|
|
|
|
|
Parliamentary debate on Lokpal Shifting goal posts of team Anna
The Indian democracy has the strength to emerge stronger
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Punjab curbs & controls corruption
Why leave out corporate houses?
Who says the PM or civil servants require no protection?
Hope one more Anna comes to tackle price rise
Team Anna targets Agnivesh over controversial video
Anna may return for more
PM meets President
|
|
Parliamentary debate on Lokpal
On 5 th of April, 2011, Shri Anna Hazare went on an indefinite fast...on 8 th April, 2011, the Government constituted a Joint Drafting Committee (JDC) consisting of five nominees of Shri Anna Hazare including himself and five nominee-Ministers appointed by the Government to prepare a draft of the Lokpal Bill. Shri Hazare ended his fast on 9 th April, 2011.
The Joint Drafting Committee met nine times during April-June 2011. During the second meeting of the Committee, 40 basic principles and the statement of objects and reasons were circulated by Shri Anna Hazare’s team which formed the basis of discussions in subsequent meetings of the Committee. There were extensive deliberations on these basic principles... there was agreement on 20 of them, on seven points there was agreement subject to modifications and on seven more issues, we had agreement in principle subject to further discussions. There were divergence of views between the representatives of the Government and the representatives of the Civil Society on six major issues. I would like to explain these six major issues.Should one single Act be provided for both the Lokpal in the Centre and Lokayukt in the States? Would the State Governments be willing to accept a draft provision for the Lokayukt on the same lines as that of the Lokpal? Should the Prime Minister be brought within the purview of the Lokpal? If the answer is in the affirmative, should there be a qualified inclusion? The third issue was: Should judges of the Supreme Court and High Court be brought within the purview of the Lokpal? The fourth issue was: Should the conduct of the Members of Parliament inside Parliament (speaking and voting in the House) be brought within the purview of the Lokpal? The fifth issue was: Whether Articles 311 and 320 (3) ( c ) of the Constitution notwithstanding, members of a civil service of the Union or an All-India Service or a civil service of a State or a person holding a civil post under the Union or State, be subject to inquiry and disciplinary action including dismissal/removal by the Lokpal/Lokayukta, as the case may be. The last point was: What should be the definition of the Lokpal, and should it itself exercise quasi-judicial powers also or delegate these powers to its subordinate officers? Because, it was agreed that the Lokpal would be a totally independent organisation, it would have its own set up, officers will be appointed by the Lokpal and the expenditure of the Lokpal will not be voted by the Parliament. It will be charged as the amounts spent by the Supreme Court are charged, not voted by Parliament. Unfortunately, even before the Bill could be introduced in the Parliament, Shri Anna Hazare’s representatives restarted the agitation by burning copies of the draft Lokpal Bill. Shri Hazare also declared that if the Jan Lokpal Bill is not passed by the Parliament by 15 tn August 2011, he would proceed on indefinite fast with effect from 16 th August 2011. (On August 23)Annaji’s representatives made the following demands, and I quote: “If the Government can agree to introduce Jan Lokpal Bill - I am exactly quoting without any editorial comments, because I got this in a piece of papepr written by themselves - (after removing those items on which we have differences) after clearing by the Law Ministry within four days and also provide a commitment that the Bill will not be referred to the Standing Committee and will be discussed and passed (with minor amendments adopted by Parliament) during this session of Parliament (even if it is extended), we can then hopefully persuade Annaji to stop this fast.
|
|
The Indian democracy has the strength to emerge stronger
The concept of a Lokpal was first made when the Administrative Reforms Commission in 1966 recommended the establishment of a Lokpal and a Lokayukta Bill. The Bill was actually introduced in 1968 by Shri Y.B. Chavan. The term “ Lokpal ” - and I am quoting from the Report - is the Indian version of “Ombudsman”. Ombudsman is a Swedish term meaning ‘one who represents someone else.’ Ombudsman is an official who is appointed to investigate complaints against the administration. More specifically, he is an officer who investigates complaints of citizens of unfair treatment meted out to them by Government Departments and suggests remedies thereof, if he finds that the complaint is justified.” Now, ‘ombudsman’ was a Scandinavian concept and, coincidentally, on 3rd April, 1963, then an Independent young Member of the Lok Sabha, Dr. L.M. Singhvi, in the course of his participation in a debate for having an ombudsman in India, attempted to find out what the Indian equivalent could be, and this word ‘Lokpal’ was added to our vocabulary, the Hindi vocabulary, by Dr. L. M. Singhvi who translated this word. Now, it is a coincidence that his very distinguished son, Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, now has to prepare the final draft of this Bill.
