LOK PAL

Alternative Dispute Resolution System

Introduction
Corruption in the Indian society has prevailed from time immemorial in one form or the other. It is a
result of the connection between bureaucrats, politicians and criminals. The major cause of concern is
that corruption is weakening the political body and damaging the supreme importance of the law
governing the society. Due to these reasons Jan Lokpal bill was introduced. It stated that it will establish
an anticorruption institution called the Lokpal at central government and Lokayukta in the state levels
which will be independent of the executive, legislature and judicial organs. It will be free from the
government and ministerial influence. It has the power to question anyone including the man holding
the highest position in our country, the Prime Minister. Though a Bill to set-up an anti-corruption body
was put forth as many as eight times between 1968 and 2011, the Lokpal and Lokayukta Bill, 2011,
stands as the for the Lokpal Act in the present form. A Group of Ministers chaired by Pranab Mukherjee
proposed this Bill, to which the Standing Committee made substantial modifications. The modified Bill,
called as Lokpal and Lokayukta Bill, 2013, was passed by the Parliament with the support of all major
political parties, barring the Samajwadi party, making it the Lokpal Act of 2013.1

The word "Lokpal" is derived from the Sanskrit word "loka" meaning people and "pala" meaning
protector or caretaker. Together it means "protector of people". The aim of passing such a law is it to
eradicate corruption at all levels of the Indian polity. For a nation to develop it needs to have an
extremely well organized and meticulously planned. A failure of the administrative set up reflects on
the holistic growth of the state, the biggest reason for the failure of the administration can be attributed
to the ill effects of corruption. The growth of the country has been plagued by corruption and it has
extended its wings throughout the entire administrative set up. To root out the menace of corruption the

institution of "ombudsman" came up and has played a great role in fighting administrative
malpractices.2

The dictionary defines the ombudsman as “an official to investigate complaints by individual against
maladministration in a vague term but may broadly refer to the way in which something has been

1
https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/all-you-need-to-know-about-the-lokpal-bill/article18254568.ece

2
http://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-50-lokpal.html
handled, for example unjustifiction delay incompetence, neglect or prejudice and not to the merit of the
decisions. It may be taken to cover administrative action or inaction based on or influenced by improper
considerations. Arbitrariness, malice or bias including unfair discrimination are examples of improper
considerations. India is to reincarnate this functionary under the name of Lokpal and is to use it as an
anti-corruption institution.1

Historical background

A tortuous journey that began 56 years ago when the concept of an ombudsman was first
discussed in Parliament, the Lokpal bill was introduced in the legislature nine times since
1968.2

In 1963, the idea of an ombudsman first came up in parliament during a discussion on budget
allocation for the Law Ministry. In 1966, the First Administrative Reforms Commission
recommended the setting up of two independent authorities- at the central and state level, to
look into complaints against public functionaries, including MPs. In 1968-2011, the Lok Pal
Bill was introduced in parliament 8 times but was not passed. 2002 The Commission to Review
the Working of the Constitution (headed by Shri M.N. Venkatachiliah) recommended the
appointment of the Lok Pal and Lokayukta; also recommended that the PM be kept out of the
ambit of the authority. In 2005, the second Administrative Reforms Commission (chaired by
Shri Veerappa Moily) recommended that office of Lok Pal be established without delay. In
2011, the government formed a Group of Ministers, chaired by Pranab Mukherjee to suggest
measures to tackle corruption and examine the proposal of a Lok Pal bill.3

Finally, the Lokpal and Lokayukta Act of 2013 came into effect on January 16, 2014. First, the
government introduced an amendment bill since it introduced changes to the original
legislation. The amendment Bill was referred to a Parliamentary Standing Committee, which
submitted its report in December 2015. Moreover, because of its depleted numbers, only 44
seats in 2014 Lok Sabha elections, the Congress candidate’s inclusion as a leader of the
Opposition in the special committee headed by the Prime Minister was untenable.

1
http://www.preservearticles.com/2011100314436/short-essay-on-the-lokpal-ombudsman-in-india.html

2
https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/editorial-dna-edit-clean-up-act-no-political-party-wants-a-powerful-anti-
graft-watchdog-2709530

3
https://www.prsindia.org/administrator/uploads/general/1302860449_Lok%20Pal%20Bill%20Timeline.pdf
Need for Lokpal

1) Lack of Independence Most of our agencies like CBI, state vigilance departments,
internal vigilance wings of various departments, Anti-corruption Branch of state police
etc are not independent. In many cases, they must report to the same people who are
either themselves accused or are likely to be influenced by the accused.

