Jan Lokpal Bill from IAC, and Govt Lokpal bill, latest versions

It is heartening that the middle class, the salaried of India are out on the streets this time: we are hit the hardest. Our income strictly controlled but our expenses (read bribes) increasing every year...

On the other hand, it is sad that few corporates have come forth strongly supporting action against corruption. While, all the "'Business Leaders' have definitely spouted their few mandatory words of support, how is that these corporations dont step up and talk about how difficult doing business in India is, how often they are asked for bribes, how ofthen they have to pay it to just stay afloat.

Obviously, they cannot: for they are as much beneficiaries in the system as are the politicians and the bureaucracy. How many of our top 20 businesses (read conglomerates) in India today (keeping the IT sector out) have developed and grown because of talent, innovation and creativity? And how many because they have friendly politicians?

Looking for a superhero is another fallacy, all we need to do is create an independent unit which can interrogate, investigate, press charges, take the person to court & also fight the case till conviction.

Look at HK's ICAC, it had no super hero, no person who stood out but yet brought down corruption by public servants from 80% in the 70's to 30% in recent times. Huge difference from a motely bunch of guys who had no interference but were fully empowered to identify & take the case all the way doggedly to the end.

This is how Justice Hegde refers to Prime Minister -

Asked why the prime minister was silent on the issue, Hegde had a cheeky oneliner: “Singh’s ears are covered by his turban."

Courtesy - Bangalore Mirror

Seems with UPA Govt kneeling down, the self appointed, self-righteous team is already high with sense of victory and the result Justice Santosh Hegde has lost his sobriety.

It doesn't behoove him well to caricature the Country's PM with such below the belt remarks. That too remarking about a Turban, is a remark against PMs religious faith and his right to practice it.

Justicve Hegde may not like the PM and his party, his works , his abilities and inabilities, but Justice Hedge doesn't have the right to call the PM with such low remarks. This is unacceptable.

I certainly demand an apology from Justice Hegde.

 

 

Thanks Sanjay for sharing that TEHELKA article. If what it says is true, and if the government can respond in a positive way, now that they have become aware of the real anger amongst the public, perhaps we have a solution in sight.

Here are two responses of mine on "savekoramangala y-group", the context they are made in being fairly self-explanatory:

1) @ Mr N  -  There admittedly are grey areas in the Jan LokPal bill, as also in the approach of Team Anna to having it passed. However, quite like you, if I too am supporting him, it's because of the way the government is seen to be approaching the whole issue - from framing a toothless bill after sitting on the draft for decades together, then trying to make out as if, once elected, they are the supreme authority answerable to none, and going on to say that the civil society has no role to play at all, on top of heaping insults on them. Well, it's perhaps when all rational approaches to making the government accountable have failed that you and I are prepared to back an unconventional and not too rational an approach, plainly out of desperation.

And, as for those making pious preachings saying in effect that if people stop paying bribes, things will automatically fall in place, I would like to know how many of them themselves, or through brokers, have not paid bribes. That's where Dr Kaushik Basu (none less than the economic adviser to the PM)'s recent suggestion, of amending the Prevention of Corruption Act to hold only the taker of bribes guilty, makes immense sense. The sarkari babu is in a position of privilege, and very rarely can you carry on your day to day life, particularly if you are running a business (smaller the worse), without falling prey to him. My own experience I have narrated here, and even talked about it openly on national television (the then only Doordarshan) over an interview by Nalini Singh. Mr Basu rightly believes that if they are not held guilty, many will come forward to lodge complaints after paying the bribe. I had taken a chance.

The above can perhaps largely take care of most of the coercive corruption. Collusive corruption needs separate handling.

Whatever said and done, it required an Anna to rattle the politicos, which they definitely have been, including of the opposition.

And, what amazes me is the support from the youth of the country (entire IIMB is supposedly skipping their lunches - and, IIM students you would generally consider rational). Perhaps what they are saying is that "hum hai kaamyaab", producing as the youth already are world class products and offering world-class services; "magar, government kaamyaab hoga bhi nahin, aur kisi ko hone bhi nahin dega". And, they don't seem to have yours and my patience.

