Govt’s Lokpal Bill Vs Jan Lokpal Bill

Lokpal should have power to investigate allegations of corruption against PM. Special safeguards provided against frivolous and mischievous complaints

PM kept out of Lokpal’s purview.

As of today, corruption by PM can be investigated under Prevention of Corruption Act. Government wants investigations to be done by CBI, which comes directly under him, rather than independent Lokpal

Lokpal should have powers to investigate allegation of corruption against judiciary. Special safeguards provided against frivolous and mischievous complaints

Judiciary kept out of Lokpal purview.

Government wants this to be included in Judicial Accountability Bill (JAB). Under JAB, permission to enquire against a judge will be given by a three member committee (two judges from the same court and retd Chief justice of the same court). There are many such flaws in JAB. We have no objections to judiciary being included in JAB if a strong and effective JAB were considered and it were enacted simultaneously.

Lokpal should be able to investigate allegations that any MP had taken bribe to vote or speak in Parliament.

Government has excluded this from Lokpal’s purview.

Taking bribe to vote or speak in Parliament strikes at the foundations of our democracy. Government’s refusal to bring it under Lokpal scrutiny virtually gives a license to MPs to take bribes with impunity.

Violation of citizen’s charter (if an officer does not do a citizen’s work in prescribed time) by an officer should be penalized and should be deemed to be corruption.

No penalties proposed. So, this will remain only on paper.

Government had agreed to our demand in the Joint committee meeting on 23rd May. It is unfortunate they have gone back on this decision.

Anti-corruption branch of CBI should be merged into Lokpal.

Government wants to retain its hold over CBI.

CBI is misused by governments. Recently, govt has taken CBI out of RTI, thus further increasing the scope for corruption in CBI. CBI will remain corrupt till it remains under government’s control

1. Broad based selection committee with 2 politicians, four judges and two independent constitutional authorities. 2. An independent search committee consisting of retd constitutional authorities to prepare first list. 3. A detailed transparent and participatory selection process.

1. With five out of ten members from ruling establishment and six politicians in selection committee, government has ensured that only weak, dishonest and pliable people would be selected. 2. Search committee to be selected by selection committee, thus making them a pawn of selection committee 3. No selection process provided. It will completely depend on selection committee

Government’s proposal ensures that the government will be able to appoint its own people as Lokpal members and Chairperson. Interestingly, they had agreed to the selection committee proposed by us in the meeting held on 7th May. There was also a broad consensus on selection process. However, there was a disagreement on composition of search committee. We are surprised that they have gone back on the decision.

To the people. A citizen can make a complaint to Supreme Court and seek removal.

To the Government. Only government can seek removal of Lokpal

With selection and removal of Lokpal in government’s control, it would virtually be a puppet in government’s hands, against whose senior most functionaries it is supposed to investigate, thus causing serious conflict of interest.

Complaint against Lokpal staff will be heard by an independent authority

Lokpal itself will investigate complaints against its own staff, thus creating serious conflicts of interest

Government’s proposal creates a Lokpal, which is accountable either to itself or to the government. We have suggested giving these controls in the hands of the citizens.

Method would be the same as provided in CrPC like in any other criminal case. After preliminary enquiry, an FIR will be registered. After investigations, case will be presented before a court, where the trial will take place

CrPC being amended. Special protection being provided to the accused. After preliminary enquiry, all evidence will be provided to the accused and he shall be heard as to why an FIR should not be regd against him. After completion of investigations, again all evidence will be provided to him and he will be given a hearing to explain why a case should not be filed against him in the court. During investigations, if investigations are to be started against any new persons, they would also be presented with all evidence against them and heard.

Investigation process provided by the government would severely compromise all investigations. If evidence were made available to the accused at various stages of investigations, in addition to compromising the investigations, it would also reveal the identity of whistleblowers thus compromising their security. Such a process is unheard of in criminal jurisprudence anywhere in the world. Such process would kill almost every case.

All those defined as public servants in Prevention of Corruption Act would be covered. This includes lower bureaucracy.

Only Group A officers will be covered.

One fails to understand government’s stiff resistance against bringing lower bureaucracy under Lokpal’s ambit. This appears to be an excuse to retain control over CBI because if all public servants are brought under Lokpal’s jurisdiction, government would have no excuse to keep CBI.

The same bill should provide for Lokpal at centre and Lokayuktas in states

Only Lokpal at the centre would be created through this Bill.

According to Mr Pranab Mukherjee, some of the CMs have objected to providing Lokayuktas through the same Bill. He was reminded that state Information Commissions were also set up under RTI Act through one Act only.

Lokpal will be required to provide protection to whistleblowers, witnesses and victims of corruption

No mention in this law.

According to govt, protection for whistleblowers is being provided through a separate law. But that law is so bad that it has been badly trashed by standing committee of Parliament last month. The committee was headed by Ms Jayanthi Natrajan. In the Jt committee meeting held on 23rd May, it was agreed that Lokpal would be given the duty of providing protection to whistleblowers under the other law and that law would also be discussed and improved in joint committee only. However, it did not happen.

High Courts will set up special benches to hear appeals in corruption cases to fast track them

No such provision.

One study shows that it takes 25 years at appellate stage in corruption cases. This ought to be addressed.

Not included

After completion of investigations, in addition to filing a case in a court for prosecution, a bench of Lokpal will hold open hearings and decide whether to remove the government servant from job.

The minister will decide whether to remove a corrupt officer or not. Often, they are beneficiaries of corruption, especially when senior officer are involved. Experience shows that rather than removing corrupt people, ministers have rewarded them.

Power of removing corrupt people from jobs should be given to independent Lokpal rather than this being decided by the minister in the same department.

1. Maximum punishment is ten years 2. Higher punishment if rank of accused is higher 3. Higher fines if accused are business entities 4. If successfully convicted, a business entity should be blacklisted from future contracts.

None of these accepted. Only maximum punishment raised to 10 years.

Lokpal 11 members collectively will decide how much budget do they need

Finance ministry will decide the quantum of budget

This seriously compromises with the financial independence of Lokpal

Lokpal will have a duty to take steps to prevent corruption in any ongoing activity, if brought to his notice. If need be, Lokpal will obtain orders from High Court.

No such duties and powers of Lokpal

2G is believed to have come to knowledge while the process was going on. Shouldn’t some agency have a duty to take steps to stop further corruption rather than just punish people later?

Lokpal bench will grant permission to do so

Home Secretary would grant permission.

Home Secretary is under the control of precisely those who would be under scanner. It would kill investigations.

Lokpal members will only hear cases against senior officers and politicians or cases involving huge amounts. Rest of the work will be done by officers working under Lokpal

All work will be done by 11 members of Lokpal. Practically no delegation.

This is a sure way to kill Lokpal. The members will not be able to handle all cases. Within no time, they would be overwhelmed.

Only government funded NGOs covered

All NGOs, big or small, are covered.

A method to arm twist NGOs

No imprisonment. Only fines on complainants. Lokpal would decide whether a complaint is frivolous or vexatious or false.

Two to five years of imprisonment and fine. The accused can file complaint against complainant in a court. Interestingly, prosecutor and all expenses of this case will be provided by the government to the accused. The complainant will also have to pay a compensation to the accused.

This will give a handle to every accused to browbeat complainants. Often corrupt people are rich. They will file cases against complainants and no one will dare file any complaint. Interestingly, minimum punishment for corruption is six months but for filing false complaint is two years.