|
|
|
Towards a 'functional Lokpal'
|
04 October 2011
The Lokpal in its very essence undertakes the tall task of eliminating corruption from the Indian political administration and bureaucracy. The recent ceaseless media coverage of the Jan Lokpal bill, the like of which was originally introduced in the Indian Parliament during the fourth Lok Sabha in 1968, did not entirely convince the masses of its feasibility. In an endeavour to mull over the underlining aspects, the Chennai Chapter of Observer Research Foundation (ORF-C) organised a discussion titled "For a functional Lokpal "with Mr M R Sivaraman, IAS (retd), former Revenue Secretary, Government of India, where he outlined aspects that could make the proposed Ombudsman-like institution serve its desired purpose.
The talk was set in motion with Mr Sivaraman admitting that it was unreasonable to expect a Lokpal (law) to fully eradicate the menace of corruption from the system. Corruption, according to him, can only be tackled with improvement in bureaucratic systems and procedures along with the common man being more assertive about his/her rights and entitlements in a civil society. Because there will be need for 28 State-specific Lokpal bills apart from the parent one at the Centre (going by the division of powers and responsibilities under the Constitution), there would come a need to streamline and synergise these pieces of legislation in accordance with what exists at the top. The Jan Lokpal bill as devised by 'Team Anna' purportedly aimed at dealing with corruption at all levels of society, which is a very flawed approach, MrSivaraman said. Such a bill is cumbersome and overburdened with more responsibilities than it can handle. It is important to remember that the Lokpal bill is essentially meant to create a body which would register complaints of corruption as experienced by civil society members in Government establishments and move on to investigate the same. It should not be expected to deal with re-dressal of grievances which is in the domain of the Executive. Neither should it trouble itself with taking to task the judiciary, which again is the province of the Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill, 2010. Mr Sivaraman described the latter as a good and effective piece of legislation, if and when put to use in the present form. He endorsed the Aruna Roy version of the Lokpal Bill, instead. (Aruna Roy, 65, is a prominent social activist and a member of the National Advisory Council (NAC) which pioneered the Right to Information (RTI) movement in India).
In order to improve the feasibility of the Lokpal, its reach should be restricted to certain important activities with a limited but a highly dedicated staff, drawn from all professions and paid comparable salaries. And it should most importantly be made independent of the Executive, Judiciary and the Legislature in its day- to-day functioning and recruitment of staff. Mr Sivaraman threw light on a World Bank study on anti-corruption agencies, which was released in 2002. According to the study, anti-corruption bodies are divided into four groups - one, the Universal Model which incorporates investigative, prosecuting and communication actions (as practised in Hon Kong), two, the Parliamentary model- where the anti-corruption body is accountable only to Parliament (as in New South Wales), three, the Singapore model (reporting only to the President) and four, the multi-agency model, where anti-corruption activities is taken care of by various departments (like the Department of Government Ethics, FBI, the Justice Department, as in the US). India falls in the last category where multiple agencies are involved in investigating corruption. It should not be discarded out-of-turn, as in many cases where State-level political masters and officials are involved, Central agencies like the Income-Tax Department, Customs and Enforcement Directorate have exposed wrong-doers.
Mr Sivaraman expressed the urgent need to bestow constitutional status to the State and Central Lokpal bodies, much like the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) and the Election Commission (EC). In the realm of recruitment for the Lokpal, officers from the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) or any other Government establishment should be deemed ineligible. Lokpal must have in its ranks an entirely separate set of investigators inducted from top-rung colleges and law schools much like the FBI in the US. They should be thoroughly indoctrinated towards maintaining staunch loyalty towards the institution they serve and dedicate themselves to the national interest of the country. Ideally, they should be based on the Hon Kong model of deputation and contract. All IAS, IPS and other Central service officers should also be tried by the Central Lokpal, and not by those in the States, in order to prevent a soft-peddling approach by the respective State Governments. There should be an active time-limit to wrap up cases of corruption. Trials by courts should take place on a day-to-dayday basis to expedite the process of conviction/acquittal. In view of the suggestion that the Lokpal should be made a constitutional body, there is no need to exclude the trial of high dignitaries like the Prime Minister or the Chief Minister on charges of alleged corruption.
According to the World Bank study, most of the anti-corruption agencies all over the world have failed to achieve their objectives barring the Singapore and Hong Kong models. The UK Bribery Act of 2010 is yet another landmark achievement in regulating corruption. It's simple but phenomenally exhaustive provisions cover regulating corruption in the private sector as well unlike the Indian Lokpal -- and falls in line with the UN Convention on Corruption. It is indeed an example worth emulating in India.
Mr Sivaraman said that the functions of CBI should be relegated to the pure and simple role of police Investigation and the NIA should be merged with it, making it similar to the FBI. He stressed the role of the State and Central Governments to appoint committees at the grass-root level with the task of completely overhauling the systems and procedures of government mechanisms in this computerised world , rectify and constantly review their operations and improve communication with the people in order to advance the "practicability and constitutionality" of the Lokpal. The provisions of LokpalBill should also ensure strict financial independence for the institution, with funds being allocated from the Consolidated Fund of India under the Constitution. Other important missing pieces in the Lokpal puzzle which require proper placement include regulation of corrupt practices indulged by non-governmental organisations( NGOs) , foreign nationals and Indians dealing in murky foreign transactions, unaccounted assets in foreign banks( described as 'speed money') and officials involved in smuggling.
In conclusion, it was recognised that unless the civil society changes its mind-set with the State Governments too activating the right initiatives, Lokpal can never me made implementable.
(This report is prepared by Sneha Bhura and Janani Govindankutty, Department of International Studies, Stella Maris College, Chennai)
|
|