2) @ ND  -  A serious anomaly in the Sarkari LokPal bill, as I have understood, is the provision for probing the doings of NGO's, even at the Village Panchayat level. In this context, I wish to submit, that the scope of the word "corruption" should be limited to cases of misuse of public/ tax-payers' money. Mis-use of non-public funds is simple and straight forward cheating, which can be tackled under Sec 420 and other provisions of law. If, on the other hand, the LokPal/ Ayukta is to come into the picture in cases of mis-use of funds by office-bearers of NGO's, not just 5 but even a 100 LokPal's/ Ayukta's will be enough. Of course, if an NGO has obtained government funding, it is a different matter.

And, the most disquieting part of the Sarkari bill, again as I have understood, are the draconian provisions for so-called frivolous complaints, even as the defendant government servant is given the help of the state machinery to put up his defence.
 

Courtesy - Times Of India

Anna Hazare in a message from Tihar Jail on Thursday said that he will continue his protest till the government passes the civil society's version of the Lokpal Bill. Anna will leave Tihar Jail tomorrow.

Isn't this undemocratic and anarchic?

SanjayV, Murali,

On the surface of it all looks very lofty - Fight against corruption, Gandhian leading, Magasay award winners, PIL expert duo etc. But let us look at the questions you guys have asked.

(b) Any law passed is debated in a public forum - get feedback from the public, from the experts, argue, debate and yes bargain and put something workable out there.

Precisely the point, the authoritarian attitude of IAC's approach has led to suppression of any discussion other than the draft from IAC. In their pursuit of becoming messiah's themselves and retaining the whole pie of anti-corruption lofty, they pushed the nation, politics to not to look beyond Fasts and Dharnas. Are we going to say here that IAC represents all fo us? Certainly not me.

Let us assume if govt had accepted JLP in its inert version, would that have met the criterion that you listed? I am sorry instead of correcting the course we are making it more monstrous. Even if the JLP is passed, nothing is going to change on ground in terms of public participation in making of legislation.

Today the only course left for me to give my opinion on any prospective bill is to petition the Parliament's standing committees. I will only be super lucky to be called in and given an opportunity.There is lot of secrecy in making of legislation in parliament, with only MPs are privy to it. Along with pitch for JLP, the dismantling of this parliament secrecy should have been the paramount objective.

Instead of asking for fishnet, we have settled on getting the fish. No doubt this fish is very very important now and in near term.

The current process of legislative making process should be made transparent and open to public. That would have strengthen the institutions of legislation and set a template for all other bills to come. But IAC seems uninterested in making the legislative process transparent and inclusive.

This should have been the moment where a institutional mechanisms should have been forced to built within the system to make the 'Consultative Process' more robust, inclusive, transparency that paves the way for participation of ordinary soul like me in every bill that is being envisioned and tabled in the parliament. LP bill could have been the experiment in that direction and slowly fine tuned that process so that all other bills are legislated with opinions of many, instead of only few.

In frenzy of IAC's my way, other versions of Lokpal bill have been overlooked and completely sidelined. It is in our own interest that we also look at every other view that is being suggested. Very interesting is the competitive version of JLP from Aruna Roy and his team, though not necessary the panacea for Govt or IAC version.

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/lokpal-bill-aruna-roy-and-ncpris-suggestions/172475-53.html

On a different thought, When the gross politically and legally incorrect arrest of Hazare made news, every Indian came out and protested, condemned. Most vocal was the hypocritical middle class, affluent, celebrities and front in line political parties. They did it rightly so. Every wrong has to be protested. But our protest has been very selective, prejudiced.

On a regular basis, activist in Kashmir, Assam, Nagaland are taken into preventive custody and arrested on every drop of the hat. We rarely hear the voices calling it a "Murder of Democracy", but vocal and first to claim it when it suits us.

BTW, I would not hesitate to lay the entire blame on political class primarily at the door UPA not to have taken steps to respond to various ills of the country inclduing corruption fast and effective enough.

