rEGARDS
DR JN SHARMA
On 4/11/11, Chitta Behera <chittabehera1@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
> 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