Lokpal and the Quest for Transparency: A Blueprint for a Corruption-Free India

“The worst disease in the world today is corruption and there is a cure i.e. transparency”

-Bono

ABSTRACT:

The incidence of corruption is not of contemporary genesis. It is as primordial as human civilization. In contemporary India, corruption has procured a coarse amplitude with cancerous velocity. Like a termite, it is corroding the underlying structure of our democracy. Rationally, it is impractical to conjure any department which has remained untouched from the shadow of corruption. Corruption has become our nation's deadliest foe and has a major impact on its growth. It has changed from a taboo to a common practice in our society. Every day many citizens face extortion by dishonest officials in public offices. If this goes on, corruption will soon destroy India's democratic foundation. Right now, India ranks 85th out of 180 countries on the Corruption Perception Index. To wipe out corruption, we need a strong system to handle public complaints about corruption and bad management. To fight the rising threat of corruption, India's government passed the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act in 2013. This law aims to combat corruption and create a corruption-free India. The Lokpal is a group that investigates corruption complaints at the national level.

The institution of Lokpal investigates poor administration cases and is considered the strongest barrier against corruption and abuse of authority. In India, the Lokpal body aims to save the citizens from the arbitrary exercise of authority by the executive. The setup of Lokpal is very essential for taking India towards a corruption-free direction. Corruption is still a major obstacle to economic development and it has been estimated that big slices of public corruption are financed by programs that are laid down by the government. The Indian electorate has now realized the worth of their vote and generally ask for systems to combat corruption. The Lokpal bill, though a handy tool in the fight, has not been allowed to function effectively due to lack of enthusiasm and general discontent over it. This study has tried to understand how the voters perceive and feel about the Lokpal bill, and point out basic issues related to the Lokpal and governance.

Keywords: Corruption, Democracy, Lokpal, Extortion, Corruption, Perception Index, Governance, Complaints.

Introduction:

With the emergence of the Welfare State, administration has gained importance in today's socio-economic world. Large powers concentration in administration gave birth to their abuse and misuse by way of maladministration and corruption problems. The avenues through legislative and judicial channels for redress to citizens have often insurmountable constraints in the shape of long and cumbersome court procedures. Similarly, Parliament does not directly control the administration; the members can only pressurize the ministers by making demands and complaints against relevant departments. This is in this direction that many countries have taken the initiative and felt the requirement for an independent body to supplement the other mechanisms and see that unbiased and efficient administration is maintained. The concept of an Ombudsman, a public official who investigates complaints against public authorities, was enacted in Sweden in 1809. Thereafter, this institution has been adopted by Finland, Denmark, Norway, New Zealand, England, and India. The term "Ombudsman" is of Swedish origin, meant to denote an officer appointed by the legislature to look after the grievances against administrative and judicial action. A work of Ombudsman examines complaints emanating from the affected individuals but also conducts inquiries suo moto. He works as an Investigator fact-finding in an impartial manner and presents his report to the legislature. It was until recent times that the emergence of the Ombudsman portrays the increasing loss of confidence in public officials on account of deficient sensitivity, efficiency, and fairness. He is a simple and effective method of redress against administrative actions.

Administrative Reforms Commission, which was set up in 1966, accorded the highest priority to this issue of redressal of public grievances and presented its first interim report on this subject. ARC recommended setting up an Ombudsman-type institution and suggested establishment of Lokpal and Lokayukta. In fact, the model of Ombudsman is a device for enforcing accountability of administration to Parliament in the sense that a complaints receiver authority appointed by the legislature investigates into complaints of administrative and judicial acts. The ARC recommended that the grievances against the ministers and secretaries of the government should be investigated by 'Lokpal' at the centre and 'Lokayukta' in states, but these bodies should look at the administrative acts of the other functionaries. The salient features of the two bodies, as proposed by the ARC, are as follows: They should understandably be independent and impartial. Their inquiry and investigations should be carried out in private and uniformly. Their appointments must be as non-political as possible.

Their status is to be at par with the senior-most judiciary of the land.
They shall attend to the grievances regarding injustice, maladministration, and arbitrary actions within the discretionary area.
Their proceedings shall not be subject to judicial review and they will enjoy wide powers to obtain all relevant material.
They shall not have any gain or profit from the executive government.

