Re: [IAC#RG] JanLokPal Bill follies

You are right; Janlokpak Bill was drafted on the basis of Lokpal Bill which was then pending with the Parliament for more than forty years to fool and divert the attention of the people from the Baba Ramdevji's movement of bringing back the moneys deposited in the foreign banks.

 

V.S.Sardesai 

From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
To: indiaresists <indiaresists@lists.riseup.net>
Sent: Friday, 29 November 2013 10:55 AM
Subject: [IAC#RG] JanLokPal Bill follies

Dear Mr. Mathur

I have appended your submissions in 2011 on Lokpal Bill to RS Standing Committee below your email message.

The central thrust from every anti-corruption expert is that any effective Ombudsman (LokPal) should be reserved for high-level corruption only (ie. PM down to Joint Sec, and Higher judiciary only).

It is the corrupt forces who misled innocent Indians into taking to the streets in 2011 for a worthless and impractical legislation known as "Jan Lokpal Bill"

PS: Shri Mathur (IPS 1972)  is a retd. DGP  of Tamil Nadu Cadre awarded President's Police Medal for meritorious service 2002.

Sarbajit

On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 9:25 AM, <santmathur@gmail.com> wrote:

Sent on my BlackBerry® from Vodafone

-----Original Message-----

From: santmathur@gmail.com
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 03:10:08
To: Girender Singh<girinder_singh@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: santmathur@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] Update: PUBLIC NOTICE: To IAC's old volunteers now disillusioned with AAP

Irrespective of the coinage of the term "India Against Corruption" (you can even have World Against Corruption,or Cosmos Against Corruption, for that matter to fool lot of people some of the time at least), the waywardness of the "Strategy"/ Holistic or Integrated approach" betrayed the agenda of the organisers of (what can at best be called as) rabble rousing.

It shocked the.conscience of tens of thousands of "anti-corruption professionals" and finest brains/scholars involved for decades in practising/improving the anti-corruption work that sheer street smartedness was trying to hijack the agenda and too through an extremely shoddy and totally poorly conceptualised idea like "LP" or JLP" Bill.

Nothing was more anti-democratic than imposing (as a motley group of five) themselves on the nation a sole saviours or conscience-keepers of the nation. Is that the idea of a "participative democracy" or serving personal agenda through "mobocracy"?

Will Lokayukta Bill" not be drafted through participative democratic process,which surely is a time-consuming process,when done in a cool-headed manner? What a part of the "absolutely reasoned/seasoned strategy" could be has been shared with many and Sh S Roy is going to place it for the knowledge of the members of this forum too .

Yes, pl go through my comments sent to the Standing Committee and be enlightened as to what Statute - formation exercise should be and how.   people will feel cheated and indignant for having been taken for a ride. No one sticks one's neck out on knowing what the perfectionist professional /legal mechanism is in anti-corruption crusade,and that how this has already for long been demanded in appropriate fora, without taking to the streets through a deviant donation-collection system.

I would,as a professional/researcher in anti-corruption arena (for decades) request the masses not to let themselves down and be wisened on going through my articulation on LPB. Not the best way to sermonise ad infinitum on the holistic anti-corruption strategy/management/operation. Wait,pl wait.this too, will be done in public domain shortly.S P Mathur IPS DGP(retd) BE MBA PhD

Sent on my BlackBerry® from Vodafone

                                                         

Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhviji

Chairman

Standing Committee on AR & PG

Rajya Sabha

New Delhi

 

Sir,

 

Sub: Lokpal Bill 2011-Suggestion and comments-regarding

 

As the time available to register suggestions and comments is not sufficient, I am unable to present an alternative draft of my own, nor am I able to offer very comprehensive comments at this juncture, but could do so positively, if given an opportunity to present myself before the Committee headed by you.

 

The limited areas on which I would like to offer my comments are given as below:

 

GENERAL: Any Statute has to pass through the acid that  of:

·        Necessity

·        Legality

·        Practicality

 

It has then to be subjected to next line of sieve consisting of techno management tools comprising  of :

 SWOT  analysis , and

 

DATT (The Bono's 10 famous principles of creative decision making -Direct Attention Thinking Tools) & Deming's theory of Profound Knowledge.

