Date: 14/09/2022

Relevance: GS-2: Separation of powers between various organs dispute redressal mechanisms and institutions; Appointment to various Constitutional posts, powers, functions and responsibilities of various Constitutional Bodies.

Key Phrases: Lokpal, Ombudsman System, Lokpal and Lokayukta Act, Jurisdiction of Lokpal, Powers of Lokpal

Context:

• Recently the Delhi High Court stayed the proceedings initiated by the Lokpal against a former Jharkhand Chief Minister citing the jurisdictional and other objections by the petitioner.

What are Lokpal and Lokayukta?

• Lokpal and Lokayuktas are statutory bodies under Lokpal and Lokayukta Act of 2013 without any constitutional status.
• The Lokpal and Lokayukta Act, 2013 provided for the establishment of Lokpal for the Union and Lokayukta for States.
• They perform the function of an "ombudsman” and inquire into allegations of corruption against certain public functionaries and for related matters.

Evolution of Indian Ombudsman system of Lokpal and Lokayukta

• In India, the concept of constitutional ombudsman was first proposed by the then law minister Ashok Kumar Sen in parliament in the early 1960s.
• The term Lokpal and Lokayukta were coined by Dr. L. M. Singhvi.
• The First Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC-I) 1966-70, chaired by Morarji Desai, recommended the setting up of two independent authorities- at the central and state level, to look into complaints against public functionaries, including MPs.
• Similar recommendations were given by the Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (2002) headed by M.N. Venkatchelliah and the Second Administrative Reforms Commission (2005) chaired by Veerappa Moily
• In 2011, the government formed a Group of Ministers to suggest measures to tackle corruption and examine the proposal of a Lokpal Bill.
• In the aftermath of the "India Against Corruption movement” the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government at the Centre passed the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Bill, 2013, in both the Houses of Parliament which came into force in January 2014.

Jurisdiction of the Lokpal

• Jurisdiction of Lokpal includes Prime Minister, Union Ministers, members of Parliament, Groups A, B, C and D officers and officials of Central Government.
• The Prime Minister is immune from Lokpal scrutiny in some specific cases of allegations of corruption relating to international relations, security, the public order, atomic energy and space and so on.
• The acts of the MPs, ministers or PM in the Parliament are out of Lokpal jurisdiction.
• Its jurisdiction also includes any person who is or has been in charge of a body, organization, society set up by central act or any other body financed/ controlled by central government.

Powers of the Lokpal

• It has the powers to superintendence over, and to give direction to CBI and its officers.
• The Inquiry Wing of the Lokpal has been vested with the powers of a civil court.
• The Act also incorporates provisions for attachment and confiscation of property acquired by corrupt means, even while the prosecution is pending.
• Lokpal has the power to recommend transfer or suspension of public servants connected with allegations of corruption.
• Lokpal has the power to give directions to prevent the destruction of records during the preliminary inquiry.
• The Act also ensures that public servants who act as whistleblowers are protected.

Prevailing Challenges

• Lokpal is not free from political influence as the appointing committee itself consists of members from political parties.
• Dearth of office bearers of Lokpal is a cause of concern even after almost a decade of commencement of the Lokpal Act
• The biggest lacuna is the exclusion of the judiciary from the ambit of the Lokpal.
• The Lokpal is not given any constitutional backing and there is no adequate provision for appeal against the Lokpal.
• The 2013 Act did not provide concrete immunity to the whistle blowers.
  • The provision for initiation of inquiry against the complainant if the accused is found innocent will only discourage people from complaining.
• The complaint against corruption cannot be registered after a period of seven years from the date on which the offense mentioned in such a complaint is alleged to have been committed.

Way Forward

• The institution of ombudsman must be strengthened in respect of functional autonomy and workforce availability to fight against corruption.
• The appointment of Lokpal is not the real solution to problems; instead the government should focus on eliminating the root causes because of which the general public is demanding a Lokpal.
• There should be complete transparency when nominating a Lokpal and Lokayukta as it will increase the chances for the right person to be appointed.

Conclusion

• The recent case has put the institution of Lokpal into public and political discourse and provides an opportunity to make the institution stronger and efficient to tackle the challenge of deep rooted corruption in the Azadi Ka Amrit Kaal.
• This can be done by providing more autonomy and powers to the Lokpal coupled with Greater transparency, more right to information and empowerment of citizens and citizen groups is required along with a good leadership that is willing to subject itself to public scrutiny.

Source: The Hindu

Mains Question:

Q. Despite having a concrete system of ombudsman in the form of Lokpal and Lokayuktas there have been numerous corruption and graft cases against the public authorities in India in recent times which reflects the collective failure of the various organs of government, Discuss. Also suggest ways to strengthen the institution of Lokpal. (250 words).