Civil society
In any developing society, in any mature society, there will be a role for civil society.Some of them may take positions which seem a little excessive which may not be implementable. We must concede to them the right to build up pressure but not be provoked by them; we must not lose our sense of rationality as to what we are to accept and what we are not to accept and we must legislate keeping in mind the basic principles of the Constitution and the values of Indian society. What we must not do is to engineer a kind of a confrontation either between Parliament and civil society or the Government and civil society. The maturity of Indian polity is that we must not allow ourselves to get provoked.
Judiciary
You asked us as to what should be the mechanism for Supreme Court and High Court judges. At the moment, there are two mechanisms for Supreme Court and High Court judges. One is the in-house mechanism, which is a mechanism which has worked in some cases; not worked in some cases, and, the alternative mechanism is impeachment. We have discussed this two weeks ago in the course of proceedings for removal of a Judge of a High Court,where I had mentioned, and, I see that as a popular sense of the House, that there is a need to create a National Judicial Commission. The Government’s approach, which appears from your statement, is that you want a Judicial Accountability Bill. The civil society is saying that if you want it, please strengthen it. Now, whether you call it a National Judicial Commission or the Judicial Accountability Bill, we have to bear in mind one basic principle that the Executive must not interfere in the independence of Judiciary. But, at the same time, the task of appointing Judges and judging Judges cannot be left to Judges alone, and, therefore, your original Bill, as was introduced in the Parliament by Mr. Moily, the erstwhile Minister,left it to the Judges alone. Therefore, the present system, which is the in-house mechanism, will become a statutory mechanism. It won’t improve the situation.
|
||
|
Punjab curbs & controls corruption
Today the billion plus people of our country are not affected by top level corruption. What affects them in their daily lives is when they have to get their daily needs, like getting the ration card or a gas connection or a water connection or get admission in school or electricity connection, when they have to grease somebody’s palms, pay a bribe to get these things. That is what harasses them.
That is why it is necessary that when the result of every interaction with the police or bureaucracy or administration is directly dependent on the amount of bribes that person gives, we must make sure that this need of the billion plus people is addressed. Today, be it an educationist or a lawyer or a doctor or business tycoon, NGOs or media houses - every segment at any level - there is corruption. There is corruption in each and every segment of our society. Corruption is there even in schemes like the Indira Awas Yojana for the homeless or Old Age Pension for the poor or even in MGNREGA. I am happy to let you know that in my state of Punjab, we have started a policy of e-tendering for all government tenders above the limit of Rs. 5 lakh. Any one sitting anywhere in the world can bid for a scheme on-line without having to go to a minister or a bureaucrat to get a favour. This has eliminated the unnecessary interface between the Executive Engineers, the bureaucrats and the ministers. The bids have become so competitive that we have almost saved thirty per cent of the amount of the projects. On 15 th August of this year, the Government of Punjab has implemented a Right to Service Act 2011 which makes the civil servants and the police accountable to the citizens of Punjab. There are 67 services of the Government, related to the Departments of Revenue, Housing, Police, Transport, etc. where the officer is liable to deliver the services in a limited time frame. Failing to do so, he has to not only pay a penalty or be penalised, but also will be suspended and lose his job. Thus making the officers, the bureaucracy, accountable to the aam aadmi. Today, if you need permission for using even a loud speaker, you have to go to the police; you have to make many trips, and probably bribe someone. But in Punjab, you can seek this permission online and get it via your computer. In Punjab, the car dealer from whom you purchase a vehicle can give you the registration. All the rights of the DTOs and the RTOs have been taken away. If anyone wants to get his land records, he has to take umpteen number of trips to either the Tehsildar or the Patwari. You know how corrupt they are. In Punjab we have computerised all land records so that any farmer, any land holder sitting in any part of the world, can go online and get his records. … A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. This Jan Lok Pal Bill may not address the problem hundred per cent, but it is that single step for that long journey of eradicating this cancer. Let us take this step and do a great deed to start the end of rampant corruption.
|
||
|
Why leave out corporate houses?
