A robust Lokpal
Source: By NK SINGH: The Statesman
It has been a long and tumultuous struggle, one that began with the Lokpal Bill of 1968. The Bill had lapsed when it was under consideration in the Rajya Sabha because the Lok Sabha was dissolved. There were seven such attempts in the past, which either lapsed due to dissolution of the Lok Sabha or withdrawal of the Bill. Another Bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha on 4 August 2011, and thanks to the Anna Hazare movement, the government, Parliament and the political class concertedly rose to the occasion this time around. The Bill was promptly passed by the Lok Sabha in the winter session of December 2011. In the Rajya Sabha, however, it met with an ignominious end. Discussions on the basis of the select committee’s report were disrupted. The House had to be abruptly adjourned at midnight.
For all that, history was created on December 17 and 18, when both Houses passed the Lokpal Bill, creating a reasonably robust and impartial entity. And the credit goes to Anna Hazare, the people who rallied around him at Ramlila maidan, and to the Aam Aadmi Party, now in power in Delhi. Credit is also due to those who gave a resounding verdict in the Delhi assembly elections. The political parties, barring one or two, extended wholehearted support. It would be less than fair to denigrate this class generally.
The “crusade against corruption in high places” has paid off. There have been laws and acts in the past, but the Lokpal Bill is quite different. It creates an Ombudsman to deal with corruption at ‘high places’. The identity both of the CVC and the CBI has happily been preserved. The proposal to merge the former with the SPE Division of the CBI with the Lokpal has been rejected. The Lokpal will primarily investigate cases of corruption involving ministers, MPs and civil servants in the Group A and B categories. The CVC will handle cases involving C and D categories of civil servants, but under the Lokpal’s overall supervision. Thus, the idea to put in place a Lokpal to deal with corruption from the level of the Prime Minister to patwari has been dropped. Further, while the CBI will continue to be under the administrative control of the government, which, in turn, is accountable to Parliament, the services of its investigation wing will be available to the Lokpal. And in cases entrusted to it by the Lokpal, the power of ‘superintendence’, will vest in the latter. The Act provides that no officer of the CBI, investigating a case that has been forwarded by the Lokpal, will be transferred, without its approval. In such cases, the Lokpal will wield the powers of sanction. Finally, the power of according sanction under Section 197 of the CrPC or Section 19 of PC Act is being taken away from the Government, and vested in the Lokpal.
It bears recall that the Taj Corridor case against the BSP leader, Mayawati, fizzled out because the Governor of Uttar Pradesh, who was appointed by the Centre, had refused to grant sanction. In the Adarsh housing scam in Mumbai, the Maharashtra Governor has declined sanction against the former Chief Minister, Ashok Chauhan. As a result, the CBI’s case is bound to fall through. The CBI Director will now be appointed by the Government not on its own volition, but on the recommendation of a collegium comprising the Prime Minister, the leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha and the Chief Justice of India. Parliament deserves to be complimented for going a step further by providing for a Directorate of Prosecution for CBI cases. His services will also be available to the Lokpal in cases entrusted by it to the agency. The Director of Prosecution will be appointed on the recommendation of the CVC, and will be under the administrative control of the Director, CBI.
As regards the Selection Committee, the Lokpal will not be sarkari or dominated by the government. Nor will it include Nobel laureates of Indian origin, Magasaysay award-winners or a 4-star General. It will instead consist of the Prime Minister, the Chief Justice of India, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha and Leader of the Opposition. To ensure balance, it will also include an eminent jurist.
Still more significant is the fact that the office of the PM has eventually been brought under the ambit of the Lokpal, of course with certain safeguards, such as exclusion of subjects of security, foreign relations etc. In accord with the federal structure of our polity, the Act does not include the institution of Lokayukta for states; nonetheless, the states have been directed to create the institution within 365 days of the passage of the legislation and on the lines of the Lokpal Act.
The creation of the Lokpal does not signify the end of the exercise to fight against corruption and for probity in public life. Citizens need a mechanism for the redressal of grievances, and the whistleblowers require protection. For a healthy criminal justice system and a clean democratic process, the all-important judicial and electoral reforms are imperative. The CBI must have an Act of its own. Whatever has been provided in the CVC Act or other laws must be given a second look. Keeping in view the provisions of the Lokpal Act and the strong observations of the Supreme Court, a consolidated CBI Act must be in place.