Accordingly, following the recommendations of ARC, attempts to set up the Lokpal at the Centre were made for many years-with bills being brought to Parliament in 1968, 1977, 1985, 1990, 1998, 2001, and till 2011. Most such attempts were finally abortive because either the house was dissolved before the passage or any final decision on the bills. The issue was again in limelight with extensive public demonstrations led by anti-corruption activist Anna Hazare and the India Against Corruption movement. Finally, the Lokpal Bill passed with amendments to earlier versions in the Rajya Sabha on December 17, 2013, and in the Lok Sabha on December 18, 2013. President Pranab Mukherjee gave his assent on January 1, 2014, and the bill took effect on January 16, 2014.

Main Features of Lokpal Bill:

The Lokpal would be at the national level, and there would be a Lokayukta in each state. The Lokpal and the Lokayukta shall function, just like the Supreme Court and the Election Commission, quite independent of any undue influence by the government in the process of carrying out investigations, and no minister or bureaucrat will be able to influence their decisions. Corruption cases will not drag on for decades. Most of the investigations are to be completed within a year, and the trials should be completed within the next one year so that the corrupt politician, officer, or judge gets punished in time. When caught, the corrupt officials have to compensate the government. Unprofessional conduct in government offices which affects common citizens will be dealt with. Apart from that, the public will have the right to approach Lokpal in cases of inordinate delays in securing a ration card, passport, or voter's card, etc. The Bill will be sent to Parliament for consideration within a week. The Lokpal will get complaints regarding corruption which includes diversion of ration supplies, low quality of road construction, misappropriation of funds of Panchayats, etc. Investigations through the Lokpal should conclude within one year, and trials must also be completed within a year. The fear of the Lokpal itself getting corrupted is minimized by ensuring its membership will be chosen in a fair and representative manner comprising judges, citizens, and constitutional functionaries. Action against a corrupt Lokpal official: A probe would be conducted against corrupt conduct by a Lokpal official, who can be removed within two months. The existing anti-corruption agencies like the Central Bureau of Investigation, departmental vigilance units, and anti-corruption branches would be merged with the Lokpal system. The Lokpal would have full authority to prosecute any person indulging in political or administrative malfeasance. The Lokpal shall be responsible for protecting whistle-blowers.

Anti-Corruption Movement of 2011:

Persistent failure of the Indian Parliament to pass the Lokpal Law created a mass discontent in the psyche of the common people, who suspected a lack of political will on enacting such an important anti-corruption measure. The culmination of this discontent was that, through the government, finally, the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act of 2013 was passed in 2011. Anna Hazare, a Gandhian leader, has to be given much credit for this important legislation, as a result of his hunger strike at Jantar Mantar in New Delhi, demanding the Jan Lokpal Act be instituted. The resultant protests and strikes across the nation showed the public requirement of the Lokpal Law. This resulted in deep-rooted agitation and pressure throughout the country, to which the government had to give in by introducing the institution of Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013 to root out corruption in government machinery.

Support for the bill:

Corruption Watch India had conducted an online poll on the draft Lokpal Bill. As many as 85% of those who took part said they opposed the government version of the Bill. Dissatisfaction in part was affected by the impressive performance of Sibal in his Rajya Sabha constituency of Chandni Chowk. Only less than three-fourths knew about the Lokpal according to a CNN-IBN and CNBC-TV18 poll. On an average, the participants knew about Ombudsman-34%, but 24% were unfamiliar with what it means. Jan Lokpal Bill on Justice: Prashant Bhushan asked for a national referendum to take the pulse of citizens' opinion on the Jan Lokpal Bill.

After Anna Hazare's movement spread like a wildfire across the breadth and length of the country, many political parties started favourable disposition towards Jan Lokpal Bill. Significantly, Congress MP Priya Dutt of Maharashtra backed the bill. Datta Meghe pressed for an apology to be offered by Manish Tiwari for his Hazare-respective comments. The movement witnessed much friction that a sizeable number of parliamentarians were forced to confine themselves to their homes due to protests outside their houses, which also included those of Shiela Dixit, Kapil Sibal, and Pranab Mukherjee. Even the BJP MP Varun Gandhi moved the bill as a private member's proposal. Anna Hazare's movement gained immense momentum, and through social media, his movement spread like wildfire. On Independence Day, that is on August 15, 2012, during Hazare's campaign, more than 500,000 mentions were recorded across major social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter. Within three days, the figure shot up to 10 million. His video on YouTube received more than 40,000 hits, and on Facebook, he had as many as 542 fan pages. In all, over 87% supported the Lokpal Bill. The poll showed that Anna Hazare's "Jan Lokpal Bill" agitation had overwhelming public support and public awareness, and this had been amplified further by Times of India itself through an online anti-corruption campaign that allowed people to have a say and tell their concerns.

