Lokpal Bill Essay

The present paper is aimed to undermine and explore the viability of Lokpal Bill which is to act as armour against the most detested and evil practice, namely corruption. This reverent bill coined in 1963 by L. M. Singhvi for grievance redressal mechanism was first introduced in 1968 and passed the fourth Lok Sabha in 1969 but before it could be passed by Rajya Sabha, the Lok Sabha was dissolved and the bill lapsed. The bill is inspired by the Hong Kong Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC). The present Lokpal bill at hand will be meticulously examined and discussed and its approach towards decreasing corruption will be compared to the countries which have similar anti-corruption legislation. A comparative study between the Janlokpal Bill, amended by the civil society, and the Lokpal Bill (Government’s Bill), will also be drawn out. Implications of the implementation of the appropriate Lokpal Bill is illustrated and its scope and significant role in the society in preserving the constitutional spirit of the democratic nation, India is highlighted. The gruesome problem, which is of implementation of the law in the present situation will be highlighted. Paper will be enhanced using judicial views of bringing Lokpal Bill in India and its Pros and Cons will be discussed in the light of several pertinent issues. Paper will also target to answer some thought provoking question in this area which shall lead to better understanding. 1. Origination of the concept of a Lokpal Bill: The basic idea of the institution of Lok Pal was borrowed from the concept of Ombudsman in countries such as Finland, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, U.K. and New Zealand. In 1995, the European Union created the post of European Ombudsman. Presently, about 140 countries have the office of the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman is an institution, independent of the judiciary, executive and legislature and analogous with that of a high judicial functionary. He is mostly free to choose his investigation method and agency. The expenditure of the office is under Parliamentary control. In Sweden, Denmark and Finland, the office of the Ombudsman can redress citizens’ grievances by either directly receiving complaints from the public or suo moto. However, in the UK, the office of the Parliamentary Commissioner can receive complaints only through Members of Parliament (to whom the citizen can complain). Sweden and Finland also have the power to prosecute erring public servants. 2. History of The Lokpal Bill: In 1966, the First Administrative Reforms Commission recommended that two independent authorities at the central and state level be established to enquire into complaints against public functionaries (including Members of Parliament). The Lok Pal Bill was introduced for the first time in 1968 but it lapsed with the dissolution of the Lok Sabha. It was introduced seven more times in Parliament, the last time in 2001. However, the Bill lapsed each time except in 1985 when it was withdrawn. At the state level, so far 18 states have created the institution of the Lokayukta through the Lokayukta Acts. In 2002, the report of the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution urged that the Constitution should provide for the appointment of the Lok Pal and Lokayuktas in the states but suggested that the Prime Minister should be kept out of the purview of the authority. In 2004, the UPA government’s National Common Minimum Programme promised that the Lok Pal Bill would be enacted. The Second Administrative Commission, formed in 2005, also recommended that the office of the Lok Pal be established without delay. In January 2011, the government formed a Group of Ministers, chaired by Shri Pranab Mukherjee to suggest measures to tackle corruption, including examination of the proposal of a Lok Pal Bill. 3. Lokpal Bill: Introduction- The main objective of the concept of the Lokpal is to bring out speedier anti-corruption measures in the greater interest of the public and bring justice to them. The Lokpal is proposed to be a three-member body and the chairperson should be a current or past Chief Justice or a judge of the Supreme Court. The other two members should be current or past Chiefs Justice or judges of high courts across the country. The appointments of the Lokpal members should be made as per the recommendation of a specially constituted committee for the purpose. The Lokpal should not hold any office of profit under the Union and State governments. The Lokpal should have a fixed tenure of three years and the salaries of the members should be charged on the Consolidated Fund of India. Any person, other than public servants can make complaints against corruption to the Lokpal and the Lokpal should complete the inquiry within 6 months. It may be noted that the operational jurisdiction of the Lokpal is restricted only to cases of corruption and not applicable to other grievance areas like maladministration. Implementation- The citizens of developing nations like India are very much familiar with the word â€Å"corruption.† The hapless citizens are quite often victims of corrupt political leaders and the top brass of the administrative officers. The countrymen are often denied the fruits of growth because illegally accumulated money is blatantly siphoned off to foreign banks that indirectly back tax evasion. Politically conscious citizens and those vocal against corruption are happy about the potentialities of the Lokpal bill. The bill is influenced by the concept of Ombudsman prevalent in Scandinavian countries, especially in Sweden. The Ombudsman concept has been highly successful in dealing with corruption in European countries and India now deserves a try. Why is the Lokpal Bill still pending? It can make even a child understand why the politicians are intentionally delaying the bill. After all, the bill is ultimately targeted to them only. Though there are normal grievance redress mechanisms available the public in the present judiciary system, they are not speedy enough and often are victims of red-tapism political influences. The Lokpal bill, if implemented, will