A new ray of hope has emerged with Anna sitting on fast for us. No words can be enough to thank him or to praise him. What can we the people like us, who do nothing except to comment on the on the inadequacies present in our system do? The least is to make ourselves aware of the situation, so that at least we are in a position to speak the right thing and to spread right opinion by the word of mouth. I confess that i'm one of the 'Mango' people who lack the will power to get directly involved in the action. I was on my way to home yesterday when a group of supporters crossed my path; I'm ashamed to confess that all I was doing was to look for a gap in the steady stream of supporters to get to my home without getting more late. I had so many chores to attend to at home. Well I'm sure each of you would be having a similar reason a similar story...
I'm making a small effort to make the facts about Lokpal Bill more clear, as I've stated above with an aim to educate ourselves more about what exactly is happening, I would like to make it clear that all this information has been gathered from various sources on internet:
The Jan Lokpal Bill (Citizen's Ombudsman Bill) is a draft anti-corruption bill drawn up by prominent civil society activists seeking the appointment of a Jan Lokpal, an independent body that would investigate corruption cases against politicians, complete the investigation within a year and envisages trial of such cases getting over in the next one year.
Ombudsman is a Swedish word that stands for "an officer appointed by the
legislature to handle complaints against administrative and judicial action. Traditionally the ombudsman is appointed based on unanimity among all political parties supporting the proposal.
The incumbent, though appointed by the legislature, is an independent functionary - independent of all the three organs of the state, but reports to the legislature. The Ombudsman can act both on he basis of complaints made by citizens, or suo moto. She/he can look into allegations of corruption as well as mal-administration. Such functionaries are called by different names in different countries; its power and functions also vary. Almost invariably in all the countries they deal with complaints relating to both corruption and mal-administration.
Origin of the Lokpal Bill in India: The Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC) set up in 1966 recommended the constitution of a two-tier machinery - of a Lokpal at the Centre, and Lokayukt(a)s in the states. The ARC while recommending the constitution of Lokpal was convinced that such an institution was justified not only for removing the sense of injustice from the minds of adversely affected citizens but also necessary to instill public confidence in the efficiency of administrative machinery. Following this, the Lokpal Bill was for the first time presented during the fourth Lok Sabha in 1968, and was passed there in 1969.
However, while it was pending in the Rajya Sabha, the Lok Sabha was dissolved, resulting in the first death of the bill. The bill was revived in 1971, 1977, 1985, 1989, 1996, 1998, 2001, 2005 and most recently in 2008. Each time, after the bill was introduced to the house, it was referred to some committee for improvements - a joint committee of parliament, or a departmental standing committee of the Home Ministry - and before the government could take a final stand on the issue the house was dissolved. There are as many as 17 states where the institution of Lokayukta has been constituted, beginning with Orissa in 1971. However the power, function and jurisdiction of Lokayuktas are not uniform in the country.
The main objective is to provide speedy, economically more viable form of justice to people. The Bill if it becomes an act would enable the Lokpal to investigate the corruption cases against the political persons at the Central level. Some important features of the Lokpal Bill have varied over the years; in its most recent avatar, the bill contains the following:
Members: Lokpal is to be a three member body with a chairperson who is or has been a chief justice or judge of the Supreme Court; and its two other members who are or have been judges or chief justices of high courts around the country.
Appointment: The chairperson and members shall be appointed by the President by warrant under his hand and seal on the recommendation of a committee consisting of the Vice-President (Chairman), the PM, the Speaker of LS, Home Minister, Leader of the House, other than the house in which PM is a member and leaders of Opposition of both the houses.
• Appointment is to be made on the recommendation of a committee.
• The Lokpal is ineligible to hold any office of profit under Government of India or of any state, or similar such posts after retirement.
• Fixed tenure of three years and can be removed only on the ground of proven misbehaviour or incapacity after an inquiry made by CJI and two senior most judges of SC.
• Lokpal will have its own administrative machinery for conducting investigations
Salary of Lokpal is to be charged on the Consolidated Fund of India
Jurisdiction of Lokpal:
• The central level political functionaries like the Council of Ministers including the Prime Minister, the Members of Parliament etc.
• He can not inquire into any allegation against the PM in relation to latter's functions of national security and public order.
• Complaints of offence committed within 10 years from the date of complaint can be taken up for investigation, not beyond this period.
• Any person other than a public servant can make a complaint. The Lokpal is supposed to complete the inquiry within a period of six months. The Lokpal has the power of a civil court to summon any person or authority. After investigation, the ombudsman can only recommend actions to be taken by the competent authority. A number of safeguards have been taken to discourage false complains or complain of malafide intent.
• He can order search and seizure operations.
• He shall present annually to the President the reports of investigation and the latter with the action take report has to put it before the both houses of parliament. It may be noted that the Lokpal is supposed to investigate cases of corruption only, and not address himself to redressing grievances in respect of injustices and hardship caused by maladministration.
It may be argued that inside the government offices, any decision of one official can be appealed to a higher official, all the way up to the head of a department. However, this mechanism has inherent flaws. Higher officers enjoy departmental fraternity with those against whom complaints are made, and both sail the same boat. Therefore their impartiality in judging appeals is always doubted. On the legislative side, an individual can approach the member representing his constituency for his demands. But given the absence of easy access of an ordinary citizen to his representative, this has more remained a myth more than reality. Among the organs of state, the Judiciary has proved itself to have highest credibility in protecting individual rights. However, due to procedural complexities involved in court cases - right from filing a case to the delivery of final verdict - there are inevitable delays of justice, which often are also denial of justice.
The existing devices for checks on elected and administrative officials have are not effective. The Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) is designed to inquire into allegations of corruption by administrative officials only. The CBI, the premier investigating agency of the country, functions under the supervision of the Ministry of Personnel, Public grievances and Pensions (under the Prime Minister) and is therefore not immune from political pressures during investigation. Indeed, the lack of independence and professionalism of CBI has been castigated by the Supreme Court often in recent times. All these have necessitated the creation of Lokpal with its own investigating team in earliest possible occasion.
Anna wants the Lokpal’s office to subsume the CVC so that both political leaders and officials come under its ambit as well as the judiciary. He also wants the Lokpal to have police powers — that is, to not just be a recommendatory body but an effective office that can file FIRs, chargesheet the accused and file cases. Hazare and other activists have been demanding for the Prime Minister’s Office to come within the ambit of the Lokpal.
The present government has planned to bring the Judiciary within the purview of Lok pal; this is one reason why the Bill has been referred to the Group of Ministers. However given the history of Lok pal bill, there is a constant risk that the bill will simply lapse because no conclusion is reached within the life of this Lok Sabha!
The political fraternity is understandably opposed to a Lok pal, since the purported target of the Lokpal is mainly the politicians themselves. The publicly stated reason for the current delay is that some important issues are as yet unresolved.