 

At next stage come the concepts of scientific decision-making process,  using decision-tree and pay-off matrix/matrices.

This work is assisted – or has to be assisted necessarily – by regression/multiple regression analysis so that decision-making is truly evidence-based and could pass the due diligence muster, mandated by SC. 

                                                     

Nothing can - and should - be done in haste just because historically delay in decision-making has taken place. Two wrongs DON''T A RIGHT MAKE. No dilatory tactics also could be applied or 'paralysis by analysis' (Unwarranted nit picking) for extraneous considerations, resorted to.

 

Your great wisdom, at individual and collective level, could set a fine balance. This Valuable suggestion is made to avoid recourse to extreme positions as advocated by many people/groups.

 

SPECIFIC

 

(i) Selection of Lokpal (Chairman/Members)

Must be fair and merit-based as also transparent and seen to be so. Screening committees and Selection Committee should have 50% non-officials (eminent & relevant personnel) who are conversant with the process of HR assessment.

 

(ii) Coverage

·                    Lokpal must cover the PM (in serving capacity also) for legal, practical & psychological reasons. With PMO adopting RFD (Result Framework Documentation) and becoming increasingly transparent, there is no valid reason to fear that vexatious and frivolous complaints would harm the power and position/performance of the PM.

 

Safeguards are, of course, possible like agreement by half or two thirds of Lokpal Members agreeing to take up Enquiry/Investigation. Certain sensitive areas like 'international relations', 'nuclear programmes/test', 'national security' etc could be kept out of the purview of Lokpal.

 

If the PM is not included, all the Ministries, directly under the charge of the PM, will get excluded from the purview of Lokpal and that would be an anti-thesis of the spirit of Lokpal legislation. Arguments against the common law of equality are devoid of merit, and any evidence and apprehensions are purely misplaced. Previous Standing Committees have agreed to the inclusion of The PM under Lokpal coverage, and nothing has changed since then.

 

This one single provision would act as master stoke to create pervasive deterrence. Not only this, the PMO, acting proactively, wouldn't allow any    

 Minister or high profile functionary to act in corrupt/dishonest manner.

 

The nation is not vertically divided over this issue. Just a microscopic minority, for unresearched and unimaginative reasons, has been taking a contrarian view.

 

·                    Judiciary could be covered under Judicial Accountability Bill. This is now generally agreed to. An important import of their concept is that Lokpal institution doesn't have to - and just can't-provide omnibus coverage to all types of personnel/agencies/ organisations.

 

·                    While the conduct of MPs, within the Parliament (under Art 105)  could be kept out of the purview of Lokpal there is absolutely no justification in keeping their conduct outside parliament out of Lokpal purview, specifically in view of SC judgment, declaring MPs as public servants. The parliamentarians should rise above 'party line' and 'privileged' position and support the move to look like commoners in the eyes of law and common people. It's essential also to redeem the practically low esteem in which they are held by the masses at large, their exalted positions and unaccounted privileges notwithstanding. They, as public representatives, must set an example (of leadership) of probity in public life, rather than find cover behind fig leaf of technicalities, or assailable like of arguments.

 

·                    The lower bureaucracy (below JS level) must be kept out of the purview of Lokpal. The statistics of CVC/CBI indicate that there has never been any problem in handling their cases specially as they don't enjoy  great clout/power and have very little discretion to indulge in corrupt practices at mega level.

 

Lokpal is a premier institution. There is no need to use a sledge hammer to kill a fly. Lokpal institution has been conceptualized as part of 'gap analysis' to cover high profile /powerful functionaries over which traditionally CBI/CVC hasn't been able to provide requisite cover. CVC's Annual Reports speak volume on this subject.

 

Thousands or lakhs of cases could clog the functionaries of premier institution like Lokpal. Also the modern management principles talk in terms of decentralisation of administrative work and about lean organisations.

 

The current concept of vigilance at unit/departmental level and enquiry/investigation at CBI/CVC level could be – rather must be – improved through greater autonomy/empowerment & thoughts check-list based system, as also through point-of-action proportionate accountability system.