2) Some bodies like CVC or Lokayukta are independent, but they do not have any powers.
They have been made advisory bodies. They give two kinds of advice to the
governments – to either impose departmental penalties on any officer or to prosecute
him in court. Experience shows that whenever any minister or a senior officer is
involved, their advice is rarely followed.

3) Lack of Transparency and internal accountability in addition, there is the problem of

internal transparency and of these anti-corruptions. Presently, there isn’t any separate
and effective mechanism to check if the staff of these anti-corruption agencies turns
corrupt. That is why, despite so many agencies, corrupt people rarely go to jail.
Corruption has become a high profit zero risk business. There is absolutely no
deterrence against corruption.1

4) Foreign bribery- India is among four countries with “no or little enforcement”
mechanism to check foreign bribery, according to report released by anti- corruption
organisation transparency international. India already has the Central Vigilance
Commission to address governmental corruption but even though it’s an autonomous
body, it’s not an investigative agency. And, the Prevention of Corruption Act is which
aimed at combating corruption in the government has largely been misused due to
Section 13(1)d, which allowed honest officials to be prosecuted serving as deterrent to
bold decision making.
“The bad news is there is still a long way to go. Four countries, accounting for 6.7 per
cent of world exports, have deteriorated in their performance and a total of 33 exporters,
accounting for about 52 per cent of world exports, still have limited or little to no
enforcement against foreign bribery. That includes all four of the exporters not party to
the Convention China, Hong Kong, India and Singapore, all of which get the lowest
rating of little or no enforcement.”2

1
http://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-50-lokpal.html

2
https://www.transparency.org/news/feature/exporting-corruption-2018
Lokpal Bill – its advantages and disadvantages

Time has been the testimony to a series of debates over the power one can bestow upon the
Ombudsman and possible encroachment into the periphery of Executive and Judiciary
functions of the country. However, as conscientious citizens of India and important
stakeholders of the country, it would do us good to make a nonpartisan analysis of the upside
and downside of the government’s proposed Bill.

Advantages of Lokpal Bill

 The major advantage lies in the nature of the legislation proposed. The clauses are
aimed at tackling a major socio-political problem – corruption.

 Unlike the traditional system, the Lokpal Bill proposes to give decision making power
to highly qualified individuals who are neither bureaucrats nor politicians.

 This bill has been in the pipeline for almost five decades, which is a clear indication
that people across generations had faith in this legislation.

 It is expected that the corruption cases will witness a speedy conclusion and the decision
will be swifter. The turnaround time for justice to be meted out will be less.

 Moreover, people will not get lost in the size of Indian judiciary system and they can
count on a single entity to report crime and get their grievances redressed.

Nobel laureate Amartya Sen had voiced his discontentment over the proposed
legislation. Besides saying that it is not well thought out, he pontificated that the challenge is
to integrate it “without undermining the democratic structure” and at the same time, “making
corruption easily to be dealt with by the judicial system.”

Disadvantages of Lokpal Bill

 First and foremost, criticism of government’s Lokpal Bill is the clause which prevents
Lokpal from receiving complaints of corruption from common people. It must be at the
Parliament’s mercy to get access to those complaints.

 Proposed Lokpal Bill treats the institution only as an advisory body. After Lokpal
makes an enquiry in any case, it must forward the report to the ‘competent authority’,
which will have the final powers to decide whether to act or not. That makes Lokpal
completely toothless.
  Lokpal is deprived of police powers and therefore it cannot register a FIR. In such a
situation, enquiries conducted by Lokpal will be considered as “preliminary enquiries”.
There’s no mention on the procedure following the acceptance of Lokpal’s report. Who
is going to file the charge sheet in the court and initiate prosecution? Moreover, who is
going to appoint the prosecution lawyer?

 There’s no clarity on the role of CBI once Lokpal Bill becomes a law. The question
remains whether CBI and Lokpal will investigate the same case or will CBI be restricted
to investigating politicians only.

