Jan Lokpal Bill

This time it is true to its name. My take on the Jan Lokpal bill must truly be in minority. 

There is no denying that an Ombudsman-like office is essential for a modern democracy. But I am talking about this particular legislation which is being currently debated on. On the face of it, it seems pretty naive. (Still reading from http://indiaagainstcorruption.org/doc/civil_society_s_lokpal_bil.pdf). I was planning to fast for two days (for whatever it is worth) in solidarity with Anna Hazare until I came to know the details of the bill being pushed. (Actually, until he quit his fast :-) ) 

As an example, the clause about recovering loss to the exchequer from the convicted public officer is a definite deterrent to any public officer (politician or bureaucrat) against take any strong decision. This will make the system even more lethargic than it already is. Already officers often shy away from taking such stands for fear of being labelled a bribe-seeking should the decision be reversed at a higher level.

There are several operational issues as well. Following is an example. The Lokpal is finally a tribunal, and hence, its decisions can be challenged in and reversed by the Supreme Court. Removing the Lokpal from the purview of the SC will require amending the constitution, which this bill is not attempting to do. This makes the clause about two years’ time limit effectively defunct. Any case of substantial corruption will definitely be challenged in the SC. And imposing such a constraint on the SC will be inane, and will again require an amendment of the constitution.

Another striking point is about imposing financial penalty on public officers for delay in work. This in my humble opinion is utter naivety. What happens if the passport office in unable to deliver my passport in the prescribed time due to resource crunch? Do they skip the due process? It is agreed that as of now, most delays are due to bribery demands. But even in a ideal case, if an passport officer is clearing documents in the order of 10000 a year, is a delay in 5 or 10 or 50 not acceptable? Any substantial fine will make her/his salary negative. So officers will just skip the due diligence and make the applicants happy to avoid complaints.

The selection panel requirements are also quite arbitrary. It is supposed to contain, among others, "All Nobel Laureates of Indian Origin Last three Magsaysay Award winners". Is the sovereign legislature of the country to rely on decisions of such organizations? Also, if VS Naipaul doesn't even consider himself Indian, should he be conferred such power and responsibility?

I am still reading the draft bill, and will post a follow-up after I am done.