Political Diary

New Delhi, 25 June 2011

Jokepal Or Jonkh

OUCH, LOKPAL HURTS!

By Poonam I Kaushish

Much ado about nothing. Succinctly, my dear countrymen this encapsulates the death of the much-hyped but ephemeral Lokpal Bill. The Government-civil society conclave which started with a bang, amidst high hopes of our netagan genuinely interested in turning a new leaf, ended in the worst damp squib and acrimony. Anna’s Jokepal vs Government’s jonkh (leech). Never mind the polite face-saver, ‘we agreed to disagree. Sic.

A post mortem of the weeks gone by, beginning with Anna Hazare’s fast in April, exposes the Government charade:  They don’t want to be accountable. Our leaders only agreed to dialogue because they did not want Anna’s corruption campaign to become the cause célèbre of the State Assembly elections.

Polls over they hardened their stand and refused to play ball. Now by postponing the monsoon session to Parliament, the scam-tainted Congress wants the onus of not having a stringent ombudsman and the Anna anti-corruption campaign to singe the entire political spectrum and not it alone.

:

Arguably, given our netagan’s penchant of anointing themselves as the law will this prove to be its nemesis?  Already, Anna has threatened to resume his fast from 16 August till the Government accepts the Jan Lokpal Bill in toto. Said he, “I am not afraid of death am ready to face bullets. Karenge ya marenge.”

Trashing the Government’s Lokpal Bill, Team Anna dismissed it as drivel and just a "symbolic attempt" to install an authority in the name of a Lokpal rather than a "comprehensive, independent, empowered" institution to fight corruption. Instead, the Government version was gunning for those who complain against corruption.

The key issues on which differences remained even after nine meeting of the 10-member Government-Team Anna panel included bringing the Prime Minister, higher judiciary and acts of MPs inside Parliament within the purview of the Lokpal, CBI’s inclusion under the Lokpal and Lokayuktas in State and the mode of selection and removal of its members.

The main bone of contention: the Prime Minister inclusion under the ambit of the Lokpal. Team Anna is correct, existing laws do not prevent or preclude investigations into the Prime Minister post. Arguably, suppose 2G scam’s Raja, Mayawati or Lalu became the Prime Minister, such a person enjoying complete immunity from any kind of investigations would himself become the biggest security threat. 

More. What happens if a Prime Minister holds 15 portfolios, would all these ‘Ministers and Ministries’ be outside the ambit of the Lokpal?  After all, couldn’t a corrupt Prime Minister become a conduit for receiving bribes on behalf of his Ministerial colleagues if immunity is granted to him?

Predictably, the Government had no answers for these pointed queries. Instead it continues to parrot its opposition based on the premise that it would lead to institutional instability and could lead to a power vacuum resulting in governance paralysis. But this fails to cut ice.

Does the Constitution permit a PM to be merrily corrupt, just because he is the PM and enjoys a majority in the Lok Sabha? Can Parliament afford to remain a mute spectator if a PM is accused of any wrong doing? If we adopt the Government formula of the PM being investigated once he demits office, then a PM can make money hand over fist and continue to lord over a corrupt regime.  The PM is only primus inter pares, first among equals, so why special treatment?

Further, for reasons best known to it, one fails to fathom why the Government has done a 360 degree turn on including the PM in the draft Bill. Recall, the Standing Committee Report on the Lokpal Bill 2001 was all for the PM’s inclusion. Remember the adage, like Caesar’s wife he not only has to be clean but appear to be clean. Yatha Raja tatha praja.

Team Anna’s insistence on putting the judiciary under the Lokpal based on the fact that the courts were not doing enough to combat corruption in the judiciary, is dead on. What is wrong if the Lokpal and not the Chief Justice of India were to grant permission to file an FIR against a judge? Would the case turn on the person granting permission or the judgment be different?  For the Government to claim the Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill were sufficient to deal with corruption in judiciary was incorrect as the Bill did not deal with bribes taken by judges.

On another facetious plea that a Lokpal would impact the independence of the judiciary as his decisions are subject to a judicial review, it could also be argued that if the judges themselves are answerable to the Lokpal, could that create a situation where judges might be unwilling to go against the proposed anti-corruption watchdog?

Undeniably, the demand for inclusion of the conduct of MPs and MLAs in their respective legislatures is partly rooted in the infamous 2008 cash-for-votes scam wherein 11 guilty MPs were expelled from the House by a Parliamentary committee.  Along-with others caught for misusing the MPLADS scheme.

Undoubtedly, one cannot expect fair investigation from either fellow MPs or the police which is directly under the Government. Heavens will not fall if such investigations are done by an independent body like the Lokpal? Presently, the police submit its report to the Speaker. Who will prosecute them? And in which court?

True, the Speaker has the power to prosecute and sentence them but this is easier said than done if the guilty comprise Partymen. In fact, more than expulsion the MPs ought to go to jail for accepting bribe, as till date no criminal investigation has been ordered in the Parliamentary scams.

Unquestionably, the Lokpal need to oversee the entire bureaucracy not only joint secretaries and above. By excluding the lower bureaucracy, the public inter-face of the Government and root of corruption, it would make the Lokpal toothless. What recourse and whose door should the common man knock once he has unearthed corruption in some Government scheme through the RTI?

Importantly, at the heart of these answers lies a larger question: What is the best institutional framework for fighting corruption? Should India have one, all-powerful anti-corruption watchdog or should it have several smaller ones? For, what if the Lokpal gets corrupted the way other institutions have. What recourse will we have then?

Are we better off with a strong Lokpal? Or are we better off making the CBI truly independent of the Government, strengthening the 'Judicial Accountability and Standards Bill et al. All this, of course, coupled with a Lokpal to keep an eagle eye on politicians and bureaucrats.

Clearly, there are no answers to these questions. It would be presumptuous to assume that a piece of paper will sound the death-knell of the corrupt. Given that every law has a loophole, each argument a counter viewpoint. And just as all fingers are not the same, one cannot tar all men with the same corrupt brush. All in all, the time has come for our leaders to wake up from their deep slumber of self conceit and deception.

Indeed, India has to make a beginning in its fight to end corruption. Our leaders need to answer two basic questions: Are they ready to call a spade a spade and bell the big fat cat of corruption? Are they willing to be accountable? The moot point is: Who will cast the first stone and translate words into action?

At the end of the day, are we going to mortgage our conscience to corrupt and tainted leaders? How long will we allow myopic partisan politics to recklessly play havoc with India’s future? Alas, if this trend continues a day might come when the rule of law will stand reduced to sand? Enough is enough! ---- INFA.

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)