The Union Cabinet cleared the Lok Pal Bill on Thursday, and it is likely to be introduced in Parliament during the forthcoming Budget session. The Bill, which aims to set up a watchdog body to deal with corruption in high places, and which failed to pass the Rajya Sabha amid dramatic scenes in December 2011, has had several major changes made to it following prolonged scrutiny by the Select Committee in Parliament.
The new draft of the Bill has delinked the creation of the Lok Ayuktas in the states from the Lok Pal at the Centre. This should, presumably, convince prickly smaller parties that stalled the original draft’s passage 13 months ago that no state powers are being trampled on by the Centre, and the new Bill stays faithful to constitutional principles of federalism. It is likely now that the states will have to move on their own to set up a Lok Ayukta — but, given the experience so far, it is unlikely that they will move very fast. In states with a relatively powerful Lok Ayukta, such as Karnataka, political and administrative corruption has been exposed. Other states, such as Gujarat, have let their posts lie vacant for years; and some have not even made a provision for such an office. Not all of the Select Committee’s recommended changes have been accepted, for example. For one, the draft Bill allows government servants affected by an inquiry to present his or her views on the matter under discussion at the preliminary stage. The Select Committee wanted this right taken out; the government disagreed. It is possible that the government is in the right here, as a process should not be framed that does not allow the accused to be heard as early as is possible.
The big problem, however, continues to be with case-building, prosecution and the conduct of the government’s arguments at trial. India has been witness in the recent and not-so-recent past to brazen attempts by the government to use its power, through the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), over such corruption cases to gain political advantage. This has led to general cynicism about whether any government could be serious about checking corruption, or whether enough corruption cases will be successfully prosecuted. True, some reports have it that the Lok Pal Bill has had an important modification introduced, by which the director of prosecution will be appointed by the Central Vigilance Commissioner, an official with statutory backing and whose appointment is made by a bipartisan committee. It is far from certain, however, that this is enough. In the end, the CBI’s full independence is crucial — and that can be ensured only through a transparent process for appointing its head and by ensuring it autonomy, free from interference by the government.