JLP alone should not be the golden lokpal mechanism, I agree. Remember, this bill has to finally clear parliament. So we have the checks and balances right there. The IAC team claims that they have researched and taken a lot of feedback and presented a proposal. Maybe at the end of this process, we come up with a newer way to make legislation inclusive. But the process will be ugly. Coming to the subject of Anna's blackmail, how long has Iom Sharmila been fasting? Does the govt pay any attention to that? Do we? Sadly no!! Treat Anna the same way. My position is clear. I want some traction, any traction. I am willing to push with Anna in the hope that things will sort themselves out. I have suffered enough and i am in no mood to not take advantage of tins opportunity to add to some fire. In other words, I fully get where you are coming from, but this flawed approach is what I choose to support. Can I ask you something - please see these videos on you tube. There are 4 of them. http://www.youtube.com/wa... there are a set of 4 videos. It gives some insight into the JLP movement.

Courtesy - IBNLive

Sagarika Ghose: Do you believe that this protest which is taking place while the Bill is before the Parliamentary process is justified?

Nandan Nilekani: I don't think it is justified. You know we have a Bill for the UID authority, which went to Parliament and was placed before the standing committee on Finance, which is chaired by Mr Yashwant Sinha. And I have had the occasion to, you know, make a presentation on more than one occasion to the standing committee. Now the proceedings of this are confidential, but let me tell you they do an extraordinarily thorough job. I'm very very impressed with the quality of questions, the homework, the due diligence, the seriousness that they view these things with. And it's very bipartisan, you can't make out who is from which party because they all ask (questions) on the issue. So when you have such an excellent system of law-making...and you know they have asked us so many thing to clarify, they have called so many experts, they have called people who are against what we are doing to the committee. So it's a very comprehensive approach to law-making. So when this law is in front of the appropriate standing committee, why do we need an agitation? It escapes me why this is going on.

Sagarika Ghose: So you believe that the agitation is actually a violation of Parliamentary principles.

Nandan Nilekani: No, I'm saying when a very serious Parliamentary body called the standing committee has taken this law for consideration, why are we not working through that system?

Sagarika Ghose: And we should not disrespect the Parliamentary standing committee?

Nandan Nilekani: Absolutely. I mean, look I have visited the UK Parliament, I have gone to the French Parliament, I have been to the US House of Representatives. I have met top leaders across the world in all walks of life and let me tell you the standing committee procedures are second to none. Let us respect that, let us give them the opportunity to call all the experts for and against and let them come out with something. They are the appropriate people, they are our representatives.

Pathy Sir,

The standing committee had invited Anna and his team. He and his team were given 3 days. According to other civil activist, it is very rear for any group to get 3 days of time before the committee. JLP has got its more than its due. Here is some scoop on this.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article2370258.ece

Members of the Parliamentary Committee on Law and Justice who had a “very frank, intense and productive” discussion with Anna Hazare on the Lokpal Bill are amazed that he after, giving them an impression of being “satisfied” with the interaction, said “something else” to the media.

The meeting ended with the Committee asking Team Anna to send its Jan Lokpal Bill to it for further discussion so that the Bill could be circulated to all members.

The “frank” discussions apparently included some sharp questioning of the Team, and the panel members got the impression that the Hazare delegation had not laid its cards on the table. “Andar meeting mein kuch kaha aur bahar kuch aur hi (inside the meeting he said something and outside something quite different),” said a non-UPA member of the Committee. He did not want to be identified as proceedings of the Committee are confidential.

The real crux of the matter is should the JLP version be compulsorily accepted by the committee? If it is so, why? What is so sacred about JLP? I think this is where most of us are going wrong to insist on JLP to be accepted. Why? Isn't by insisting, we are subverting the system? This is like PRAJA team saying Namma railu proposal be the only solution for CRS or traffic decongestion in city. Would that approach help?