 Government’s Lokpal bill talks about punishment (amounting to imprisonment) for

‘frivolous’ complaints. However, if the complaint is found to be true, the Ombudsman
will not have the power to send the corrupt public servants to jail!

 Lokpal Bill proposes jurisdiction only on MPs, Ministers and PM and not on officers.
It is understood that any corruption is perpetrated collaboratively by the officers and
politicians. According to government’s Lokpal Bill CVC will investigate the role of
bureaucrats while Lokpal will investigate the role of politicians. This will surely create
a bottleneck.

 Lokpal will have no power to probe any case against PM that deals with foreign affairs,
security and defence. This is another way of saying that corruption in defence deals will
be out of Lokpal’s jurisdiction and hence no scrutiny is possible.

Although certain amendments are being made on the bill, some sections of the social activists
are yet to consider it as strong enough to rise to the occasion1.

Lokpal and Lokayukta Act

The Lokpal and Lokayukta Act commonly known as The Lokpal Act, is an anti-corruption Act
of Indian Parliament in India which seeks to provide for the establishment of the institution of
Lokpal to inquire into allegations of corruption against certain public functionaries including
Prime Minister, ministers, MP, Group A officials of the Central Government.

Following are the salient features of the amended Lokpal bill passed by Parliament:

1
http://www.elections.in/blog/lokpal-bill-its-advantages-and-disadvantages/
1. Lokayukta: The new bill mandates states to set up Lokayukta within 365 days. States
can determine the type.
Under the old bill, law was applicable to states only if they give consent. Under old bill,
the central government had power to appoint state Lokayukta; the new bill gives this
power to the states.
2. Constitution of Lokpal: The Lokpal will consist of a chairperson and a maximum of
eight members, of which 50% shall be judicial members. 50% members of Lokpal shall
be from among SCs, STs, OBCs, minorities and women.
In the old bill, the chairperson was to be the Chief Justice of India or a present or former
judge of the Supreme Court or a non-judicial member with specified qualifications
(chief justice or a judge of a high court).
3. Selection of Lokpal: The selection committee will have prime minister, Lok Sabha
speaker, leader of the opposition in the Lok Sabha and the Chief Justice of India. A fifth
member of the selection committee for selection of Lokpal under the category of
"eminent jurist" may be nominated by the President based on recommendation of the
first four members of the selection committee.
Under the old bill, President could select the fifth person.
4. Religious bodies and trust: The new bill include societies and trusts that collect public
money, receive funding from foreign sources and have an income level above a certain
threshold. It excludes bodies creating endowments for or performing religious or
charitable functions.
The old bill expanded definition of public servant by bringing societies and trusts and
organisations which receive foreign donations (over Rs.10 lakh a year) under Lokpal.
5. Prosecution: In the new bill, before taking a decision on filing a charge sheet in a case
upon consideration of the investigation report, the Lokpal may authorise its own
prosecution wing or the investigating agency concerned to initiate prosecution in
special courts.
Under the old bill, such power was only with the prosecution wing of the Lokpal.
6. Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI): For independence of the CBI, in the new bill a
directorate of prosecution will be formed. Appointment of the director of prosecution
will be on the recommendation of the Central Vigilance Commissioner.
Transfer of officers of CBI investigating cases referred by Lokpal will be only with the
approval of Lokpal who superintendence over CBI in relation to Lokpal will also have
referred cases.
 7. Hearing: The new bill says a government servant will get a hearing before a decision is
taken by the Lokpal.
8. Prime minister: The prime minister will be under the purview of the Lokpal with
subject matter exclusions and specific process for handling complaints against the
prime minister.
9. Investigation: Inquiry must be completed within 60 days and investigation to be
completed within six months. Lokpal shall order an investigation only after hearing the
public servant.
Inquiry against the prime minister must be held in-camera and approved by two-thirds
of the full bench of the Lokpal.
10. Penalty: False and frivolous complaints - imprisonment up to one year and a fine of up
to Rs.1 lakh. Public servants - imprisonment up to seven years. Criminal misconduct
and habitually abetting corruption - jail term up to 10 years.1