 

·                    The best way to kill Lokpal, in infancy, is to have lower judiciary under Lokpal, directly or indirectly. Once corruption at high places get  nipped in the bud, cascading effect, ripple effect, and deterrence in varied form  would automatically prevent harassment/corruption at lower level.

·                    For the same reasons as given for lower bureaucracy; all other types of personnel/agencies (NGOs, Associations etc) must be kept out of purview of Lokpal.

Its not one-stop shop for combatting deviant behavior on part of different types of personnel/ organisations. Like Judicial Accountability Bill taking care of judiciary, other Statutes need to be created to handle malfunctioning of media/NGOs/Associations etc.  The Lokpal, as the very objective of the Bill says, is to handle corruption at high places.  It's an open and shut case for exclusion of stray types of personnel/agencies for coverage under Lokpal.

 

(iii) Functions:

'Less to do more' must be the motto for premier institution like Lokpal. Quality work and not the quantity must be the Organisation's functional philosophy. Check-list based enquiries and investigation in time-bound manner could produce desired result. One doesn't shoot 100 rounds to shoe away 100 pigeon's perched on the tree-top. Media management, for deterrence does the trick even in just a few cases, possibly in one single case.

 

Lokpal shouldn't handle administrative work of disciplinary action like employee's dismissal etc; as ab-initio itself it's contrary to legal/constitutional provisions. People using PIL with information obtained through RTI could always question if the State/ Departments give scant/ inadequate attention to Lokpal's recommendations. With an independent investigative wing under its control, enjoying the powers of police station and, clothed with all legal provisions it could handle searches, seizures and arrests etc, of course in cautious manner.These personnel, from different departments/organisations could initially be taken on deputation , and later, if necessary ,be absorbed also. Direct recruitment,at some stage, could also be thought of purposefully. That would be the only way to maintain requisite independence of the investigation wing, something  seen to be missing from the current system of functioning of CBI/ED/IT etc.

 

For work-in-progress etc, on receipt of complaints, Lokpal, on enquiry, could seek reports and make recommendations for avoidance of irregularities /malpractices and corrupt practices.

 

Wherever administrative powers are available with existing Authorities the same should not be tinkered with, for if the righteous (looking) recommendations of Lokpal are ignored or rejected (even indirectly through delay) people could seek remedy through PIL, getting requisite information under RTI. There must be no question of overreach for Lokpal for it to look like a monstrous institution.

 

Lokpal's functions must be in sync with its basic objectives.

 

(iv) Lokayukta:

If under RTI Act, 2005 & Electricity Act, 2003, State level Institutions could be conceived & set up, why likewise under the central legislstion (Lokpal Bill 2011) provision for Lokayukta at state level can't be there? Under Art 252,just if 2 States  agree, State Lokayukta's could be set up there and other States could follow-up  the model or could eventually even be covered under  the same Act. Existing Lokayukta's could get subsumed under the new provision like CVC was when CVC Act 2003 came into being.  State Lokayuktas on the model of Lokpal need to cover high level functionaries only to provide punch and quality work. The existing state vigilance and anti-corruption mechanism could - and should-be strengthened to take care of lower level functionaries. A bench-marked service delivery mechanism, through a separate State level legislation should take care of petty level corruption. It would take care of the day-to-day issues of harassment / hassle/corruption/delay with which the common people are concerned with.

 

(v) Citizen's Charter

However important this subject might look,it has simply nothing to do with Lokpal as this issue needs to be dealt with through wholly different mechanism/institutions/statutes.

 

Just by making mention of citizen's charter in Lokpal Bill no purpose will be served. This issue requires separate serious consideration & consultation,some what beyond the levels provided for currently by the Department of personnel and public grievences. A comprehensive note on this issue will be shared separately.

 

S.P.MATHUR

IPS DGP (Retd)

BE MBA PhD

03.09.2011

-----Original Message-----

From: Girender Singh <girinder_singh@yahoo.com>
Sender: indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 03:33:47

Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in/