BIKERS CLUB MAY 2019 ISSUE | Page 35

CURRENT AFFAIRS LOKPAL AND LOKAYUKTA Jurisdiction of Lokpal includes Prime Minister, Ministers, members of parliament, groups A, B, c and D officers and officials of Central of Lokpal for the Uniom and Lokayukta for States. Government. Jurisdiction of Lokpal included the Prime Minister except on These institutions are statutory bodies without any constitutional status. They allegations of corruption relating to international relations, security, the public order, atomic energy and space. The Lokpal does not have jurisdiction over perform the function of an "ombudsman" and inquire into allegations of Ministers and MPs in the matter of anything said in Parliament or a vote given corruption against certain public functionaries and for related matters. there. Its jurisdiction also includes any person who is or has been in charge In 1809, the institution of ombudsman was inaugurated officially in Sweden in (director / manager / secretary) of anybody / society set up by central act or any other body financed / controlled by central government and any other the 20th century. Ombudsman as an institution developed and grew most significantly after the Second World War. New Zealand and Norway adopted person involved in act of abetting. The Lokpal Act mandates that all public officials should furnish the assets and liabilities of themselves as well as their this system in the year 1962 and it proved to be of great significance in spreading the concept of the ombudsman. In 1967, on the recommendations respective dependents. It has the powers to superintendence over, and to give direction to CBI. If Lokpal has referred a case to CBI, the investigating officer of the Whyatt Report of 1961, Great Britain adopted the institution of the in such case cannot be transferred without the approval of Lokpal. The inquiry ombudsman and became the first large nation in the democratic world to Wing of the Lokpal has been vested with the powers of a civil court. Lokpal have such a system. In 1966, Guyana became the first developing nation to has powers of confiscation of assets, proceeds, receipts and benefits arisen or adopt the concept of the ombudsman. Subsequently, it was further adopted by Mauritius, Singapore, Malaysia, and India as well. In India, the concept of procured by means of corruption in special circumstances. Lokpal has the constitutional ombudsman was first proposed by the then law minister Ashok power to recommend transfer or suspension of public servant connected with Kumar Sen in parliament in the early 1960s. The term Lokpal and Lokayukta allegation of corruption. Lokpal has the power to give directions to prevent the destruction of records during the preliminary inquiry. were coined by Dr. L.M. Singhvi. In 1966, the First Administrative Reforms Commission recommended the setting up of two independent authorities at The institution of Lokpal has tried to bring a much needed change in the battle the central and state level, to look into complaints against public against corruption in the administrative structure of India but at the same time, functionaries, including MPs. In 1968, Lokpal bill was passed in Lok Sabha there are loopholes and lacunae which need to be corrected. Five years have but lapsed with dissolution of Lok Sabha and since then it has lapsed in the passed since the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act 2013 was passed by Parliament, Lok Sabha many times, till 2011 eight attempts were made to pass the Bill, but all met with failure. In 2002, the commission to Review the Working of the but not a single Lokpal has been appointed till date indicating the lack of Constitution headed by M.N. Venkatachaliah recommended the appointment political will. The Lokpal act also called upon states to appoint a Lokayukta of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas; also recommended that the PM be kept out of within a year of its coming to force. But only 16 states have established the Lokayuktas. Lokpal is not free from political influence as the appointing the ambit of the authority. In 2005, the Second Administrative Reforms committee itself consist of members from political parties. The appointment of Commission chaired by Veerappa Moily recommended that the office of Lokpal should be established without delay. In 2011, the government formed Lokpal can be manipulated in a way as there is no criterion to decide who is an 'eminent jurist' or ' a person of integrity'. The 2013 act did not provide a Group of Ministers, chaired by Pranab Mukherjee to suggest measures to concrete immunity to the whistle blowers. The provision for initiation of inquiry tackle corruption and examine the proposal of a Lokpal Bill. "india Against against the complainant if the accused is found innocent will only discourage Corruption Movement" led by Anna Hazare put pressure on the United people from complaining. The biggest lacuna is the exclusion of judiciary from Progressive Alliance (UPA) government at the Centre and resulted in the the ambit of the Lokpal. The Lokpal is not given any constitutional backing and passing of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Bill, 2013, in both the Houses of Parliament. It received assent from President on 1st January 2014 and came there is no adequate provision for appeal against the Lokpal. The specific details in relation to the appointment of Lokayukta have been left completely into force on 16th January 2014. on the States. To some extent, the need for functional independence of CBI has been catered to by a change brought forth in the selection process of its Lokpal is a multi-member body, that consists of one chairperson and a Director, by this Act. The complaint against corruption cannot be registered maximum of 8 members. Chairperson of the Lokpal should be either the after a period of seven years from the date on which the offence mentioned in former Chief Justice of India or the Former Judge of Supreme Court or an such complaint is alleged to have been committed. eminent person with impeccable integrity and outstanding ability, having The Lokpal and Lokayukta Act, 2013 provided for the establishment special knowledge and expertise of minimum 25 years in the matters relating to anti-corruption policy, public administration, vigilance, finance including insurance and banking, law and management. Out of the maximum eight members, half will be judicial members and minimum 50% of the members will be from SC / ST / OBC / Minorities and women. The term of office for Lokpal Chairman and members is 5 years or till the age of 70 years. The members are appointed by the president on the recommendation of a selection committee. The selection committee is composed of the Prime Minister who is the Chairperson; Speaker of Lok Sabha, leader of opposition in Lok Sabha, chief justice of India or a Judge nominated by him/her and one eminent jurist. For selecting the chairperson and the members, the selection committee constitutes a search panel of at least eight persons. Under the Lokpal Act of 2013, the DoPT is supposed to put together a list of candidates interested to be the chairperson or members of the Lokpal. This list would then go to the proposed eight members search committee, which would shortlists names and place them before the selection panel headed by the Prime Minister. The selection panel may or may not pick names suggested by the search committee. In September 2018, the government had constituted a search committee headed by former supreme court judge Justice Ranjana Prakash Desai. The 2013 Act also provides that all states should set up the office of the Lokayukta within one year from the commencement of the Act. In order to tackle the problem of corruption, the institution of the ombudsman should be strengthened both in terms of functional autonomy and availability of manpower. Greater transparency, more right to information and empowerment of citizens and citizen groups is required along with a good leadership that is willing to subject itself to public scrutiny. Appointment of Lokpal in itself is not enough. The government should address the issues based on which people are demanding a Lokpal. Merely adding to the strength of investigative agencies will increase the size of the government but not necessarily improve governance. The slogan adopted by the government of "less government and more governance", should be followed in the letter and spirit. Moreover, Lokpal and Lokayukta must be financially, administratively and legally independent of those whom they are called upon to investigate and prosecute. Lokpal and Lokayukta appointments must be done transparently so as to minimize the chances of the wrong sorts of people getting in. There is a need for a multiplicity of decentralized institutions with appropriate accountability mechanisms to avoid the concentration of too much power in any one institution or authority. article by Advait Nambiar