The truth is that the Lokpal had become too contentious an issue, for the major political parties to get this bill passed without far greater and cohesive dialogue between them. The three days of the extended session was indeed inadequate, given the history of the debate.
The unity displayed, when the Lok Sabha unanimously passed the "sense of the house" resolution, in August 2011 was absent throughout the debate in both houses. What is the "sense of the house" then and now? What is the distance travelled from August to December, and now from the Lok Sabha to the Rajya Sabha?
It is important to examine the recent turn of events against the backdrop of the political unanimity displayed by Parliament just six months ago. We must remember that Parliament was at that moment, responding to an attack on its institutional credibility and existence. The short memory of the political parties has short changed that action with electoral and other interests.
In August, public protests not only brought the Lokpal issue to a boiling point, but Parliament as an institution was under attack. Politicians were derided on and off the dias at Jantar Mantar and Ramlila grounds. Assertions were being made that laws would now be formulated by "the people" and deadlines and non negotiable formulations were being presented for Parliament to pass into law. There was no answer as to "who" and "how" this determination of "the people" would be made.
The winter session was the deadline set for the passage of this most debated but complex piece of legislation. The fact that the Rajya Sabha ended in chaos, with 187 amendments being presented for consideration is an indication of how illusory this sense of unity was. While the parties will go into the elections in the five states blaming each other, there is no doubt that a great opportunity to seize the moment by the political class was lost to narrower electoral interests. The statesmanship often required to think beyond immediate interests was just not there.
The implications of a Constitutional amendment was not properly explained and placed in the public domain. Once again the media carried opinions and positions where substantive information was less important than allegations and counter allegations based on personalities. The Constitutional Amendment itself was important as it laid down minimum standards for an independent and autonomous Lokpal. It would have given Constitutional status to the Lokpal, established at the very least, its autonomy and effectively established its power to ‘direct investigation’ and exercise ‘superintendence’ over investigating agencies.
It would not have prevented a stronger Bill from being enacted, but it would have given the people of India a chance to approach the courts to make these concepts a reality. In fact even the Congress Party, that mooted the idea, faced the inexplicable ignominy of having 12 of its members being absent when it was brought to vote in the Lok Sabha ! The BJP, that had claimed to support it, has been unable to present a credible reason for its opposition when it was brought to vote. The reason proffered was that it was not the BJP’s duty to support a pet idea of Rahul Gandhi, nor did it see the meaning of passing a constitutional amendment without a strong Lokpal Bill being passed. However, it was also clear that the BJP and the NDA had themselves moved away from basic commitments made in the sense of the house resolution and from the stage in Jantar Mantar.
Lokayuktas
One of the strengths of the draft Lokpal and Lokayukta Bill as presented in Parliament, was the fact that a uniform architecture for investigating corruption would have been put in place across the country. Considering how difficult it would be to enact strong laws in many states, this is again an opportunity lost.
While federalism is an important concept, it should not be an argument to derail basic minimum structures of accountability, that should be a part of the basic legal framework. In any case, the Prevention Of Corruption Act is a central law, and the Criminal Procedure Code is in the concurrent list, so there is no real legal bar on what was a very progressive provision. It is telling perhaps, that the Bill eventually failed through opposition to one of its strongest provisions. The government was held to ransom by both the major opposition party and a regional ally in the "House of the States".
Throughout the arguments about federalism, there was no case made for amendments that would enable States to fine tune and strengthen the national law in their own contexts. The TMC demanded that the chapter on the Lokayuktas be completely removed. This, more than any other step would make this law far less meaningful to the common citizen.
Freeing Investigation
It is obvious that the government was unwilling to completely give up control over the CBI, or allow the Lokpal to have its own investigating agency.
Nevertheless, in the present draft some significant progress had been made in removing the stranglehold government had on the investigating process. The infamous ‘single directive’ and other provisions that required government sanction before investigation and prosecution have been comprehensively removed. The selection of the post of Director, CBI has been made far more balanced and bipartisan. And the concept of superintendence of the Lokpal over the investigating process had yet to be put to the test.
There was even a possibility, that like in the case of selection of the Director of the CBI, where the Government accepted the BJP’s suggestion, competitive political rivalry would finally lead to an ‘agreement’ of greater benefit to all. However, the tone and tenor of the debate made it clear that the ‘sense of the house’ this time, was not to enact a law. As a result, some of the other progressive measures such as the provision for compulsory declaration of assets of all government servants at all levels, and confiscation of ill gotten wealth hardly received a mention from anyone except the ruling party.
Marginalising other Bills
At least two other bills were the immediate victims of the ‘politics’ of the Lokpal. Protection to be provided to Whistleblowers was not discussed, and not put to vote despite the fact that, as the debate continues, people continued to be attacked and killed for asking for information and blowing the whistle on corruption. The Whistleblower protection Bill should have been discussed and passed in this session itself.
The Judicial Accountability Bill also should have been examined as there are some very serious objections that have been raised about its provisions, and the Standing Committee has recommended the establishment of a National judicial Commission for the appointment, transfers and criminal investigation of the higher judiciary. The progressive Grievance Redress law that will give citizens a chance to enforce accountability was also introduced. However, it has been discussed less on merit, and more on whether the sense of the house required the whole enforcement of the citizens’ charter to be done by the Lokpal.
So where next ? The political parties will go to the five states where elections are on, and blame each other. As citizens, we need to ask questions of and get answers from all parties, with substantive reasons for whatever positions they take. Campaigns and citizens’ groups need to start focussing on ways to ensure that some of the contentious issues can be resolved before the budget session.
It is not just the Lokpal, but the whole basket of measures that are under consideration. As a part of people’s movement, sustained dialogue and pressure can be used to make sure the momentum is not lost. We need to start focussing on the specific cases of corruption that surround us, and demonstrate that anti- corruption is a movement that is not just about the technicalities of a law, but also about changing power relationships in India. The next chapter of the history book must record that it is sustained movements for justice and democracy that can overcome the narrow politics of self interest.
In the final analysis, between the "sense of the house", and the lack of sense of the Rajya Sabha discussions, hangs the credibility of the parliamentarians themselves. Political parties can only salvage themselves from the confusion if they show, by their action in the forthcoming session, that they can act together to take issues of corruption and accountability seriously. The responsibility for effective enactments on this range of issues lies with Parliament as a whole.
Aruna Roy and Nikhil Dey are
social activists associated with the National Campaign for People’s Right to Information and Mazdoor
Kisan Shakti Sangathan