Reticent Urjit Patel turn eloquent

RBI Governor Urjit Patel's silence on demonetization made him an easy target for critics. Almost all public statements on demonetization were made by economic affairs secretary Shaktikanta Das giving rise to the impression that government had sidelined RBI and usurped its policy role, confining it to mere execution. But the Nirav Modi-PNB scam has forced Patel to shun reticence and speak out on several contentious issues without mincing words. 

• Patel rejected accusations that the regulator’s laxity was to blame for the Rs.13,000-crore fraud at state-owned Punjab National Bank, suggesting that laws need to be changed to ensure punitive action can be taken in time and effectively putting the onus on the government. 
• He made a pitch for withdrawal of legal immunity from RBI regulations that PSB's enjoy, saying it had led to considerable emaciation of RBI powers over corporate governance. 
• Patel made an indirect case for privatisation or reducing the role of state-owned lenders. He said the government should decide what to do with public sector banks if it wanted to optimise the use of taxpayer money.
• He asserted that Banking Regulatory Powers in India are NOT Ownership Neutral. He then went on to read out chapter and verse, the list of clauses and sub-clauses from the legal landscape to underline the helplessness of RBI when it came to regulating public sector banks, which account for nearly 70% of Indian banking.
• Making this worse is the persistence of delays, of criminal investigation and judicial process. The Governor points out that “RBI data on banking frauds suggests that only a handful of cases over the past five years have had closure, and cases of substantive economic significance remain open. As a result, the overall enforcement mechanism is not perceived to be a major deterrent to frauds relative to economic gains from fraud.”
• Nearly nine months later – after two rounds of selection meetings – the Deputy Governor’s post is yet vacant.
• RBI is faced with constraints. It cannot act to remove directors or the management of public sector banks. But does it need the ultimate power to prevent malfeasance? The RBI is empowered to give directions where it is in the public interest. How often has that been deployed? Has the power of inspection been utilised? A call for more power is not a credible demand when existing provisions have not been leveraged.
• RBI said: “The risks arising from the potential malicious use of the SWIFT infrastructure” has been a risk factor and it had “confidentially cautioned and alerted banks” on three occasions since August 2016 and added, “Banks have, however, been at varying levels in implementation of such measures.” But RBI never cautioned savers about these risks in the banking systems.
• He said, “If we need to face the brickbats and be the Neelakantha consuming this poison, we will do so as our duty. We will persist with our endeavours and get better with each trial and tribulation along the way." He went on to saying that promoters and banks should seek to be on the side of the devas (the gods) rather than asuras (the demons) in this amrit manthan. 

Despite his image of a reticent, submissive man, Patel withstood pressures from various sides after demonetisation, stuck to a low-inflation regime, didn't lap up the proposal to create a bad bank and opposed farm debt waivers, calling them moral hazards posing inflation risk and undermining an honest credit culture. With his robust defence of the central bank and castigation of public sector banks, Patel has buried the image of a central banker of few words. And with his mythological references, he has shown he can find eloquence when required. 

The full text of RBI Governor's speech

Responsibility shared by two persons is not 50% each. It is 10% each.

While Bank's proper management rests with the owners (MoF in case PSB's), Urjit Patel, RBI Governor can't resort to offensive in the blame game initiated by Arun Jaitley by invoking mythological comparisons and absolve of its regulatory failures.

Had Urjit Patel shown same courage in 2016, the harebrained demonetization wouldn't have happened and nation would have been spared of its consequences borne mostly by lower class people. These discussions, reasons and advises will be engaging our time and leads to nowhere. While the loot may never get recovered, what is important is elimination of recurrence of such events in future. Urjit Patel must know his responsibility as institutional head never to allow government interference beyond a point and preserve institution's independence and integrity at all costs. Government as owner of PSB's is solely responsible for their proper functioning and the regulatory rules governing PSB's and private banks must be same. RBI's regulatory role in preserving depositors & lenders interests and integrity of banking system can not be compromised.