Who is the Lokpal? What is the genesis of this institution?

A Lokpal is a kind of ombudsman for the redressal of grievances of ordinary citizens against corruption in high places and public offices. The basic idea was taken from the experience of Scandinavian countries where an ombudsman had been set up to check corruption in public offices. The experience in the Scandinavian countries has been uneven. In Sweden and Finland, the ombudsman can prosecute erring officials, while he can only order prosecution in Denmark. In India, the concept has been in vogue since the 1960s.

The word and concept was first mooted when former PM Morarji Desai headed the Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC) in 1966. He submitted a special interim report on ?Problems of Redressal of Citizen?s Grievances? in 1966. In this report, the ARC recommended the setting up of two special authorities. One was designated as Lokpal and another, for the state governments, was called the Lokayukta. While Desai also increased the ambit of the Lokpal to include cases of maladministration and failure to act within the norms of integrity, subsequent standing committee reports, notably a Joint Parliamentary Committee in 1977, considered this too wide a term of reference and restricted complaints to corruption alone.

The Lokpal Bill was first introduced and passed in the fourth Lok Sabha in 1968, but couldn?t become a law as the Lok Sabha had to be dissolved while the Bill was still pending at the Rajya Sabha. Subsequently, versions of the Lokpal Bill were revived in 1971, 1977, 1989, 1996, 1998 and 2001. At each introduction, the Bill was referred to parliamentary committees, as is the norm with important Bills. But it has been hanging fire since the 1960s, more or less.

Why has this issue suddenly become very important now?

Between 2009 and 2010, India was rocked by a series of scams related to people occupying public office. Huge amounts were disclosed as having left Indian shores through graft and the government of the day only appeared to be taking action after a very pro-active judiciary stepped in at the investigation level itself. Growing public anger against graft at this level, not to mention a sanguine government, seemed to have added steam to a movement to bring in what is now being termed as a Jan Lokpal Bill, as opposed to the government?s version of a Lokpal Bill.

Civil society activists also feel that the government?s own anti-graft bodies either take too much time, as in the case of the Central Vigilance Commission, or have become too politicised for truly independent investigations, as in the case of the Central Bureau of Investigations (CBI).

What?s the government?s objection to the Jan Lokpal Bill?

Civil society activists, who formed a group called India Against Corruption, claim that the government?s Bill is a toothless tiger designed to protect its own. They cite the example of several Lokayukta reports that are gathering dust in government offices as a case in point. The Lokayukta was conceived as a state-level ombudsman, but every state has a different version, with one common point which is that the findings of the Lokayukta are not binding and that it is up to the government to take action on the reports.

The government, on the other hand, feels that the Jan Lokpal suggestions undermine the mandate of the Parliament to frame laws and for MPs to be considered the legitimate representative of the people. In this context, the entire idea of what constitutes civil society and just how representative people?s representatives are becomes important.

The government has also been arguing that the civil society groups have been trying to strong-arm their way into the domain of the legislature, which is unconstitutional.

What happened in April 2011?

Bapat Baburao Hazare, or Anna Hazare as he is better known, had been campaigning for a Lokpal Bill with significant civil society inputs for a long time. In April this year, the cumulative effect of the 2G scam, the Commonwealth Games scam and the Adarsh Society scam gave the anti-corruption movement the momentum it needed. When PM Manmohan Singh refused a joint committee for drafting the Bill, arguing, quite legitimately, that drafting laws was the job of Parliament, Hazare undertook a 97-hour fast to influence the government. The fast drew huge crowds and responses.

The government gave in to the demand for a joint drafting committee, with finance minister Pranab Mukherjee and former law minister Shanti Bhushan as co-chairs of the committee. The committee met precisely nine times, with the last meeting held on June 21. But differences over whether or not maladministration could be brought under the ambit of the Lokpal Bill and, most importantly, whether or not the PM could be brought under the purview of the Bill remained as intractable as ever.

The government then asked for an all-party meeting to ascertain the views of all political parties and found that several parties, including the chief opposition party the BJP, wanted the PM under the purview of the Bill. But there is also a strong argument made by a diversified lobby that doesn?t want the PM to be under the Lokpal?s purview while he is in office, believing that this would not advance the cause of smooth functioning of the government. In the Indian political system, the buck stops with the PM and he is accountable to the Parliament, according to the Constitution.

Why do supporters of the Jan Lokpal Bill object to the government?s Lokpal Bill?

Last week, the Union Cabinet cleared its version of the Lokpal Bill. Now, the nitty gritty of the differences between the government and Team Anna?s Bills are as follows. In the Jan Lokpal Bill, the body will have suo moto rights to take cognizance of corruption. Plus, it will have the right to police powers and to initiate First Information Reports (FIRs) on complaints. The Jan Lokpal will have an investigating arm, just like the CBI, and those found guilty of corruption could be sentenced for anywhere between five years to life imprisonment.

In the government?s draft, the Lokpal will act on complaints received from the public. It will not be able to file FIRs, nor have CBI within its ambit. But the Lokpal will have its own prosecution wing and investigation wing. The PM will be liable to investigation only after demitting office and only within seven years of having demitted office. Finally, those found guilty of corruption could be sentenced to for anywhere between six months to seven years.

Where the matter stands now …

The Union Cabinet cleared its proposals and its version of the Lokpal Bill last week and is determined to introduce it in the ongoing monsoon session of Parliament. As a sop to the opposition, it will include some of the proposals moved by the opposition when the Bill was referred to a standing committee. Civil society activists have, meanwhile, termed the government?s draft a travesty of what had been envisaged and discussed. They have already announced a plan for agitation, and will be initiating one on August 16, when Anna Hazare will be undertaking a hunger strike yet again. The home ministry has imposed section 144 in Delhi and its ?Hyde Park?, the Jantar Mantar, to prevent public assembly. On the first day of the current session itself, the Parliament saw a ruckus over the corruption matter. Stormy days lie ahead.