act as a real guardian of civil rights and will bring errant politicians to justice – speedily and economically. Feasibility of Lokpal Bill- There have been fears that the Lokpal bill will call in question the very democratic infrastructure of the country and people will lose faith in it. The Lokpal will be nothing else but an extra-constitutional body. The Lokpal Bill will bring all existing anti-corruption bodies like the departmental vigilance, Central Vigilance Commission and anti-corruption branch of the CBI into the Lokpal. This would result into immense concentration of power in just one institution – the Lokpal. The body will become highly powerful and there is no guarantee that corruption will not creep in the country’s highest anti-corruption wing – the Lokpal itself. In short, the Lokpal may threaten the democratic and judicial functions of the country in many ways. This ultimately may not be beneficial for democracy. The Lokpal will have total authority to initiate inquiry suo motu in any case. This will give it the power to register FIRs, prosecute any officer and proceed with criminal investigation against any politician or judge. All this power can dangerously weaken authority of other institutions like police and CBI. There are high chances that the Lokpal will emerge as a completely unchecked extra-constitutional body without stability. There may be contradictory opinions on Lokpal, but we will definitely want to put a full stop to corruption and stashing of black money into safe tax havens. Some form of power should be vested on the common citizens so that they can unmask corrupt politicians and officers to prevent further erosion of moral and social values in the country. This is an effort from SSER, with the assistance of Meharia & Company, a reputedly largest law firm in Mumbai, Delhi, Kolkata, we have taken the onus of dealing into any matter that affects the common people. We believe our free legal advice would be helpful to them. Loopholes of the Lokpal Bill- According to the current version of Lokpal Bill, Lokpal will not have any power to either initiate action suo motu in any case or even receive complaints of corruption from public. This is making the Lokpal bill useless. But according to the Jan Lokpal Bill, full powers to initiate investigations suo motu in any case and also to directly entertain complaints from the public. This is something very important and needs to be addressed by the Government and we see most of the political parties finding this as a threat to them. The Government proposed Lokpal bill does wants the Lokpal to be advisory body and just forward the complaints to the recepective department and does not have any right to register and FIR or police powers. This bill not give power to the Lokpal to do any investigation against the Prime Minister, which deals with foreign affairs, security and defence and also no jurisdiction over bureaucrats and government officers. These are the major lacking of the current version with the Government, but we need a Jan Lokpal bill which is addressing the above mentioned issues. Do support for this bill and try your best to force the Government to do it for us. We are the people who have put them on to rule the country and they will have to do it for us. Criticism- The Lokpal bill is intended to provide the common man with direct powers to censure his/her elected representative. However, every complainant has to pay fees and take full responsibility for leveling charges. In case the complaint is found to be baseless, punitive action extending to two years in jail and monetary fine of up to Rs.50,000 may be imposed on the complainant. Charges of corruption in the Indian legal system are not necessarily covered only under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 but also under many other Acts, but the Lokpal restricts its ambit to the cases under this Act. Regarding the constitution of the Lokpal, the Chairman of the Lokpal shall be from among past or present chief justices of Supreme Court. But the other two members of the Lokpal may also be from those qualified to be judges of the Supreme Court. The loose end left here makes countless many from India’s entire judiciary eligible for the post including those who are also senior party politic ians with legal background. 4. Jan Lokpal Bill: The Jan Lokpal Bill (Citizen’s ombudsman Bill) is a draft anti-corruption bill drawn up by prominent civil society activists seeking the appointment of a Jan Lokpal, an independent body that would investigate corruption cases, complete the investigation within a year and envisages trial in the case getting over in the next one year. Drafted by Justice Santosh Hegde (former Supreme Court Judge and former Lokayukta of Karnataka), Prashant Bhushan (Supreme Court Lawyer) and Arvind Kejriwal (RTI activist), the draft Bill envisages a system where a corrupt person found guilty would go to jail within two years of the complaint being made and his ill-gotten wealth being confiscated. It also seeks power to the Jan Lokpal to prosecute politicians and bureaucrats without government permission. Retired IPS officer Kiran Bedi and other known people like Swami Agnivesh, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, Anna Hazare and Mallika Sarabhai are also part of the movement, called India Against Corruption. Its website describes the movement as â€Å"an expression of collective anger of people of India against corruption. We have all come together to force/request/persuade/pressurize the Government to enact the Jan Lokpal Bill. We feel that if this Bill were enacted it would create an effective deterrence against corruption.† Anna Hazare, anti-corruption crusader, went on a fast-unto-death in April, demanding that this Bill, drafted by the civil society, be adopted. Four days into his fast, the government agreed to set up a joint committee with an equal number of members from the government and civil society side to draft the Lokpal Bill together. The two sides met several times but could not agree on fundamental elements like including the PM under the purview of the Lokpal. Eventually, both sides drafted their own version of the Bill.