LISTEN, CARE-TAKERS OF JAN LOKPAL BILL
It is good that Version 2.1 of Jan Lokpal Bill has been purged of the long, difficult-to-remember title that it used to wear earlier. At first sight vast improvement is visible in comparison to the previous draft, which appeared to be hastily drafted by some non-professional or semi-professional people. Still there are silly errors here and there stalking the revised text of the Bill. For instance, read Section 27(2)(b) of the Bill-'The Ethics Committee shall, within a month, decide whether to'. It seems the sentence remains incomplete. It is essential that the very drafters and members of the drafting panel scan it as minutely as possible and bring about constant revision, especially immediately after the errors have been identified by the viewers. It is expected that before the first meeting of the joint panel is held, the Draft Jan Lokpal Bill ought to read a fool-proof document at least in syntactic sense.
Chitta Behera
Mobile: 09437577546
From: Chitta Behera <chittabehera1@yahoo.co.in>
To: indiaagainstcorruption.2010@gmail.com; info@indiaagainstcorruption.org
Sent: Sun, 10 April, 2011 2:43:20 PM
Subject: A Poser to proponents of Jan Lokpal Bill
A single, uniform, monolithic anti-corruption law necessary for both Centre and States
(A poser to Anna Hazare's campaign for a Jan Lokpal Bill at apex level)
After going through the text of the Jan Lokpal Bill (its exact nomenclature being Anti-Corruption, Grievance Redressal And Whistleblower Protection Act, 2010), it transpires from the definition of 'Government' (Section 2-5) that the proponents of Jan Lokpal Bill, like that of the official draft Bill on Lokpal, envisage the Lokpal to address only to the allegations or grievances leveled against the authorities functioning at Central level. That the Bill's jurisdiction is limited only to Central level authorities is further confirmed from a note given on the homepage of the website ' India against Corruption' (http://indiaagainstcorruption.org/index.php) that reads, "We have drafted a similar Bill called Jan Lokayukta Bill for the states. Presently 18 states have Lokayukta Acts. However, they are quite ineffective. We want that the existing Lokayukta Acts should be replaced with Jan Lokayukta Bills". .Thus, going by the present scheme espoused by Anna Hazare and his group, they propose to have in place two similarly motivated but separately enacted laws in a federal country like India- one popularly called Lokpal applicable to Central level only, and the other proposed to be called Lokaukta for each State.
Without mincing the words, I foresee a real problem to emerge in days to come, which is precisely the theme of this poser. Assuming we shall have a proper Lokpal law in place as envisaged by Annaji by coming 15th of August, then also the people in each State shall have to struggle for enacting a model Lokayukta law for their respective States. Obviously the Union Territories shall not require separate laws for them, since they shall be governed as per the Central Lokpal law. Under the circumstances, there being 28 States, we shall require 28 nos. of Lokaukta laws, except of course the case of those States where Lokpal/Lokayukta laws in some form or other exist (for instance, Karnataka, Orissa et al), needing only a revamping exercise.
But it may so happen that a particular State may agree to legislate a Lokayukta Act for itself under the pressure of country wide euphoria created by the current Anna campaign around the central Jan Lokpal Bill. It is obvious that every State Government shall try to get a Lokayukta Act passed in their respective Assembly/Council following the conventional parliamentary procedure, as per which there is no legal compulsion to consult the civil society groups at the drafting stage. Even if they consult for populist purposes, there is no surety that the civil society groups in different States would have matured enough during this short span of time to stand up to the jugglery and machinations of the crafty nexus of negotiating politicians and bureaucrats. If the past experience be any guide, even the people of the State hardly know when a particular Bill is piloted in the State Assembly. They come to know about a new law only after the same has been passed by the State legislature. Further, as is well known, once the Bill is made into a law, it becomes a Herculean task to get it amended. Thus there is every possibility that various States may enact Lokayukta laws, which shall be suffering from too many critical loopholes and therefore reactionary and retrograde albeit paying lip-service to the State Lokayukta's investigative and penal powers over the Ministers and bureaucrats. In the process it may so happen that we shall have a very, very strong and progressive anti-corruption law at Centre co-existing with equally flawed and regressive parade of laws across the States. Again, it may so happen that in cases where both Central and State actors are involved, the Central Lokpal and State Lokayukta might work towards cross purposes, simply because of dissimilar legal frameworks. The end result may turn out to be messy and chaotic, nay counterproductive for the country as a whole.
