A toothless Lokpal?

Supporters of Anna Hazare at the Gateway of India in Mumbai for a candlelight march on March 8. - VIVEK BENDRE

If the government's draft of the Lokpal Bill is adopted and the one produced by Team Anna is largely ignored, the Lokpal will be an ineffective institution.

I am not surprised at the turn of events in the national capital after all the fretting and fuming over the Lokpal. The talks between the government and Team Anna have broken down. We agreed to disagree, is the official stand. Such an agreement' in the present context of acrimony is nothing but an admission of failure. The loaded statement of Human Resource Development Minister Kapil Sibal gives the false impression that despite huge differences of opinion, there is a lot of bonhomie between the contending parties. But in reality, there seems to be no love lost. My guess is that there is only a small measure of politeness between the two. And nothing beyond it. The bitterness underlying the statement about agreement' is, however, hard to keep under wraps for too long. I concede this is not the time for either side to indulge in a blame game. This is because both are at fault for taking extreme positions.

History will not forgive either if ultimately the much-touted anti-corruption body does not take off. My hunch is that even if the Lokpal does ultimately take a legal shape, it will be a toothless wonder. That is, if the government draft is adopted and the one produced by Team Anna is largely ignored. This is likely to be the most probable outcome. The obvious lack of enthusiasm for a powerful Lokpal even among the opposition, including the Bharatiya Janata Party, confirms the absence of a strong political will to create a strong anti-corruption machinery. The average citizen knows that no politician is excited about countering corruption. This is why we have a phenomenon like Anna Hazare, whose indomitable spirit is worthy of emulation by many of us. Let us forget his frailties because, after all, he is a human being.

Talks on the issue have reportedly failed because of disagreement over at least 10 points. The main point of disagreement is whether the Prime Minister and the judiciary should come within the ambit of the proposed Lokpal. I can understand why the judiciary, which has to interpret the fundamental law of the land and also impose penalties prescribed by the criminal law, should not be brought under the new mechanism. But there is no earthly reason why the Prime Minister should enjoy the same immunity. An incumbent Prime Minister, who may happen to be investigated for misdemeanour by the Lokpal, can always be replaced by the ruling party or alliance through a simple resolution that goes before the President. Heavens will not fall in such an eventuality. The alternative to protecting a Prime Minister against a Lokpal probe is forbidding. Imagine A. Raja or Kanimozhi being elected leader of the majority group in the Lok Sabha and the havoc either of them can cause to the already low credibility of the nation. I do not rule out such a calamity, given the compulsions (read coalition dharma' as Manmohan Singh once put it) of our politics. What happens to us in such a scenario? It is precisely because of this fear that we need to bring the Prime Minister under the Lokpal's purview. It is as simple as that. I cannot think of any country that accords such a blanket cover to a serving Prime Minister.

The apprehension of political instability likely to be caused by a Lokpal investigation against a Prime Minister is not convincing. It is said on behalf of the government that it has no objection to the Prime Minister being probed after his laying down office. This is comical. Imagine a scenario where a Prime Minister, who has come to adverse attention and is under investigation, continues in office. If he or she is an individual with no sense of propriety, he or she would be nonchalant and brazenly continue to indulge in malpractices with absolute impunity. How do you prevent the country from reaching such a ridiculous situation? On the other hand, if you have a clinically chosen Lokpal, do you believe he would ever initiate a frivolous inquiry against a democratically elected Prime Minister, unless he is a political animal with a dubious agenda? There is then a severe contradiction in the stand of the government. A tightly conceived selection process would ensure that the Lokpal is a person of unimpeachable integrity and honesty. He or she will not needlessly meddle with political stability. One safeguard against misuse of office by a Lokpal is to make him or her ineligible for any government position after he or she lays down office.

The Anna draft also provides for a citizen moving the Supreme Court for a probe of misconduct by the Lokpal or his deputies. What more guarantee can you give against Lokpal arbitrariness?

All this controversy about who should be in and who should be out is mere rhetoric. The national debate ignores the fact that the institution of the Lokpal will be a big zero unless it has an investigating agency of its own and the latter is not fettered by irritants such as the single directive', which requires government permission for the Central Bureau of Investigation even to initiate a preliminary inquiry against someone of the rank of Joint Secretary and above. In my view, this should be the focus, and we need to galvanise opinion in favour of a powerful investigating wing, which will not suffer from the infirmities that at present weigh down the CBI. It is also necessary that such a wing is not defined as a police organisation, as the announcement by the Union Law Minister suggests. It should be on a par with the investigating arms of the Income Tax and Customs Departments, which are competent to record signed statements. The Criminal Procedure Code, which regulates police (including CBI) investigation, prohibits signed statements. The next question is whether the CBI should report directly to the Lokpal. One must remember that the CBI does more than anti-corruption work. It will not be inappropriate to bring the anti-corruption wing of the CBI alone under the control of the Lokpal.

We need professional investigation of corruption in high places. This, only the CBI can give. The movement in favour of a strong anti-corruption agency that will not have to kow-tow to the executive has just been grounded. This is sad, considering the valorous fight put up by the team that Anna Hazare has led. It is for ordinary citizens like us to ensure that no one sabotages the commendable and much needed mission.