Rejection at the committee is not the end of road for JLP. It has to be taken up LS and Rajya Sabha. It has to be passed by both the houses. Do you think govt version will have the field day without substantial amendments to it? No, on contrary It is possible that political parties in opposition may decide to vote out the bill, in that case govt will also go. Remember in RS govt is in minority. It will not be a smooth ride for any version leave alone the fate of govt version.

We should allow the process to run its course. Let us have faith in our systems. If the systems are weak let us strengthen them not bypassing or subverting them.

This is like PRAJA team saying Namma railu proposal be the only solution for CRS or traffic decongestion in city. Would that approach help?

There is a difference in this analogy, Namma Railu is the MOST cost effective solution for commuter rail but the BEST could be a Maglev or Elevated metro type which will blow the exchequer to bits.

So similarly trying to clean up CBI, CVC etc & making them work with so much political interference already entrenched may be a more expensive (& futile) to do in terms of time & effort than roll them up to an independent authority & remove interference in one shot. 

Secondly even if Namma Railu can be considered to be the only cost effective solution for a commuter rail system it is not the only option for traffic decongestion. The frames of references used in this context is not correct.

Lastly there is no magic wand. Nobody says anything is a magic wand in itself. Lets not repeat this phrase again & again misleading the people.

@ramesh_mbabu

Pls correct your remarks about right or left wing. None of my posts even remotely refers to the political tones of this movement and voices against it. May be you want to look at it that way. You are free to do that. I am not going to take that bait.

FYI, I considered and prefer to be in "CENTRAL" wing, where lies the India's well being and mine.

The long list of charge-sheet against govt, that you have listed is the side show to the real issue. If you are accusing the govt side of mudslinging, then there is equally and more below the belt campaign from Anna's team. Only the other day Justice Hegde calls the PM deaf because of his Turban. Even if this was cheeky comment, it doesn't behoove people like Hegde to resort to settle score with the PM in this manner. He is making comments about PM's attire, symbols of his personal faith? Are we bankrupt of words and phrases to have civility in the debate?There is a daily dose of uncivilized phrase match between the two. Result is the real debate on to what should be in the bill has been pushed to the corner and we are fighting on side issues of who said what.

There are 3 fundamental issues that I considered to be paramount in today's situation:

1. What should be the contents of the Bill? How do you get a consensus without having a larger debate inside and outside of parliament? Where is that happening? Both sides have side stepped this vital requirement.
2. What process should it take to become a law? Should it take a different route than the well established procedures of law making? If so why and should this become the new process for all the upcoming bills? By Doing so do we strengthen our systems or undermine them?
3. In any system, ultimately somebody will have the final say - Like EC in Elections, SC in judicial system. Now should the govt be deprived of its prerogative to have its final say on the contents of the bill? If not who should have it, how and why? Who and how ill we determine that final say in future on all such matters? How should citizens and groups like IAC should respond if the final product doesn't measure up to their expectations?

These are the issues that we should ponder upon. Not whether it is right or left wing? Who says what? We can have differences on each of the above 3 issues. But in democracy there is golden rule of "Agreeing to disgaree".

 

IBNLive has published an article by MR Madhavan 0f PRS Legislative Research listing the differences between the 2 versions of the Lok Pal Bill. He broadly classifies the differences into 10 categories and lists the differences.

1. Jurisdiction
2. Composition of Lokpal
3. Selection Process of Lokpal Members
4. Qualification of members of the Lok Pal
5. Process of removal
6. Offenses covered
7. Investigation Wing
8. Prosecution Wing
9. Process of Prosecution
10. Grievance Redress

A very good read to understand the strengths and weaknesses of both the bills.

For more Read Here

Courtesy - IBNLive

After going thru that interview, one would like to agree with What Nandan Nilekani is saying. Fact of the matter is the Lok pals, CAGs are all at work after the fact. They come into picture after the acts of omissions or commissions has been committed. Which is also very important to ensure that our governance is in checked on spending?

One important take away for me from that interview is the importance of prevention. I fully agree with Nadan's view that in order to fight corruption, we also need to streamline the public delivery systems along with enacting anti-corruption laws like Lokpal/Lok Aykta and enforcements. Now with availability of technologies this task is much easier compare to few years back. Needless to say it requires multi-prong strategy.