I come to the question of Citizens’ Charter. Again we are actually talking of it as though this is something new that we have brought about. There are Right to Services Act that have been passed by five States in our country already. They are Bihar, J&K, Madhya Pradesh, Punjab and Uttar Pradesh. They are proposed in Jharkhand, Kerala and Rajasthan.
I was surprised to see the other day, on the Internet, the draft Electronics Services Delivery Bill. It was also written that citizens may send their responses to Abhishek 80.gov.in by 4 th of May, 2011.It is in the public domain. Your Bill is in public domain. You are discussing it. I do not know why the Government is not even referring to the fact that this mechanism has already been proposed by this very Government. You already have a mechanism that you have proposed. It is there in the public domain. Either the left hand of the Government does not know what the right hand is doing, or, the Government itself is not realisng what it is,actually, doing. There has to be some provision in the Lokpal Bill
to take steps against corporate companies and business houses which indulge in corrupt practices. Is corruption the prerogative only of public servants? I have said earlier that you have a nexus. You have the nexus of corrupt politicians, corrupt bureaucrats,corrupt corporate houses and I am sorry to add, certain sections of the corporate media. You have this nexus that is coming up. But the Lokpal should have the authority and power to also move against these other sections; it cannot be only for one particular section.
|
||
|
Who says the PM or civil servants require no protection?
There is never a debate about the need to have an effective institution to combat and control corruption. The issue is what are the processes that we adopt? Will those processes become precedents of the future? If so, will they be healthy precedents? As a student of law we were told the first principle of the Constitution is that Constitutions are established to act as bulwark against the impulses of the transitional majorities. This principle has been repeatedly affirmed by the highest court of this country.
So far, in 67 years, we may not have had a perfect system of governance; we could have made mistakes; much more needs to be done and that is why we are debating the contours of the new Anti-Corruption Law. But, on the whole, this system has served the country well; that is why I am delighted that if there is one issue on which there is complete unanimity, it is that law-making is the exclusive domain of both the Houses of Parliament and that law-making cannot be done under a banyan tree by scores of people sitting under it. I have never, for a moment, doubted the innate wisdom of the people of India. But we also know that emotions do, sometimes, get the better of our judgment and that is true for the best amongst us and that is why W.G. Summers,talking about the need to move away from extremes, said, “ because democracy is a song of moderation, it shuns extremes and it is not the peak but the plateau that is desideratum of the democratic discourse. ” The Prime Minister is not only first among equals but also, in fact, the key-stone of the Cabinet arch. Do we subject him to vexatious, frivolous and malafide inquiries, investigations and litigations at a time when he might be in the middle of conducting an international negotiation or when he might be in the middle of waging war to defend our borders or the Prime Ministerial office is at the centre of everything that is required to be done to sustain the unity and integrity and inviolability of our Government? Therefore,in the face of the fact that we have mechanisms where Prime Ministers have been prosecuted, where officers serving under the Prime Minister’s Office, maybe, the CBI, in turn have gone and prosecuted them, I would only hasten to add, please reflect on what we should do with reference to his office. The suggestion that, perhaps, the Prime Minister could be excluded while he is Prime Minister but included when he is not, does not appeal to me at all. You can’t keep the Damocles’ sword hanging on the Prime Minister’s head for acts done in his capacity as Prime Minister but to be investigated later when he ceases to be the Prime Minister. He will be disabled in his defence and this is applicable to all Prime Ministers. Articles 311 and 320 (3) of the Constitution relate to the Central Government employees. We have 37 lakh Central Government employees. It could be even more. My figures are 37 lakh. Whose case is it that there should be no protection to any civil servant? After all, we know that wild allegations can also be made against civil servants. They must have protection. Article 311 does nothing but gives them that elementary sense of protection.I have grave doubts as a lawyer, as a citizen, as a Parliamentarian, as someone who has been in the Government for a while. I have grave doubts as to the functionality, the efficacy and the purpose of bringing almost everyone under this regime irrespective of the constitutional mandate in articles 311 and 320 (3) and this provision is, doubtless,going to be challenged in the court as an infraction of this constitutional safeguard. We must understand the limits of our own jurisdiction.