Lokpal and Lokayukta Act, 2013

The Lokpal and Lokayukta Act, 2013 seeks to provide for the establishment of Lokpal for the
Union and Lokayukta for States to inquire into allegations of corruption against certain public
functionaries and for related matters. The act extends to whole of India, including Jammu &
Kashmir and is applicable to "public servants" within and outside India. The act mandates for
creation of Lokpal for Union and Lokayukta for states. The Bill was tabled in the Lok Sabha
on 22 December 2011 and was passed by the House on 27 December as The Lokpal and
Lokayukta Bill, 2011. It was subsequently tabled in the Rajya Sabha on 29 December. After a
marathon debate that stretched until midnight of the following day, the vote failed to take place
for lack of time. On 21 May 2012, it was referred to a Select Committee of the Rajya Sabha
for consideration. It was passed in the Rajya Sabha on 17 December 2013 after making certain
amendments to the earlier Bill and in the Lok Sabha the next day. It received assent from
President Pranab Mukherjee on 1 January 2014 and came into force from 16 January.

The Lokpal and Lokayukta (Amendment) Bill, 2016

A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court has finally concluded hearing a crucial appeal
(after being nine years in cold storage) under the Right to Information Act (RTI), 2005…The
five judges hearing the matter face a difficult choice. Any attempt by them to assert the

1
http://www.legalservicesindia.com/law/article/951/10/Salient-features-of-Lokpal-Bill
fundamental right to privacy as the basis for not disclosing assets to the public would
necessarily require an implied overruling of landmark judgments in PUCL (2003) and Lok
Prahari v. Union of India (2018), in which smaller benches of the court rubbished the privacy
claims of the political class while forcing them to publicly disclose not just their assets but also
the sources of their income. The final ruling of the Constitution Bench will also impact the
contentious Section 44 of the Lokpal Act, 2013, which requires all public servants (this
includes judges) to their assets but is silent on whether the disclosure should be to the
competent authority or the general public. This provision has already been the subject of an
amendment in 2016.1

This Bill was passed by Parliament in July 2016 and amended the Lokpal and Lokayukta Act,
2013.It enables the leader of the single largest opposition party in the Lok Sabha to be a member
of the selection committee in the absence of a recognized Leader of Opposition. It also amended
section 44 of the 2013 Act that deals with the provision of furnishing of details of assets and
liabilities of public servants within 30 days of joining the government service. The Bill replaces
the time limit of 30 days, now the public servants will make a declaration of their assets and
liabilities in the form and manner as prescribed by the government. It also gives an extension
of the time given to trustees and board members to declare their assets and those of their
spouses in case of these are receiving government funds of more than Rs. 1 crore or foreign
funding of more than Rs. 10 lakhs.2

 Lokpal Appointment
Five years after the notification of the Lokpal and Lok Ayukta Act, the centre has
appointed former Supreme Court judge Justice Pinaki Chandra Ghose as the
Chairperson of the first Lokpal under the Act. “Justice Pinaki Chandra Ghose appointed
as Lokpal by President of India, Ram Nath Kovind. President of India appoints Justice
Dilip B Bhosale, Justice P K Mohanty, Justice Abhilasha Kumari and Justice AK
Tripathi as judicial members. Dinesh Kumar Jain, Archana Ramasundaram, Mahender
Singh, and Dr. IP Gautam appointed as members”: ANI Tweeted. This follows the
orders passed by the Supreme Court directing the centre to complete the Lokpal

1
https://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-opinion/privacy-in-the-age-of-sunshine-
laws/article26752021.ece
2
https://www.drishtiias.com/important-institutions/drishti-specials-important-institutions-national-
institutions/lokpal-lokayukta-ombudsman-upsc-governance-transparency
 appointment process in a time-bound manner. On March 7, the CJI-led bench had
directed the centre to inform the date of selection committee meeting within 10 days.1
 Lokpal appointment committee
The selection committee comprising the Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Chief Justice
of India Ranjan Gogoi, Lok Sabha Speaker Sumitra Mahajan and Senior Advocate
Mukul Rohatgi in the capacity of 'eminent person' have appointed eight others as
members of the Lokpal. Congress leader Mallikarjun Kharge, who is the leader of the
largest opposition party, has been giving a go by to the meetings of the selection panel.
He had refused to attend the meeting protesting the fact that he was invited to attend
not in the capacity of leader of largest opposition party, but as a "special invitee" 2