Take the example of BMTC. Imagine the rate of pilferage coming down in ticketing using the smart card or any other technology to facilitate electronic payment for tickets in buses. I am sure there are hundreds of opportunities to reduce the corruption in daily life on common man.

Sagarika Ghose: So you are basically saying that the way to fight is through service delivery, to streamline service delivery, not bring back what many are calling an ‘inspector raj'.

Nandan Nilekani: Yes, I mean, I am not saying that we don't need a Lokpal Bill. That is for the Parliament to decide - what should be the frame of that bill. I'm just saying that for millions of people corruption is at the point of interaction. When they are trying to get their PDS, when their are trying to get their pension, when they are trying to get their bank account open, when they move from a village to a city and nobody is willing to recognise them. That is where corruption is. And that is where the things we are doing like giving an Aadhar ID for every person, especially those who have no ID, (comes in). Getting them bank accounts by an automatic KYC, getting them a business correspondent network so that they can withdraw money from anywhere. Giving then the portability of the PDS so that if one PDS outlet is not giving them service they can go to somebody else. That's where, you know, millions of interactions the people have with the system, you need to fix that. And that is really a process, transformation, you know, technology kind of a solution, it is not about the law.

Courtesy - IBNLive - Interview with Nadan Nilekani

UID - No parliamentary approval yet, so no legal backing.

http://business.in.com/printcontent/21272. Why doesn't he wait till it is approved by Parliament? ( In the same context, watch the movie http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120660/). Was a lack of UID the reason for former telecom minister to plunder national resources? Was it the reason real estate companies having no experience in Telecom getting licenses & spectrum following arbitrary procedures? No, none, it was absolute absence of fear of law. I don't think another UID is required to stop corruption at the higher levels, but a strong law and implmentation arm will definitely do it.

 The pilferages in public delivery system was happening all through last 64 years, every one knew it. What was preventing the goverment of the day in taking systemic reforms to prevent it? They are still in search of MAGIC WAND to stop corruption & inflation, which affects a large part of the population. They are elected to bring in right policies at right time, to bring in new legislations to reflect the changes happening around, not to search for a non-existing MAGIC WAND.

Flip flop or confusion - Possible in an unorganized fight against organized state machinery.

The movement is against those in power, infact against those blinded by power. There were reports alleging 2 ministers in the joint drafting committee leaking reports in private to the coterie journalist during the initial phase. I had mentioned earlier too about the Koramangala demolitions and how the people who filed the PIL was targeted both by the encroachers and the agencies who were supposed to take action against them.

Isn't this flip-flop?

The government initially did not accept the joind draft committee, but was later forced to accept it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Indian_anti-corruption_movement

None from the opposition in the committee. Where was our ministers who shout from roof top about democratic priniciples at that time? Don't they know that opposition members too have certain rights & obligation in a democratic setup? They just wanted a convenient passage to come out of the crisis and thought the agitation will fizzle out and will face its natural death.

 

Pranab wanted PM under the ambit of Lokpal in 2001, Moily wanted the same in 2011. What has changed drastically in last few months for  their U-turn?

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-06-14/india/29656165_1_lokpal-bill-pranab-mukherjee-prime-minister

 

Unelected dictators greatest threat: Congress

http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-06-14/news/29656924_1_hazare-camp-manish-tewari-congress-spokesperson.

As if the current PM has contested an election!!!!!! If the govt. feel so and their demands are out of place, what does prevent them from sending them all to jail? They fear, they have some thing to fear, the public support this movement has.

There is a vaccum of political leadership who can sense the public mood, who ever left is so much disconnected from the sentiments of the public who elected them in first place. The younger generation is not complacent as it was earlier. Post liberalisation generation demands quick answers and solutions, they found a platform and a leadership that filled the political vaccum. They may not be 100 % right, but the general mood of the public is that they are much better than the political leadership who were circling with 10 half-hearted attempts in bringing the Lokpal. Lack of majority in both houses were pointed out by some one, but that never stopped them bringing in legislations what they thought were convenient to them.

