The Lokpal Bill 2011 is finally before the Parliament. This is a good time to question whether the taxpayer should be forced to bear the burden of creating this behemoth of an institution or whether its objectives can be met through alternative policy prescriptions. Now is a good time for a regulatory and judicial impact assessment of this proposed law.
Though a norm in better run governments elsewhere, assessing the need for legislations and the costs of enforcing them is not how we pass laws in India. Then we fret that our laws don’t give us the outcomes expected of them. Both the Lokpal/ Jan Lokpal Bills, despite their well-aired differences, essentially seek to establish an institution to enquire into acts of corruption by public servants. Both agree on the powers to investigate and facilitate prosecution of offenders under the Prevention of Corruption Act. Both seem to address issues like having special courts, declaration of assets by public servants, attachment of assets, etc.
Yet neither convinces on the need for yet another Ombudsman in the anti-corruption framework or talks of what’s to become of the existing one once the Lokpal comes into being. The Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) is already doing or at least superintending a significant part of what’s put on the plate for the Lokpal by both parties, including administering the Whistleblower law. If this law passes, the CVC will end up merely heading the administrative vigilance machinery advising and monitoring departmental proceedings of Group A officers of the Central government and the CBI, minus the anti-corruption work, will have lost its raison d’etre. - Author - Madumita D Mitra. http://indefenceofliberty.org/Authors.aspx?authorid=1428
No comments:
Post a Comment