Observations
1. India ranks high on the corruption index, and those people such as journalists who have
revealed corrupt practices are particularly vulnerable. Political parties in India are duty-
bound to the people to give them clean governance.
2. The major cause of concern is that corruption is weakening the political body and damaging
the supreme importance of the law governing the society.
3. Though a Bill to set-up an anti-corruption body was put forth as many as eight times between
1968 and 2011, the Lokpal and Lokayukta Bill, 2011, stands as the for the Lokpal Act in the
present form.
4. Compared to agencies like CBI, state vigilance departments, internal vigilance wings
of various departments, Anti-corruption Branch of state police etc are not independent.
In many cases, they must report to the same people who are either themselves accused
or are likely to be influenced by the accused. Some bodies like CVC or Lokayukta are
independent, but they do not have any powers. They have been made advisory bodies.
They give two kinds of advice to the governments – to either impose departmental
penalties on any officer or to prosecute him in court. Experience shows that whenever
any minister or a senior officer is involved, their advice is rarely followed.

1
https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/justice-p-c-ghose-lokpal-143695

2
https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/justice-p-c-ghose-lokpal-143695
 5. Whereas, Lokpal makes an enquiry in any case, it must forward the report to the
‘competent authority’, which will have the final powers to decide whether to act or not.
That makes Lokpal completely toothless. Lokpal is deprived of police powers and
therefore it cannot register a FIR. In such a situation, enquiries conducted by Lokpal
will be considered as “preliminary enquiries”. There’s no mention on the procedure
following the acceptance of Lokpal’s report.
6. The lokpal will supervise the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and other
investigative agencies. This may insulate CBI from governmental pressures, even as it
has been supervised by another autonomous body, the Central Vigilance Commission
(CVC), on technical matters, something that hasn’t stopped governmental interference.

Hypothesis
1. No one wanted a strong Lokpal
No one wanted a strong Lokpal because it would demand accountability from
politicians and bureaucrats. After the Emergency, a new model of Lokpal emerged, a
model for ‘regime revenge’. The ‘maladministration’ model gave way to an anti-
corruption model with a sweep clause of five years. This meant that the Lokpal would
re-examine Emergency and target the Indira Gandhi government. It meant that it would
target politicians, but not bureaucrats. The power of the bureaucracy to stultify anti-
corruption measures is well known. This model continued with regularity. The 2011
Anna Hazare movement, which fought to get the Lokpal Bill passed, faltered in many
ways. When the Modi government came to power, it did not appoint a Lokpal either. It
did not want Lokpal accusations and investigations to mar its tenure.1
2. Opposition abstain from participating in decision making
The decision of the ‘special invitee’ (Congress leader Mallikarjun Kharge) to stay away
from the process on the ground that he was a mere invitee and not a full-fledged member
of the Selection Committee is regrettable. The accusation that the process of selection
of the Lokpal was not transparent falls flat if someone in the Opposition abstains from
participating in the Committee’s decision and denies himself and the nation the chance

1
https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/the-procedure-and-principle-in-lokpal/article26714009.ece
 of knowing and evaluating how open-minded or not the other members were in
choosing the members and chairperson of the Lokpal.1

Conclusion
Corruption has become a high profit zero risk business. The subject of corruption is
taken so lightly in our country that the anticorruption bill is still pending in the houses.
Since 1963 number of proposals were made regarding the lokpal and along with that
number of excuses were given to not to pass it as a law. In all the past years no matter
who was the ruling party then or now, we can only see the government dragging feet
and postponing the enactment of the lokpal bill. By this we get the impression that the
government, irrespective of the party and the circumstance, are not letting the execution
of the lokpal act.
The aim of passing the lokpal act is it to eradicate corruption at all levels of the Indian polity.
For a nation to develop, it needs to have an extremely well organized and meticulously planned.
The most important aspect of lokpal act it to check the transparency level of the government
procedure and act against matters related to corruption. But seeing the recent appointment of
the chairperson of the lokpal, it gives the benefit of doubt to the citizen, by not disclosing the
terms and ground of appointing the present chairperson over other eminent personalities.
Although its essential that, lokpal makes concerted efforts to mainstream the fight against
corruption and makes vigilance an integral part of management. Its success will also depend
upon how effectively it can exercise them. It will need support from the present government,
as well as the bureaucracy.

1
https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/turf-issues-in-fighting-corruption/article26725248.ece