I repeat, some one filled in the political vaccum, luckily they don't have baggages to carry and hide!

Have we measured this corruption? If Govt can agree on a measure & commit to an outcome of reducing lets say from 90% to 30% in 5 years then we shouldnt really care how it gets done. But in cases where the outcome is subjective the only way to get the desired outcome is to tighten on the methods to achieve it. Hence the netipicking on the bill itself.

But my confidence in results from a new law fades away when I try to analyze the state of corruption even after the existence of LokAyukta and a strong LokAyukta in Karnataka like Jutice Hegde. Seems nothing has changed on the ground? 

 

Why is it that not effective?

suo motu powers against netas and requirement for sanction for prosecution are needed to fully strengthen the institutions

JD(S) leader M C Nanaiah, advocating more powers to the Lokayukta, said that the Karnataka Act with all its deficiencies is still the best. Former chief minister Ramakrishna Hegde, who pioneered the legislation in 1984, had brought the ministers including the CM under its purview. But a year later, the provision was dropped and has not been restored since then, he pointed out. 

Read more at

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-04-08/india/29396540_1_suo-motu-powers-lokayukta-institution-karnataka-lokayukta-act

The Goverment's version of Lokpal is at best another advisory body to park their geriatric netas who have failed in previous elections, to help bureaucrats with good retirment plans who had helped them while in service, to provide return of investmsents for judges in return for the exceptional "scratch your back" service they did while in service.

Investigating and prosecution powers without sanctions from the then political bosses is another contentious issue the govt. has with JLP. Some one argued that JLP is draconian, so be it, atleast it can not be used against 99% of the popluation who are not in "Self Service aka public service", the remaining 1 % is any way good in finding myriads of way to get out of legal tangles. At the same time, there are more draconian laws like POTA, AFPSA which can be used against me, you and more than 99% of the public. They just showed their intent by imposing 144 in and around Delhi last week.

IDS,

Agreed that the current systems and process didn't deliver in most cases (even though I feel it has in many cases), what is the new process that you think will deliver? From raising the issue to getting a law passed. How, who and where?

what is the new process that you think will deliver?

The govt should take the suggestion offered by the IAC team, use the JanLokPalBill as the start point & amend it appropriately with the help of a more broad based Ad-Hoc committee (not this Laloo/Amar standing committee) to arrive at the appropriate bill including all other measures taken to make the overall system strong enough to fight corruption. Methods to measure & report corruption should be a part of this. If results not measured & reported then this is another useless organization. 

I will go on fast if they dont pass my measure & report strategy :)

IDS,

This suggestion of adhoc approach to non-govt version to be the basis of a bill legislation, to me is flawed one even if this is only for this situation. Looking beyond JLP, what is the system for non-govt version of the bills to be basis of legislation?

Let me give you a scenario. There is a proposal for a bill on Communal violence and draft is ready. BTW, this draft is written by the NAC. Already there are voices against it. There is only one voice which is for the bill, by the people, communities who had been the most effected.

For arguments sake let us consider each one them to be a non-govt versions of the bill. Most vocal in this respect is from BJP and their sister organizations. If I apply the same formula, it is the BJP version that should be taken up in the parliament rather than govt version or the lone voice of the actual sufferers. Since BJP and their supporters can mobilize crowds at least equal to Ramlila size ( already seen in 90s), am sure they will get the right to shut the other voices.

In my above description I am not at all suggesting opposition from BJP is bad or anything. They have every right to oppose this and any other formulations. I am just commenting on methodology to deal with opposing view to govt views and bills.

May be JLP churning would provide that answer.