It has been a long and tumultuous struggle, one that began with the Lokpal Bill of 1968. The Bill had lapsed when it was under consideration in the Rajya Sabha because the Lok Sabha was dissolved. There were seven such attempts in the past, which either lapsed due to dissolution of the Lok Sabha or withdrawal of the Bill. Another Bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha on 4 August 2011, and thanks to the Anna Hazare movement, the government, Parliament and the political class concertedly rose to the occasion this time around. The Bill was promptly passed by the Lok Sabha in the winter session of December 2011. In the Rajya Sabha, however, it met with an ignominious end. Discussions on the basis of the select committee’s report were disrupted. The House had to be abruptly adjourned at midnight.
For all that, history was created on December 17 and 18, when both Houses passed the Lokpal Bill, creating a reasonably robust and impartial entity. And the credit goes to Anna Hazare, the people who rallied around him at Ramlila maidan, and to the Aam Aadmi Party, now in power in Delhi. Credit is also due to those who gave a resounding verdict in the Delhi assembly elections. The political parties, barring one or two, extended wholehearted support. It would be less than fair to denigrate this class generally.
The “crusade against corruption in high places” has paid off. There have been laws and acts in the past, but the Lokpal Bill is quite different. It creates an Ombudsman to deal with corruption at ‘high places’. The identity both of the CVC and the CBI has happily been preserved. The proposal to merge the former with the SPE Division of the CBI with the Lokpal has been rejected. The Lokpal will primarily investigate cases of corruption involving ministers, MPs and civil servants in the Group A and B categories. The CVC will handle cases involving C and D categories of civil servants, but under the Lokpal’s overall supervision. Thus, the idea to put in place a Lokpal to deal with corruption from the level of the Prime Minister to patwari has been dropped. Further, while the CBI will continue to be under the administrative control of the government, which, in turn, is accountable to Parliament, the services of its investigation wing will be available to the Lokpal. And in cases entrusted to it by the Lokpal, the power of ‘superintendence’, will vest in the latter. The Act provides that no officer of the CBI, investigating a case that has been forwarded by the Lokpal, will be transferred, without its approval. In such cases, the Lokpal will wield the powers of sanction. Finally, the power of according sanction under Section 197 of the CrPC or Section 19 of PC Act is being taken away from the Government, and vested in the Lokpal.
It bears recall that the Taj Corridor case against the BSP leader, Mayawati, fizzled out because the Governor of Uttar Pradesh, who was appointed by the Centre, had refused to grant sanction. In the Adarsh housing scam in Mumbai, the Maharashtra Governor has declined sanction against the former Chief Minister, Ashok Chauhan. As a result, the CBI’s case is bound to fall through. The CBI Director will now be appointed by the Government not on its own volition, but on the recommendation of a collegium comprising the Prime Minister, the leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha and the Chief Justice of India. Parliament deserves to be complimented for going a step further by providing for a Directorate of Prosecution for CBI cases. His services will also be available to the Lokpal in cases entrusted by it to the agency. The Director of Prosecution will be appointed on the recommendation of the CVC, and will be under the administrative control of the Director, CBI.
As regards the Selection Committee, the Lokpal will not be sarkari or dominated by the government. Nor will it include Nobel laureates of Indian origin, Magasaysay award-winners or a 4-star General. It will instead consist of the Prime Minister, the Chief Justice of India, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha and Leader of the Opposition. To ensure balance, it will also include an eminent jurist.
Still more significant is the fact that the office of the PM has eventually been brought under the ambit of the Lokpal, of course with certain safeguards, such as exclusion of subjects of security, foreign relations etc. In accord with the federal structure of our polity, the Act does not include the institution of Lokayukta for states; nonetheless, the states have been directed to create the institution within 365 days of the passage of the legislation and on the lines of the Lokpal Act.
The creation of the Lokpal does not signify the end of the exercise to fight against corruption and for probity in public life. Citizens need a mechanism for the redressal of grievances, and the whistleblowers require protection. For a healthy criminal justice system and a clean democratic process, the all-important judicial and electoral reforms are imperative. The CBI must have an Act of its own. Whatever has been provided in the CVC Act or other laws must be given a second look. Keeping in view the provisions of the Lokpal Act and the strong observations of the Supreme Court, a consolidated CBI Act must be in place.
No comments:
Post a Comment