The fifth round of discussion on Monday in the joint drafting committee for the proposed Lokpal Bill — comprising five ministers and five civil society representatives who emerged from the recent Jantar Mantar movement led by Anna Hazare — has indicated a developing impasse on the contents of the much-awaited legislation. The bill was to be got ready for introduction in the coming Monsoon Session of Parliament, and the Prime Minister assured the country more than once that it was the government’s intention to stick to that schedule.
Briefing the media after the committee’s last session, the civil society representatives — admittedly drawn from a small pool — expressed the view that the government’s intentions were “suspect”, and threatened to renew their agitation if the bill was not as per their expectations. Such a threat is out of order when discussions are still on and the drafting committee meetings have not been abandoned, although differences between the government side and the non-officials appear acute.
The self-nominated civil society spokesmen are keen to bring into the ambit of the Lokpal’s jurisdiction the Prime Minister, members of the higher judiciary, and the conduct of MPs while discharging their duties inside Parliament (it is not entirely clear what this means). The government side apparently believes that bringing the Prime Minister under the Lokpal’s scrutiny can make the country’s highest political executive dysfunctional as the person holding that office can be made a target of motivated or vexatious allegations. No matter what the dichotomy in perception between the two sides, the government should not resile from its commitment to introduce the Lokpal Bill in the Monsoon Session. Also, the fresh legislation that comes on the agenda cannot be identical with its earlier version that is lying with a parliamentary standing committee. After Monday’s round, a spokesman of the government on the drafting committee said the divergences between the official side and civil society representatives would be forwarded to the states and (to) political parties for their comments. The government might do well to also involve a wider section of citizens in order to realise a full-fledged public discussion on the subject. All this needs to be done quickly. And it might be useful to remember that no matter what the committee recommends, Parliament will have every opportunity to discuss, amend or modify the draft bill once it is tabled.
The government needs to be conscious that the broad issue of corruption — as underscored by a variety of scandals in the past few months — and absence of transparency in government has come to undermine the people’s confidence in our governing structures. Perhaps a way should be found through appropriate national debate to shield the office of Prime Minister from motivated charges while not insulating it from investigation when so warranted. This admittedly won’t be easy. In such situations, recourse has been taken to the judiciary. However, in the Bofors case, Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi came to be politically hobbled although he did not lose his majority in the House. This particular instance might be usefully kept in view as we wade through the current discourse. On the question of bringing the higher judiciary under the Lokpal, the Chief Justice of India has spoken of the necessity to maintain a balance between safeguarding judicial independence and ensuring the judiciary’s accountability. These are important discussions for Indian democracy as it matures. But all things considered, a Lokpal Bill different from what we have known so far should not miss the deadline of the Monsoon Session of Parliament.