Last but not least, let me know the venue of your fast, I will join you, even if Idon't agree with you. :)

-Syed

I am not sure how much of the corruption is with the PM, lots of politicians at lower levels who make all the money both at state & center. Infrastructure contracts are the biggest money spinner. Beyond this PM issue what are the other 9 JLP issues that govt version does not include?

while (1) { 

consultation();

}

The NCPRI has taken a stand on the Jan Lokpal Bill without consulting its members and seeking their suggestions

Source

@sanjayv thanks for the link, the below point which has been left out of the Govt LPB is very important and shows seriousness of the bill to tackle retail corruption

Tenth, the JLP deals with grievance redressal of citizens, in addition to the process for prosecuting corruption cases. It requires every public authority to publish citizen's charters listing its commitments to citizens. The government Bill does not deal with grievance redressal.

Clearly the govt is ignoring important committments to servicing the citizen diluting the whole effort.

Regarding the seventh & eighth points, the govt needs to move CBI completely into JLP. Its trying to keep this completely politically manipulated "investigation" arm will lay to waste all efforts of creation of the JLP. Shows very clearly politicians are afraid of being naked with no protection for their misdeeds or carry out revenge campaigns when they need and hide the misdeeds of their friends.

fifth point again shows how used to control the politicians are. On what basis will the president know the LP needs to be removed? It has to be from his "advisors" Isnt it better for courts to first investigate on a complaint from the same "advisors" or anybody else & find him guilty before coming to the president for action? What if after the president recommends removal, the SC finds the LP fit to serve? Wont the president have egg on the face? 

Here is another comparison matrix from the NCPRI team on the bills, surprisingly in the last but one row regarding the investigative & prosecution wing, the CBI part is not addressed in this comparision preferring to show they are all in sync on this point

 

 

If reports to be believed, there are attempts from govt to bring in separate bills on Judiciary, Grievances and Whistle-blower. Would that be better option than all in one?

NCPRI recommendations are the basis of this move, nobody has a good list of positives & negatives of either of the moves. If you go by ICAC precendent keep everything in one place would make sense, but this is an amateurish guess by me. I will take the advise of the people in the kno on this. I see nothing wrong in agreeing to IAC point on this unless proven otherwise. Right now though on the streets its my-daddy-strongest

Related comments from friends:

Mr N:    I went to the Ramlila maidan this morning. The comment here describes the scene exactly. The fervour of the supporters, selfless service by many volunteers ( I drank a hot cup of coffee free!). The respect and adulation for AH had to be seen to be believed. I saw vignettes of all the people that are described below-the school teacher, the large family from Ludhiana (a big gang of sardars) old, young and people from all walks of life. Anyone who thinks that this is a movement of the pampered middle-class can only be an armchair intellectual who has not visited the site of the action. I may have been there on a historic occassion!

Ms PR:   Whether we are over ANNAlyzing or not, the fact remains that this movement is being fueled by the heart. The mind only follows. Either I get that or I don't. Difficult to argue with an angrily beating heart. And memories of cowardice. The editorials, the conversations. Nothing comes close to the one decisive thump that says "Bas, bahut ho gaya".

While I discuss, I cogitate, I criticize and I wonder what damage the A Team could potentially do to the constitution, where was I all these years when crores drained out of the system by creamily smiling Fat Cats looted us and robbed the poor in a so called bloodless crime? Impotent, seething and cowed, too small to stand up alone. Whatever the A Team has done and whatever damage they might do, I will stand on my desk and salute this man and this time for giving us the courage and platform to speak. Even though it was always there.

O Captain, My Captain

And relevant excerpts from an article by Rama Bijapurkar in Business Standard (full text accessible here):

The differences in quality between the government and private are hard to ignore and even as the quality and cleanliness of our privately-run public spaces are improving, the quality of our government-run public spaces is deteriorating. Even as the rights and services we get as consumers are improving, our rights as citizens are getting worse. “Pay a bribe and let’s talk” is the dominant theme in the latter case. Earlier, we did not know that anything better was possible in India. We were resigned to our fate. Now we do know that it is possible, because we see it and experience it. This, then, increases our rage against the government. High-decibel media exposés of government corruption adds to it — it seems to say our money could have worked much harder for us had it been used better. Saying I will stand on principle and not pay a bribe and not get my work done, give up earning potential for principle, is not an option. The middle class sees its power not in terms of the ballot box – in fact, as Sitapati suggests, it hates all things political – but in terms of noise and pressure and blackmail power with the media as its ally. It says I pay the piper so I need to call the tune because you aren’t in tune with the rest of my world.