Literature Review:

The aim of this literature review is critically to ascertain the extent at which Lokpal has played a role in embedding transparency and reducing corruption within India. Synthesizing existing studies and commentary on the impact, challenges, and efficacy of the Lokpal in creating a more transparent governance framework is key to this review. The review lightly scans through various studies, reports, and perspectives and attempts to provide an overall understanding of how the Lokpal would help realize the dream of a corruption-free India.

Content 1. Background and Rationale- The very concept of Lokpal as a borrowed concept from ombudsman was meant for ingrained corruption and incompetence in Indian bureaucracy. Literature identifies that the very rationale for the creation of Lokpal emerged out of the growing sentiment within the general public about corruption and a string of high-profile scandals. The landmarks in the historical backdrop include events such as the anti-corruption movement under Anna Hazare in 2011, a strong factor in bringing into law the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act of 2013. Works by Ghosh 2013 and Sharma 2014 have commented on how public outcry and political pressure made the formation of the Lokpal necessary.

2. Composition and Functionality- Research on the contours of the Lokpal shows that Lokpal was conceived as an independent agency which would investigate complaints filed against public functionaries, politicians, and bureaucrats. As a matter of fact, the very design of the Lokpal is such that it has to be highly independent in its functions without any direct political interference.

3. Consequence to Achieve Transparency and Accountability- The consequence brought in by Lokpal about the transparency and accountability levels has also had very mixed results from studies. Although bringing greater awareness about corruption besides providing a grievance redressal mechanism, turned out to be ineffective due to a host of handicaps such as inadequacy of resources, bureaucratic resistance, and delays in implementing its provisions. Studies hint at the fact that some amount of success was achieved on the part of the Lokpal to bring a sense of accountability, though strong hindrances remain to its functioning fully.

4. Challenges and Criticisms- Various challenges and criticisms which the Lokpal has to face find a mention in the literature. For example, Gupta (2020) mentions weak powers of the Lokpal, delays in investigation, and incomplete mechanisms for enforcement as being different issues. As critics put it, this defeats the very purpose of the institution, since political meddling and bureaucratic bottlenecks often dent the autonomy of the Lokpal. Further, Bhardwaj (2021) talks about how Lokpal has failed in investigating high-profile corruption cases effectively and how it requires more institutional support in building better operational capabilities.

5. Digitalization and Modernization Efforts- Recent efforts have been towards revisiting the role of digitization in bringing improved access to enhance the working mechanism of Lokpal. Digitization intervention may thus be seen in this scheme of things as part of probable policy reform that makes Lokpal more effectively transparent and efficient by infusing innovation such as the online filing of complaints and real-time tracking of cases.

6. Comparative Perspectives- On the other hand, such a premise can be garnered from related literature on comparative studies done with countries that have similar anti-corruption institutions. Such literature can be found in the works of Johnson, 2017 and Lee, 2018 as they compare the Indian Lokpal with ombudsman institutions found in Sweden, New Zealand, and South Korea. These comparisons reveal best practices in place and possible improvements that can be emplaced by the Lokpal through increased investigation powers, improved resource allocation, and strong legal frameworks supportive of its mandate.

Research Methodology

This section discusses the institutional performance of Lokpal in India, with regard to its effectiveness in enhancing transparency and reduction of corruption. Information generated through surveying and interviewing, together with secondary data analysis, will be used to understand the perception of the general public about this institution and its effectiveness in reducing corruption. The important thing is to understand how Lokpal is perceived by the people and to gauge its role in the reduction of corruption and anything that might need an improvement.

Data Collection Overview

Survey Data A structured survey was conducted on 1000 respondents across demographics in India. The aspects that were measured in the survey conducted are as follows:

Awareness about the institution of Lokpal
Levels of satisfaction with performance of the institution
Perceived impact of the institution on levels of corruption
Suggestions for change

Interview Data - Fifteen in-depth interviews with stakeholders were conducted, including members of the Lokpal, government officials, and anticorruption experts. The information sought in these interviews included:

Operational challenges being confronted by the Lokpal
Strengths and weaknesses as perceived by the Lokpal
Recommendations to further the role of the institution

Secondary Data Secondary data was procured from:

Government reports on Lokpal activities
Corruption Perception Index - Transparency International
Case studies on major Lokpal Interventions

Results of Survey Findings

Lokpal Awareness

Heard about Lokpal: 72%
Aware of its Functions: 45%
Understand the Concept of Ombudsman: 32% of the respondents who have heard about Lokpal

Analysis: While a majority of the respondents reported having heard about Lokpal, only 45% reported knowledge of its functions. This relatively low level of detailed understanding would suggest that more public education on the role and powers of the institution may be needed.

