KARNATAKA MODEL POINTS TO THE WAY OUT…
The states Lokayukta is unique in having powers of both investigation & prosecution,which is a step forward,says Manoj Mitta
The states Lokayukta is unique in having powers of both investigation & prosecution,which is a step forward,says Manoj Mitta
Though there is an ombudsman for corruption in half the states,none of them has been as embroiled in controversy as the Karnataka Lokayukta,former Supreme Court judge Santosh Hegde.Yet,the Karnataka model is widely hailed as a success story worth emulating for the Centre and states,to make the anti-corruption regime more effective.
This is because the controversies surrounding the Karnataka Lokayukta owe their origin to a major reform in the very constitution of that body in 1986.Thanks to the law devised by the then chief minister Ramakrishna Hegde,the Lokayukta took over not just the state vigilance bureau (dealing with disciplinary action) but also the anti-corruption branch of the police (dealing with criminal investigation).Hence,it is endowed with a dedicated police force spread across the state under an additional director general and with a current strength of 723.This is in addition to 547 other personnel,including judicial officers.To put this size in perspective,it may be recalled that the total strength of the Central Vigilance Commission is under 200.
Size does matter as it has helped the Karnataka Lokayutka take on more than its counterparts in other states could.The fact that a major component of its staff is endowed with the investigative powers of the police is mainly responsible for the impact made by the institution.The impact has been greater in the last decade since the previous incumbent,former Supreme Court judge N Venkatachala,created a sensation by accompanying the Lok-ayukta police on their raids.The breakthrough made under Santosh Hegde about a year ago in unearthing the Rs 1,600-crore illegal mining scam escalated into a major confrontation with the corrupt politicians behind that loot.
So much so that Hegde was forced to resign from his office in June 2010 when the political establishment hit back by suspending a forest officer,R Gokul,who had helped the Lokayukta detect the export of illegal iron ore.His dramatic gesture put the powerful mining lobby on the defensive as the institution of Lokayukta had captured the popular imagination.Hegde was persuaded to withdraw his resignation after chief minister B S Yeddyurappa gave a clean chit to Gokul and BJP leader L K Advani promised him that the Lokayukta would be further strengthened.
In a significant but halfhearted reform that followed the mining controversy,the government granted suo motu powers to the Lokayukta so that it can investigate corruption cases involving bureaucrats even in the absence of a complaint in the prescribed form.This measure is inadequate because it is limited to bureaucrats and prevented the Lokayukta from being as proactive with regard to corruption by politicians,including ministers and legislators.The government’s omission is glaring given that the culprits in the mining scam were politicians,including state Cabinet ministers.
Two months ago,Hegde publicly regretted withdrawing his resignation in the context of the mining controversy.The provocation this time was Yeddyurappas decision to appoint a commission of inquiry in a bid to prevent the Lokayukta from probing allegations that his family had benefited from a land scam.This extraordinary situation prompted the Karnataka high court to stay the functioning of the commission of inquiry on a petition seeking a direction that only the Lokayukta should investigate the land scam.
The frequent run-ins with the government are indicative of the odds stacked against the recommendations made by the Lokayukta.Yet,because of the Karnataka Lokayuktas investigative powers,the big picture of compliance by the government is encouraging,according to the figures supplied to TOI by Hegdes office.Out of the 438 reports sent by Hegde in the last four years recommending departmental action,the government did the needful in 345 cases.Out of 1,367 trap cases registered in the same period,the government refused prosecution sanction in only five cases while it is awaited in 100.Out of 224 raid cases registered in the last four years,the government granted sanction to prosecute in 204 cases while it is awaited in the remaining 20.
The statistics relating to sanction for prosecution seem all the more impressive considering that those reported by the Lokayukta include IAS and IPS officers,MLAs and corporators.Hegde,however,conceded,The more influential accused tend to get a favorable treatment from the government.And there is nothing we can do to force the government to sanction their prosecution.
Though corruption allegations draw more attention,Hegde told TOI that 90% of the work done by the Lokayukta related to complaints of maladministration (which could range from misplaced bumpers on the road to delays in issuing ration cards).He is helped in this task by a team of 17 judicial officers who give their recommendations to him.Hegde reckoned that among the final orders passed by him in the form of recommendations to the government on complaints of maladministration,there is a compliance rate of at least 50%.
The compliance rate in any event is more a reflection on the government than on the ombudsman.The difference that the Karnataka model could make on account of its in-house police powers should have inspired the Centre to incorporate that feature in its proposed national ombudsman,Lokpal.Sadly,it has not.
* CALLING ATTENTION Lawyers demonstrate in Bangalore in support of the Lokayukta