. But he has been often accused of using his influence with powerful politicians to have his way in a number of things. His proximity to a former PM is well-known and it is not the first time that he has threatened to quit after his wings have sought to be clipped. But even without the support from powerful politicians, his stature has never been in doubt. And if he has used politicians as a crutch, it only shows that he is either trying to counter influences from his colleagues or is not sure of his own strengths as a doctor.

AIIMS Dean Dr RC Deka is equally renowned in his own field and any support he is getting from politicians is not really necessary since his claim to fame is based on his own achievements rather than the backing he is receiving. Similarly, Ramadoss is not the first minister who is interfering in the affairs of the institute, as several others before him have done similar things.

In one way or the other, all the principal characters of the drama being enacted in AIIMS have legitimate points of view. There are also strengths and weaknesses in their arguments, as also glimpses of hidden agenda which could be there but will be more evident in the days to come.

But the basic story of AIIMS is not about individuals being right or wrong but about the survival of a great institution whose contribution to the country is more vital. It is for this reason alone that the issue of AIIMS autonomy being preserved has to take precedence over every other matter — and it is not to strengthen A at the cost of B which should be the prime focus of the debate. It is in this context that the major players have to look at the issue objectively and without bringing in their egos while reaching a conclusion to defuse the crisis.

The Health Ministry, for instance, has constituted a committee to look into various aspects. Only very recently, another committee of the ministry, headed by former bureaucrat Javed Chaudhury, had submitted its report. One fails to understand what the new committee will do since its credibility is being questioned. Dr MS Valiathan is a member and is undoubtedly a renowned medical figure. But the other two members are officers working directly under the minister and their objectivity will always be in doubt. In any case, the circumstances leading to the formation of this committee do not inspire confidence.

A clear message has to emerge from the crisis that the institute’s autonomy will henceforth never be infringed. The issue of autonomy is not confined to AIIMS alone, but also involves other great institutions such as Delhi University, the IITs and the UGC. Everyday one hears of how various ministries armtwist to infringe on the autonomies of such institutions by interference on one count or the other. Since AIIMS is an institute of national eminence, it should serve as a symbol of excellence and autonomy. Powerful politicians and bureaucrats shouldn’t be allowed to play with its future.

Obviously, there are a lot of things which have gone wrong with the institute over the years. Many undeserving people have got to occupy positions that should never have been theirs. But these wrongs need to be corrected internally and by the members of the faculty themselves. The government must, at best, play the role of a catalyst and leave the rest to the faculty, which currently stands divided. Its confidence needs to be restored and it needs to be told that political or government interference happens only when some of its members go beyond the limit of their own institute.

Ramadoss, Venugopal and Deka are only individuals. But the role of a minister, a director and a dean needs to be redefined once and for all keeping the question of autonomy in mind. The PM and responsible leaders of the ruling coalition and opposition must collectively take a considered view on the subject and ensure that corrective steps for improving various institutions must begin from within and not from outside. Between us.