|
||
|
Hope one more Anna comes to tackle price rise
Besides this Lokpal Bill, which had come up before this House eight times earlier, there are other important issues. I hope that one more Anna Hazare has to come up to tackle other few important issues like price rise and unemployment and we are waiting for that day. There is no denying that we parliamentarians have enough power and our supremacy should be given all priority but the problem is we discuss a number of issues inside Parliament which actually do not produce any result. People have started becoming frustrated over the functioning of the parliamentarians. That is the other part of the story.
As Sharad Yadav ji has said, Parliament is supreme. Today, when the debate was to start, the House was packed and all the members wanted to speak. We certainly want, at least when a sentimental or a catchy issue which involves each and every person is taken up in the House, mass involvement of the House. In a debate like this, we can call it as the cancer of corruption, mass involvement of the House is a must. The way people are gheraoing the MPs or abusing the MPs in different manners, like throwing them out of the train, are not the proper ways to tackle any issue. People should restrain themselves, in fact, restrain from both the sides is necessary. I think the government is very cautiously tackling this issue. The way the Prime Minister is making the statement, calling all-party meetings and adopting the resolution, it is all in the right direction.
|
||
|
Team Anna targets Agnivesh over controversial video
New Delhi, August 28 Agnivesh, on his part, claimed the video footage was "doctored and concocted" and part of a smear campaign against him and denied he was talking to Union minister Kapil Sibal. The minister was involved in negotiations during the intitial stages of the stand-off between Team Anna and the government. Team Anna member Kiran Bedi alleged Agnivesh had been caught on camera asking a person after addressing him as "Kapil", "Maharaj aap inko itna kyu de rahe hai (Maharaj, why are you giving them so much?)." "Who's Maharaj? Whether it is Kapil Sibal on the other side? He said Sibal sahab, I heard that," she said. Bedi accused Agnivesh of being absolutely unethical. The core Anna team and Agnivesh had developed differences during the course of Hazare's fast. Bedi told PTI that the footage had "shocked us all and we are very uncomfortable" with it. "Only he can answer this. He should own it or reject. However it leaves no doubt. It obviously tells us what happened. He should tell us who is the person whom he mentioned in this," she added. Agnivesh said, "These were lies and it is a "cut and paste" job. There are several people in my personal circle whose first name is Kapil. I never address political leaders as "Maharaj". Kapil Maharaj could be anyobody," he said without disclosing the identity of the person whom he was seen talking to in the video footage. In the video, Agnivesh is seen coming out of the ground floor of a building, which could not be identified, talking over phone. He was heard talking about Parliament's appeal to Hazare to end his fast and the Gandhian's insistence on continuing with that. Agnivesh allegedly said what the other side was doing against the government was not proper. He purportedly told the person on the other side that the government should not concede anything and deal firmly as they were toughening their stand whenever the government was conceding something. In the video, Agnivesh also referred to Parliament's appeal and said if Hazare was not ending his fast even after a "big appeal" from the whole Parliament, it was not good.
— PTI
|
||
|
Anna may return for more
New Delhi, August 28 Some sections, both within the Congress and the UPA government, apprehend that this is not the end of Anna’s theatre and that more is to come in the due course of time. They believe that having tasted blood, Anna Hazare and his team would not be content with this much
and may soon return to ask for more. Even the more optimistic elements in the government like Law Minister Salman
Khursheed, involved in negotiations with Team Anna, did not sound gung ho about this apparent vindication of Parliament. That is perhaps because by now they realise the resilience of this 74-year-old Gandhian and his ability to gather crowds. Anna too has given sufficient hints to this effect today saying, “Jeet abhi aadhi hai (This is only half the victory)” and unveiled his plan of action saying that his next battle will be for the right to recall MPs and right to reject the choice given on the ballot paper. He has sensed the mood of his supporters is that of general disdain for MPs and Parliament and encouraged by that declared, “People’s parliament is greater than this Parliament in Delhi.” Add to this the BJP decision to fish in troubled waters. BJP president Nitin Gandkari has not wasted time and issued a blank cheque from his Nagpur home this morning. He congratulated Anna for the successful campaign against corruption and said, “I would like to assure Anna that the BJP will continue to solidly stand behind him in his selfless endeavour to transform society.”
