Lokpal and Lokayukta

GS 2-GOVERNANCE 

The Lokpal and Lokayukta are statutory bodies in India, established to investigate and prosecute corruption among public officials.

Recommendation of ARC

In the 1960s, India’s Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC) proposed the establishment of two dedicated bodies, the Lokpal and Lokayukta, to address citizens’ grievances related to corruption.

Role of Ombudsman

Both the Lokpal and Lokayukta function as ombudsmen, responsible for examining allegations of corruption against certain public organizations and officials.

National and State-Level Jurisdiction

While the Lokpal operates at the national level, the Lokayukta functions at the state level. Both institutions are authorized to investigate and prosecute corruption cases and are led by a panel comprising judges or retired judges.

Jurisdiction

The Lokpal and Lokayukta handle complaints related to corruption involving ministers and senior government officials.

Background and Evolution of Lokpal and Lokayukta in India

The concept of an ombudsman originated in Sweden in 1809. In India, the idea of a constitutional ombudsman was first introduced in Parliament by former law minister Ashok Kumar Sen in the early 1960s. In 1963, Dr. L. M. Singhvi coined the terms “Lokpal” and “Lokayukta.” The First Administrative Reforms Commission (1966) later recommended establishing these institutions at both central and state levels.

Although the Lokpal Bill was passed in the Lok Sabha in 1968, it lapsed due to the House’s dissolution. The bill was subsequently introduced multiple times but failed to become law. The National Commission for Review of the Working of the Constitution (2002) and the Second Administrative Reforms Commission (2005) reiterated the necessity of establishing Lokpal and Lokayuktas.

The demand for an independent anti-corruption body gained momentum with the Anna Hazare-led “India Against Corruption” movement in 2011. Hazare’s hunger strike pressured the government to introduce the Lokpal and Lokayukta Bill in Parliament, leading to its enactment in 2013.

Key Provisions of the Lokpal and Lokayukta Act, 2013

1. Selection Committee: Comprises the Prime Minister (Chairperson), Speaker of the Lok Sabha, Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, the Chief Justice of India (or a nominated judge), and a legal expert appointed by the President.
2. Jurisdiction: Covers the Prime Minister, Union Ministers, Members of Parliament, and government employees across Groups A, B, C, and D.
3. Composition: The Lokpal consists of a chairperson and up to eight members, half of whom must be judicial members. Additionally, 50% of members must be from Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes, minorities, or women.
4. Investigative Authority: The Lokpal has the power to supervise and direct investigative agencies, including the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), in cases referred to it.
5. Foreign Contributions: The Lokpal’s jurisdiction extends to cases involving foreign donations exceeding ₹10 lakh annually under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010.
6. State-Level Implementation: The Act mandates state governments to establish Lokayuktas within 365 days of the Act’s enforcement.

Lokpal and Lokayukta (Amendment) Act, 2016

The 2016 amendment modified provisions related to reporting assets and liabilities of public officials.

• It allows the leader of the largest opposition party in the Lok Sabha to be part of the selection committee in the absence of an officially recognized Leader of the Opposition.
• Section 44 of the original Act, which mandated public officials to declare assets and liabilities within 30 days of taking office, was amended. Now, officials must report such details as per government regulations, without a fixed deadline.

Role of the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC)

The enactment of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act enhanced the Central Vigilance Commission’s authority:

• Sections 8A and 8B were added to the CVC Act (2003), enabling the commission to investigate cases referred by the Lokpal concerning government employees at various levels.
• The CVC was granted supervisory powers over the CBI in matters related to corruption investigations under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, ensuring greater transparency and accountability.

Existing Anti-Corruption Framework in India

Several mechanisms exist to combat corruption, including:

1. Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988: The primary legislation to punish public officials involved in corrupt activities.
2. Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI): The main investigative agency for corruption cases involving government servants.
3. Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) and State Vigilance Commissions: Handle complaints regarding corruption in public offices.
4. National Human Rights Commission (NHRC): Addresses cases where corruption violates citizens’ rights.
5. All India Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968 and Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964: Prohibit government employees from engaging in activities that may compromise their integrity.
6. Administrative Tribunals: Bodies such as the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) adjudicate cases related to corruption in public administration.

Effectiveness of Lokpal and Lokayuktas

Despite being enacted in 2013, the Lokpal and Lokayukta Act faced implementation challenges:

• Selection Committee Issues: Due to the absence of an official Leader of the Opposition in the 16th Lok Sabha, the appointment process was delayed. However, the Supreme Court later clarified that the process should proceed regardless of this vacancy. A 2015 Parliamentary Standing Committee recommended replacing the Leader of the Opposition with the leader of the largest opposition party.
• State-Level Challenges: According to Transparency International, several states and Union Territories, including Assam, Bihar, Delhi, and Kerala, have not amended their Lokayukta Acts to align with the 2013 legislation. Only Bihar, Manipur, Odisha, and Tamil Nadu have appointed both judicial and non-judicial Lokayukta members.

Limitations of the Lokpal and Lokayukta Act, 2013

The Act has several shortcomings:

1. Lack of Independence: Government influence over the appointment process may compromise the Lokpal’s autonomy.
2. No Provision for Anonymous Complaints: The Act does not permit anonymous complaints, discouraging potential whistleblowers.
3. Time Limitation: Complaints can only be filed within seven years of the alleged corruption, which may not be sufficient in certain cases.
4. Strict Punishment for False Complaints: Heavy penalties for frivolous complaints might deter genuine whistleblowers.
5. Limited Transparency: The process of investigating complaints against the Prime Minister lacks transparency.
6. No Suo Motu Powers: The Lokpal cannot initiate investigations on its own.
7. Procedural Rigidities: More emphasis is placed on the format of complaints rather than their content.

Way Forward

To enhance the effectiveness of the Lokpal and Lokayukta institutions, the following measures should be considered:

1. Greater Functional Autonomy: These institutions should be granted more independence in investigations and decision-making.
2. Financial and Administrative Independence: They must operate without interference from the authorities they are meant to investigate.
3. Transparency and Accountability: Greater citizen participation, access to information, and leadership accountability should be promoted.
4. Decentralized Anti-Corruption Mechanisms: Strengthening other institutions with appropriate accountability measures can prevent the excessive concentration of power in a single body.