The more we privatise and show ourselves what can be done, the more we expect “paisa vasool” from our government services.

I just can not understand how the central government can now say that a broader consenses is required to be taken to table the janlokpal draft for considering for discussion in Parlaiment. Have they taken such broad consenses while preparing thier lokpal bill draft to claim democratic? The very draft of govt. is not acceptable to many parties in Loksabha. Even if they take the broader consenses for the Janlokpal draft and find 85% are in favour of it while 15% are not in favour of it, how should it be concluded - whether the people by and large are demanding the Janlokpal or it should be ignored because 15% are not acceptable? The central govt. is not at all sincere and appear like protecting the gangs of corrupt people and corrupt govt. employees; after all the corruption only dwells with govt. The central govt. should better know that the Parlaiment is not above majority of people and the members of parlaiment have not descended from the heavens.

It is frequently stated that the Law should be in simple terms and easily understood by even a less qualified person.That should be the essence.

Yesterday PM mentioned about Loksatta's JP's version of LP in th parliament. Has anybody seen it? Couldn't find it on net?

I read the loksatta versions and suggestions.  Seems top tread a middle path, but I am not able to comment on whether sall suggestion make sense.

One other question I had was on this Suo Motu powers business.  Can the lokpal investigate corruption on the basis of press reports or other inputs in the absence of a formsl complaint?  Justice Hegde used to keep complaining about the lack of this.  What is the stand of all these versions on the Suo Motu business.

Let us continue for another century or so hoping against hope that some day wisdom will rein our elected representatives to implement existing laws effectively or bring new legislations to curb the corruption.

Let corrupt amass wealth in obscenely large amounts, they have lost count of the amount of money amassed long ago, now a days in competetion to add more zeros to the amount, number of zeros is the only count and idea they have about the money.

Threat to democracy - what a farce? Who has taken down the credibility of the institutions? The elected member themselves!!!! No one else. When people ask for accountability for their actions they feel threatented! When the vaccum created by political leaders is filled by some one, they feel threatened.

Did they even have a decent debate in parliament at a time when the whole nation and people around the world is keenly listening on? Were they able to sense the seriousness of the issue other than shouting about the threat? The threat if any is within not from outside.  How can they claim credibility and supremacy? Amar Singh & Lalu in a standing committee discussing the legislation against corruption. Ahhh... there are a couple of more vacancies that can be filled by Kalmadi, A Raja & Kanimozhi.

Hail the democratic institutions as they exist now and hail the status quo - at least it suits few!!!!!

 

Some interesting statistics.

Close to 30% of Loksabha MPs have criminal back ground.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_general_election,_2009#MPs_with_pending_criminal_charges

 

• Every MP in the Lok Sabha or the lower house of the Indian parliament under the age of 30 had inherited a seat.

• More than two thirds of the 66 MPs aged 40 or under are hereditary MPs.

• Every Congress MP under the age of 35 was a hereditary MP.

• Nearly 40% of the 66 ministers who are members of the Lok Sabha were hereditary members.

• Nearly 70% of the women MPs have family connections.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/soutikbiswas/2011/01/is_india_sliding_into_a.html

Kiran Bedi and Arvind Kejrival were part of the government under the executive and for sure the reform processes started by Bedi in her various capacities are in public domain. They know the system far better than most us.

We are in an intellectual cul-de-sac. Change requires emotion, but emotion without direction is sterile. Anna Hazare estimates that if we had a Jan Lokpal and Jan Lokayuktas, 60 per cent of corruption from national life could be eliminated.

Maybe so! But if we have a PM who enforces honesty, 60 per cent of corruption in national life would not arise in the first place! Where do you get the best bang for the buck? It is for the citizens to apply single minded pressure on whoever may be the PM. If we drop the bar for the PM, we wound our country.

For the full text of the article by Mr Sanjeev Aga in the Daily Mail, click here.

Says a lot.