|
||
|
PM meets President
New Delhi, August 28 "The Prime Minister briefed the President about the ongoing session of Parliament and also on the resolution passed in both the Houses of the Parliament yesterday on matters relating to the Lokpal Bill," a Rashtrapati Bhavan spokesperson said. The meeting lasted for about half-an-hour, the spokesperson added. Anna Hazare broke his 12-day fast at the Ramlila Maidan here today. — PTI
|
||
|
Jantar Mantar
Rise of Congress’ young turks
Other young turks, including Jitin Prasada, RPN Singh, Milind Deora, Sachin Pilot and Jyotiraditya Scindia were roped in to communicate the government viewpoint on news channels after Nehru-Gandhi scion Rahul Gandhi finally broke his silence and spoke on the Lokpal Bill in the Lok Sabha last week. The group was closeted with Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee in his Parliament House office for quite some time on Saturday where they were briefed on the party line. Scindia was chosen to speak in Parliament while others were encouraged to participate in television debates. Congress spokesperson Manish Tewari was a notable absentee. Once a favourite on news channels, the party yanked him off air following the strong public reaction to his declaration that Anna was corrupt.
When Gadkari was left with no option
It is no state secret that BJP president Nitin Gadkari is an RSS nominee and is quick to follow the mother organisation’s directions. It was after he received a diktat from the RSS that Gadkari reversed the party position and dashed off a letter to Anna Hazare, pledging his party’s support to the Jan Lokpal Bill. His party colleagues, who were not consulted, were caught off-guard as the BJP had strong reservations about the Bill prepared by Team Anna and had made its position known both inside and outside Parliament. By writing this letter, Gadkari himself went against the grain as he is not particularly taken in by the Anna phenomenon like all other politicians from Maharashtra. Gadkari never stops making fun of him in private conversations. In one of his candid story-telling sessions recently, Gadkari narrated the truth about the now-famous story about how Anna succeeded in forcing then Maharashra CM Manohar Joshi to remove four “corrupt” ministers. It is being said that Joshi, who wanted to drop the ministers but was unable to do so because of various pressures, passed on incriminating documents about them to Anna who promptly went on a fast to demand their removal.
|
|
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Letters | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | Delhi | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | E-mail | |
On 5th of April, 2011, Shri Anna Hazare went on an indefinite fast...on 8 th April, 2011, the Government constituted a Joint Drafting Committee (JDC) consisting of five nominees of Shri Anna Hazare including himself and five nominee-Ministers appointed by the Government to prepare a draft of the Lokpal Bill.
The concept of a Lokpal was first made when the Administrative Reforms Commission in 1966 recommended the establishment of a Lokpal and a Lokayukta Bill. The Bill was actually introduced in 1968 by Shri Y.B. Chavan. The term “ Lokpal ” - and I am quoting from the Report - is the Indian version of “Ombudsman”.
Harsimrat Badal (SAD)
Sitaram Yechury (CPM)
There is never a debate about the need to have an effective institution to combat and control corruption. The issue is what are the processes that we adopt? Will those processes become precedents of the future? If so, will they be healthy precedents? As a student of law we were told the first principle of the Constitution is that Constitutions are established to act as bulwark against the impulses of the transitional majorities. This principle has been repeatedly affirmed by the highest court of this country.
The Anna Hazare crisis witnessed the emergence of Congress’ young MPs who had earlier been lurking on the margins. Lok Sabha MP Sandeep Dikshit, son of Delhi CM, came into his own as he effectively used his earlier links with NGOs to open a dialogue with Hazare’s associates, who were clearly wary of talking to the government. 