Satisfaction with Performance

Very Satisfied: 20%
Somewhat Satisfied: 35%
Neutral: 25%
Somewhat Dissatisfied: 15%
Very Dissatisfied: 5%

Analysis: Even though 55% of the respondents are at least somewhat satisfied with the performance of the Lokpal, the dissatisfaction percentage accounts for 20%. This questioning of effectiveness in certain areas thus elicits a mixed perception in the public.

Perceived Impact on Corruption

Significant Impact: 30%
Moderate Impact: 40%
Minor Impact: 20%
No Impact: 10%

Analysis: Most of the respondents feel that Lokpal has an effect on corruption, more or less. In contrast, responses said that the impact is less than minimum or nil by 30%. That shows that there are positive changes recognized; yet, there is scepticism regarding its effectiveness generally.

Suggestions for Improvement

More Transparent Operations: 40%
Faster Resolution of Cases: 35%
Greater Public Awareness Campaigns: 15%
More Powers for Lokpal: 10%

Analysis: The most useful suggestions talk to the second aspect of making the process more transparent and expediting the disposal. More publicity and additional powers are also seen as aiding in the functionality of the Lokpal.

In-Depth Interview: Respondent Perception

Functional Issues

Bureaucratic Delays/Lack of Cooperation by Bureaucracy - 60% of the interviewed would mention this as a factor.
Insufficient Resources: 40% reported that due to the insufficient resources and staffing, they are deterred from functioning effectively.
Political Influence: 30% reported that the political influence at times can affect the independence of Lokpal investigations.

Analysis: These indicate that the major problems lie in the inefficiency of the bureaucracy and in lacking proper resources. Overcoming these may help in increasing the operational efficiency and independence of the Lokpal.

Efficiency and Shortcomings-

Positive Outcomes: 50% of the respondents gave examples of positive cases where intervention by Lokpal brought about serious reforms.

Gaps: The biggest shortcoming of the Lokpal, as mentioned by 50% of the respondents, relates to time-consuming procedures and a lack of jurisdiction. From the analysis here, it would appear that though there have been some remarkable successes with regard to the Lokpal, whatever people hear about the Lokpal pertains to procedural delays and limitations of its jurisdiction.

Way Forward

While celebrating the Amrit Mahotsav-78 years of Independence, India is still in the process of getting shaped as a fully developed nation. All pervasiveness of corruption in the country may be imagined by slow pace of development towards economic growth. Though the institution of Lokpal instilled hopes for a corruption-free future, the fight against corruption is very important and immediate. Loopholes and weaknesses in the current Lokpal Act must be rectified to fight corruption effectively. Corruption has visibly increased in education and healthcare departments, for which a proper strategy needs to be implemented to root out these problems at the grass-root level. The Lokpal must expedite with transparency in resolving the citizen grievances.

Conclusion

In the present times, corruption acts as a strong barrier to good governance and an optimum societal welfare. A healthy and just society can be facilitated only by addressing and eliminating corruption at large. Some amount of corruption may still be prevalent within the legal boundary, but we can no longer afford to tolerate it. It is time that some earnest public institutions, specifically the Lokpal, take strong measures to curb corruption. Stringent measures like the Jan Lokpal Bill will have to be implemented to check corruption. In addition, corruption cannot be checked without removing its very roots-poverty and lack of education. A war against corruption without eradicating these basic evils will at the most be partially effective. It has to be a multi-pronged attack: stringent anti-corruption measures coupled with socio-economic improvement; only then can the dream of an honest and transparent society be realized. This can only be adequately addressed through a holistic approach, which will be important in ensuring long-term integrity and confidence in public institutions.

References

1) Mohit Bhattacharya, New Horizons of Public Administration, Jawahar publishers and distributors, New Delhi, 2011, pp.-406.

2) www. unescap.org/pdd, what is Good Governance? Viewed on 12/03/2015.

3) The Hindustan Times, May 5, 1996, cited in 'Social Problems in India'- Ram Ahuja, Rawat Publications, Jaipur, 2013, pp.-451. |

4) T.S.R. Subramanian, India at turning point: The road to good governance, Rupa Publication India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, 2014. |

Author:

Ayush Shukla

Savitribai Phule Pune University