The pursuit of the powerful ……MANEESH CHHIBBER
Why government and opposition clash over the Lokpal’s mandate
EVEN four decades after the first Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC) strongly recommended setting up a two-tier system of a Lokpalat the Centre and Lokayukt as in the states,an Indian version of the ombudsman, first setup in Sweden in 1809, remains a pipe-dream.
There as on why successive governments failed to install the system was disagreement within the government as well as lack of consensus among political parties over the Lokpal bill’s template. While most governments were against the prime minister’s inclusion in the list of Central government functionaries whose actions would be within the purview of a probe by the Lokpal, opposition parties stressed the need for such a clause. (In the latest bill, which has received the go-ahead from Prime Minister Manmohan Singh,the PM is under the purview of the Lokpal.) Some political parties also played spoil sport,demanding that members of the higher judiciary should also be under the Lokpal’s purview. However, the Constitution does not allow such a provision. Other obstructing argument shold that the real ready exist many independent agencies such as the Central Vigilance Commission and Central Bureau of Investigation, which perform similar functions.
There was also serious debate over whether the Lokpal should be provided its own investigative wing or whether it should take the assistance of the much-maligned CBI to probe complaints received by it. Another point of conflict was whether the Lokpal should be given the authority to take suo motu cognisance of government actions or wait for somebody to file a formal complaint before initiating a probe.
Originally conceptualised as a “bulwark of democratic government against the tyranny of officialdom”, the ombudsman is an independent officer appointed to probe complaints of corruption against the high and mighty, including members of the legislature and judiciary. In its report, the first ARC headed by Morarji Desai said it was convinced that the Lokpal would not only remove any sense of injustice from the minds of adversely affected citizens, but would also go a long way in instilling public confidence in the efficiency of the administrative machinery. While 17 of the total 28 states have put in place the system of Lokayuktas, the results have been far from satisfactory, and the Central government continues to lack one.
The only time a serious attempt was made to set up a Lokpal office was in 1969, when a bill was introduced and passed in Lok
Sabha. However, before the bill could be passed by Rajya Sabha, Lok Sabha was dissolved, leaving the matter unresolved. Since then, while attempts were made to get the bill passed in 1971, 1977, 1985, 1989, 1996, 1998 and 2001, differences within the government and changes sought by the opposition led to its demise.
Those opposing the inclusion of the PM in the bill also point to the 2002 report of the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution headed by the former chief justice of India, M.N. Venkatachaliah.
Those opposing the inclusion of the PM in the bill also point to the 2002 report of the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution headed by the former chief justice of India, M.N. Venkatachaliah.
The commission observed that in the parliamentary system, the PM occupies a unique position: “He is the king pin of the entire government structure. It is his personality, his image and his leadership that drives the government and, indeed, other major institutions of the state. Major threats of destabilisation and subversion of democratic governments cannot be ignored. In this context, the prime minister as the symbol of the stability and continuity of the regime, should not be exposed to the risks of well-orchestrated and well-planned attempts to malign his image and reputation on which the entire functioning of govern ment depends. The entire structure can be undermined by malicious character assassination…” It strongly recommended the office be kept out of the purview of the Lokpal.
Among most states that have appointed Lokayuktas, the post has come to symbolise a post-retirement perk for retired judges.Consider this: no minister has ever been prosecuted in Punjab after being indicted by the Lokpal for acts of corruption and nepotism. So much so that after the death of the then-Punjab Lokpal, Justice D.V. Sehgal (retd), in office, the Congress government kept the post vacant for over two years.
In neighbouring Haryana,the Indian National LokDal government headed by OmPrakash Chautal are pealed the Haryana Lokpal Act,1997 through an ordinance in 1999 just to get rid of the in cumbent JusticeI.P.Vashisth (retd) after less than a year of his appointment.
Recently, the Karnataka Lokayukta, Justice N.Santosh Hegde (retd),put in his papers after expressing frustration at the state government’s in difference to the institution.Though he was later cajoled to continue in office, questions persist over the support that a nelected government would extend to a body whose main job is to probe corruption allegations against the government itself.
* The latest bill, which has received Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s go-ahead, puts the PM under the Lokpal’s purview.