It is not a realistic expectation that the Lokpal Bill that the joint committee of government ministers and members of civil society — handpicked by the Anna Hazare group — has been tasked to present to the Monsoon Session of Parliament can put an end to corruption in our society. Nevertheless, the proposed legislation answers to the country’s aspirations.
The idea was around for about four decades. Successive attempts to get a Lokpal law through Parliament have come to nought as ruling parties at the Centre at various times fell at hurdles set up to negate those efforts. The issue could be revived recently only in the wake of the high-velocity Jantar Mantar campaign, which crucially relied for its success on the backdrop of a series of corruption scandals that rocked the nation, deeply embarrassing the ruling coalition and the political class as a whole. If the panel set up to frame the bill works diligently, it is not unlikely that it can produce a document worthy of being discussed by Parliament. For reference, there already exists an earlier version of the bill that got stuck at a parliamentary standing committee.
It will be a pity if the joint panel’s deliberations are in any way permitted to be impeded by the unseemly controversies surrounding some civil society nominees on the committee. Effectively speaking, the body only has some two months in which to accomplish its task. That time is probably not enough. Framing bills is a complex exercise, not least one whose aim is to establish a new institution to deal with corruption in high places, and to bring about transparency in governance in order to minimise the scope for corrupt practices. Nevertheless, key government figures, including the Prime Minister, have declared that it is their intention to present the proposed Lokpal Bill to Parliament in the Monsoon Session. All the more, then, it’s in the UPA government’s interest that the panel is not sidetracked by controversies involving civil society representatives, and successfully completes the task at hand. Matters such as the CD dispute, and the presumption of nepotism that arises from the nomination of the father-son duo of Shanti Bhushan and Prashant Bhushan to the committee, are relevant questions for the courts and society at large to deal with. But we should display the wisdom to compartmentalise the larger purpose from the issues that may come to dog individuals associated with it.
It needs to be understood that fingers will be pointing at the government if the proposed bill is not ready in time — even conceding that the coercive timetable imposed on the panel by the Hazare group is arbitrary, and speaks of insensitivity to the complexity of the exercise undertaken. This might be the case even if delays are attributable to the status of civil society representatives on the panel. In this age of the Internet and social networking, it is not difficult to mount virtually any kind of online campaign.
If the panel engaged in hammering out provisions of the bill does not want to be misunderstood, it could start by not taking unduly long breaks between sessions. After its inaugural meeting on April 16, the next session has been scheduled for May 2. A sense of urgency could have been imparted to the proceedings if the gap were shorter. In some cases, appearance is of no less value than substance. The committee should also be pragmatic and invite suggestions from the general public as well as interested organisations even as its deliberations are on. For one, this would help save time. All in all, the start has not been particularly auspicious. It is necessary to take this on board.