In view of the above anxiety, it is suggested that we need to have a single, uniform, monolithic anti-corruption law for the whole country, to apply to Centre and States alike just as the RTI Act 2005 does. As everybody knows, with the enactment of RTI Act 2005, not only its predecessor law Freedom of Information Act 2002, but also all the corresponding State laws were automatically and at one repealed. Under the new law the State Governments were given the only power to frame Rules and that too on matters clearly specified keeping the letter and spirit of the parent law in tact. Of course some States while framing their Rules went against the mandates of RTI Act (such as Orissa collecting cost of information from BPL families vis-à-vis the exemption allowed to them under Section 7-5 of the Act). But such deviations by the particular States in respect of the limited Rule making power do leave a strong, legitimate ground for the conscious citizens to raise their objection before various forums including concerned Information Commissions and courts of law. Sooner or later, under the overriding force of law, such deviations are bound to be thrashed out and the Rules existing ultra vires the parent Act amended in line with the mandates of the latter.
Coming back to the point at issue, let me ask a straightforward question - what is the harm in enacting a Central Lokpal Bill applicable to both Centre and States at one go in place of the proposed Jan Lokpal Bill which purportedly applies only to Central level public authorities? I think there is no legal difficulty as such in passing such an anti-corruption law commanding comprehensive jurisdiction over both Centre and States, since there are already a few such progressive laws in force across the country besides RTI Act, such as PESA, MGNREGA, Forest Rights Act and Domestic Violence Act. .
Conversely, I find the present scheme of Jan Lokpal Bill with its exclusive jurisdiction extended over only Central authorities to be very much skewed in scope from the standpoint of the teeming millions, in whose name it is being floated by its proponents. As a matter of fact, most of the grievances of the common people living in rural or urban areas are created by acts of misfeasance on the part of the public authorities working under their respective State Governments. Be it payment of wages under MG-NREGA, distribution of land under Forest Rights Act, issue of BPL/ Ration Card under PDS, provision of subsidized house under Indira Awas Yozana, functioning of Anganwadis at village level, provision of midday meals in schools, maternal care under Janani Suraksha Yozana, running of Govt hospitals and dispensaries, free and compulsory education for the children, construction of village roads, provision of irrigation or drinking water facilities, subsidized electrification, prevention of pollution, resettlement and rehabilitation of the displaced people, welfare of SC/ST/OBC/Minority groups, women and child development, welfare of slum-dwellers or functioning of Panchayats/ Muncipalities- these are dealt with by the concerned public authorities working under the concerned State Governments. And here in these respects, most of our people living at grassroots level happen to get deprived of their entitlements and run from pillar to post in quest of justice, but as everybody knows, ultimately in vain, since there is no superior, empowered complaint redressal authority at State level to expeditiously hear their grievances and deliver compensatory justice to them. Does the proposed Jan Lokpal Bill hold any promise for securing to them the very entitlements denied by the State authorities? The answer is obviously an emphatic no, since Jan Lokpal is purportedly designed to serve as a corrective and penal institution in respect of only Central authorities.
Next, let us consider the other outstanding promise of the proposed Jan Lokpal Bill i.e. to hear and adjudicate the allegations on corruption or abuse of powers by the Ministers and bureaucrats and penalize them if necessary. The oft cited instances of such corruption are CWG bungling, 2-G Spectrum Scam, Tax evasion by Hasan Ali and Black money stashed in foreign banks- all involving the Central authorities. Though the common people living in villages and cities are not directly affected by the above instances of corruption, these are certainly abominable slurs on the body politic of our republic and deserve to be squarely taken on by the would-be Lokpal. However, there are innumerable instances of corruption and power abuse taking place everyday involving the State authorities- scams around mining leases, looting of NREGA money, bungling of PDS food-grains meant for BPL households, massive corruption in paddy procurement from the farmers, siphoning of midday meal stuffs for school children, forcible acquisition of public and private land following underhand deals with corporate houses, deliberate negligence shown to the environmental nuisance caused by industrial houses, calculated inaction of the police and administration in the face of communal holocaust, ruthless police atrocity on innocent tribal people on the pretext of fighting Maoists and the like- which directly affect the day-to-day life, nay survival of the millions of common people living in the villages and cities across the country. The people below certainly look forward to the enactment of a law, which can, to start with, address to their existential issues of the above sorts. Thus there is an urgent need for linking the ongoing struggle for a foolproof anti-corruption law at apex level to the people's aspiration to get over the myriad injustices and miseries inflicted on them by the various authorities functioning at State level. Why shouldn't we have a single, uniform anti-corruption law at the apex level that can mete out punitive justice to the corrupt and abusers and deliver the compensatory justice to the deprived millions at State level?
As a matter of fact, the existing anti-corruption law Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 is a single, monolithic law, applicable to both Centre and States. However, right since the day one, the institutions it bred, CBI at Central level or Vigilance Directorates at State level remained the handmaids of the respective Governments. Not that they didn't possess teeth, but they squarely lacked the autonomy and independence to decide whom to bite and when. But the very comprehensive framework covering both Centre and States is definitely a positive trait imbuing this much maligned law (PoCA), which the proposed anti-corruption law espoused by Anna Hazare need to imbibe so as to acquire both teeth and turf, deserving of its grandiloquent manifesto.
Chitta Behera,
Cuttack , Orissa
Dt 10th April 2011
No comments:
Post a Comment