The government's decision to refer the Lokpal (Amendment) Bill to a Parliamentary Standing Committee for review makes ample sense, as a large number of people who were adversely affected by certain provisions of the Bill can now hope for natural justice - that is their voices would be heard before a final view is taken on a matter that is of critical importance for the existence of civil society. The Standing Committee will examine Section 44 that requires public servants to file declaration, information and annual returns pertaining to their assets and liabilities as well as for their spouse and dependent children. In April this year, the government had extended the date of filing returns by public servants from April 15 to July 31 - the fifth extension to the deadline since the Act came into force in January 2014. The Lokpal and Lokayukta Act, 2013, legislated by the United Progressive Alliance government had brought all senior management personnel working with non-governmental organisations (NGOs) within the definition of public servants. The Act, which kicked in following the notification, meant that they can also be prosecuted under the Prevention of Corruption Act for non-compliance.
There is no doubt that civil society should promote transparency and accountability as the Lokpal idea itself was born from civil society movements. Besides, the NGO sector has often been criticised for its opaqueness. Yet, the idea of treating senior functionaries of these organisations as public servants defied logic as there are already many rules in place to remove the veil over the flow and utilisation of funds by the sector. This includes reporting to the home ministry on foreign grants, public disclosure of audited annual accounts and annual filing of income-tax returns to justify non-profit status. The Reserve Bank of India's regulations have also led to annual "know-your-customer" filings by all senior officials of such organisations. The other issue was that the requirement of public disclosure of wealth raised questions of privacy and were seen an additional tool of the government to harass civil society - a reason why many of the trustees in NGOs resigned after the notification. That is bound to happen in a surcharged atmosphere where civil society is looking at every government move with suspicion and as a fresh attempt at harassment. Thus, the only viable option before the government was to defer the July 31 deadline. Fortunately, better sense prevailed.
That there was a need for the government to take a fresh look at the matter is also evident from the fact that the Central government has reportedly made it mandatory for all NGOs to obtain unique identification numbers and register them on the NITI Aayog portal before they can apply for grants from any ministry. That's not all: All trustees and office-bearers of NGOs will have to give details of their Aadhaar and Permanent Account Numbers (PAN). The home ministry is also planning to tell states to issue instructions to their regulatory bodies such as the Registrar of Societies and the Charity Commissioner to ensure that the NGOs enrol on the portal. The problem is that this move to create a central database of NGOs has sparked off fresh concerns over the government's real motive. Then there is the related issue of whether NITI Aayog should be involved in issues such as registration of NGOs. It surely has better things to do.
