To what zoo does this animal belong?” asked prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru, in a lighter vein, when Dr L.M. Singhvi made a passionate plea for setting up an anti-corruption ombudsman during a parliamentary debate in 1963. Nehru asked the eminent jurist and parliamentarian to Indianise what was primarily a Scandinavian construct. Singhvi named it ‘lokpal’—protector of the people.
The idea of lokpal, however, has had a long and arduous journey to fruition. Nine failed attempts at passing the law in Parliament, several rounds of administrative brainstorming and a countrywide agitation finally led to the enactment of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013, on January 1, 2014. It was only after some stern rulings by the Supreme Court that the Narendra Modi government appointed the lokpal this March 19.
But the lokpal, with powers to investigate corruption charges against people in powerful positions, including the prime minister and Union ministers and officials, is yet to get cracking. Tucked away on the second floor of The Ashok in Delhi is the lokpal’s office. Only a closer look at the doors on either side of the carpeted Oudh corridor makes it evident that these are not normal hotel suites but office space allotted to the inaugural team of the lokpal, comprising a chairperson, four judicial members and four non-judicial ones. This is where the lokpal has led a silent existence so far, and not even a whimper has been heard from it, forget a roar against the corrupt.
A basic requirement for the lokpal to begin functioning is the notification of the format in which complaints have to be filed. However, the Centre is yet to do that. The department of personnel and training, in response to a query by Right to Information activist Shubham Khatri, said: “The complaint forms are being formulated keeping in view the provision mentioned in the act and the same shall be notified after obtaining due approval of the competent authorities, which may take some time.” Lokpal chairperson Justice Pinaki Chandra Ghose, however, told THE WEEK that he was confident that the format would be notified soon.
Till October 31, the lokpal has received 1,160 complaints, of which 1,000 have been heard by the lokpal bench, according to RTI responses to Khatri. The lokpal stated that preliminary inquiry has been initiated in none of these complaints, nor has it initiated a full investigation in any case. “As the lokpal is an ombudsman institution dealing with complaints of corruption and abuse of office,” said Brij Bhushan Singh, deputy director, Transparency International India, “the complaint format and other guiding principles should have been notified without further delay.”
Then, there is the problematic optics of the lokpal functioning from a five-star hotel. But it could be argued that there is nothing controversial in that as The Ashok houses other departments, too, just like the nearby Hotel Samrat. In response to an RTI application, the lokpal secretariat stated that it pays a monthly rent of around Rs50 lakh, and from March 22, 2019 to October 31, it has paid Rs3,85,09,354 crore in rent. But there is not enough space at the hotel for the full lokpal bench to hold its meetings, said sources. Ghose said the lokpal would soon be shifting to its new office—reportedly in Vasant Kunj in south Delhi.
Activists accuse the Modi government of indulging in wilful and deliberate delay over the lokpal. “The manner in which the government has dealt with the issue of lokpal raises serious questions about its commitment to fighting corruption,” said RTI activist Mayank Gandhi.
Also, it is said that the government began the selection process for the lokpal only after the Supreme Court’s intervention. In April 2017, acting on a petition by the NGO Common Cause, the Supreme Court rejected the government’s contention that the process for selecting the lokpal could not be initiated in the absence of the leader of opposition, who, as per the law, has to be in the five-member selection committee. The other members are the prime minister, the Chief Justice of India or his nominee, the speaker of the Lok Sabha and an eminent jurist. The court said the law was a workable piece of legislation and the government need not wait to amend it to include the leader of the single largest opposition party in the panel in the event of no party qualifying for the post of the opposition leader.
When another year passed with little movement in the selection process, a contempt petition was filed against the government. Attorney General K.K. Venugopal assured the court that the process had been set in motion. This January, the Supreme Court told the search committee to finalise the shortlist of candidates by February end. On March 7, the court asked the Centre to inform when the committee would meet to select the chairperson and members of the lokpal. On March 19, the lokpal was appointed.
It is said though that the manner in which the lokpal’s appointment was made left much to be desired. “A few weeks before the Lok Sabha election, the government took forth the process for selection of the lokpal, but without the presence of the leader of opposition in the selection panel,” said transparency activist Anjali Bhardwaj. “There was preponderance of the government in the selection process, giving rise to apprehension about the people selected.”
While the Centre is yet to amend the lokpal law with regard to the leader of opposition provision, it has carried out two other amendments, which, said experts, defeat the very purpose of the lokpal. In 2016, an amendment to the lokpal law was passed, which excluded spouses and dependent children of public servants from disclosure of assets, and said the government would decide the form and manner of disclosure by public servants. In 2018, an amendment to the Prevention of Corruption Act made it necessary to get government sanction to register an FIR and begin an inquiry, unless the accused is caught red-handed.
Congress leader M. Veerappa Moily put the lokpal developments in the context of the anti-corruption movement launched by Anna Hazare that led to the downfall of the United Progressive Alliance government. “The movement was politically motivated and abused by our rivals,” he said. “Narendra Modi became prime minister and Arvind Kejriwal became chief minister of Delhi as a result of the movement. But they have both forgotten their pledge to fight corruption. There was no genuine intent to create an organisation like this.”
Several states, too, have been dragging their feet on appointing a lokayukta, with the Supreme Court asking them to expedite the process. While Maharashtra, Odisha, Rajasthan and Karnataka were among the first to set up the lokayukta, there is still no lokayukta in Jammu and Kashmir, Telangana and Puducherry.
It is argued that the lokpal developments should be seen in the larger context of ‘weakening’ of the anti-corruption framework by the Modi government. “The amendments in the RTI Act and the inordinate delay in the notification of rules to implement The Whistleblowers Protection Act, which was passed in 2014, fly against the Modi government’s claims of acting against corruption,” said Venkatesh Nayak of the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative. Eminent jurist Shanti Bhushan, who led a long struggle for the lokpal, said he was not expecting much from this lokpal. “I feel very let down. It is a big opportunity missed for the country,” he said.
But Vipul Mudgal of Common Cause, though concerned about the lack of impact made by the lokpal, chooses to be optimistic. “I would want to give the process time to settle and the lokpal to get ready with its infrastructural and functional requirements because, at present, the issues are also being looked at from an ideological point of view,” he said.
The optimism is shared by Ghose, who said, “I am extremely positive... that the institution will work. All my fellow members are also positive and eager to do justice.”
