The Kerala government recently proposed an ordinance to alter the Kerala Lokayukta Act.
Proposed Modification:
The cabinet has proposed that the Governor issue the ordinance, which would allow the government the authority to "either accept or reject the Lokayukta's verdict, after affording an opportunity to be heard."
A public servant is currently compelled to quit office if advised by the Lokayukta under Section 14 of the Act.
Criticism: The quasi-judicial institution will be reduced to a toothless advisory council whose decisions will no longer be binding on the government as a result of this law.
Working of Lokayukta in States:
The state-level versions of the Lokpal are known as Lokayuktas.
Establishment of Lokayukta: "Every state shall establish a body to be known as the Lokayukta for the State, if not so established, constituted or appointed, by a law made by the State Legislature, to deal with complaints relating to corruption against certain public functionaries, within a period of one year from the date of commencement of this Act," says Section 63 of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013.
The law then established a framework.
Lokayukta act-2013:
Purpose: Lokpal is the national anti-corruption ombudsman, established under the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act 2013 to inquire and investigate into allegations of corruption against public functionaries.
Membership: Lokpal consists of a chairperson and a maximum of eight members, 50% of whom are judicial members, who are or have been Judges of the Supreme Court or Chief Justices of a High Court.
Qualification of members: The other half being non-judicial members are people of impeccable integrity and outstanding ability having special knowledge and expertise of not less than twenty-five years in matters relating to anti-corruption policy, public administration, vigilance, finance including insurance and banking, law and management.
Types of membership: 50% of the members of Lokpal shall be SC/ST/OBCs, minorities and women.
Selection of chairperson: Selection of chairperson and members of Lokpal would be through a selection committee consisting of PM, Speaker of Lok Sabha, leader of opposition in Lok Sabha, Chief Justice of India or a sitting Supreme Court judge nominated by CJI.
Coverage: The Lokpal has jurisdiction to inquire into allegations of corruption against anyone who is or has been Prime Minister, or a Minister in the Union government, or a Member of Parliament, as well as officials of the Union government under Groups A, B, C, and D.
Regulations on Civil Society: All entities (NGOs) receiving donations from foreign source in the context of the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) in excess of Rs 10 lakh per year are under the jurisdiction of Lokpal.
Need of the Lokpal:
Lack of Independence: The majority of our agencies, including as the CBI, state vigilance departments, internal vigilance wings of various departments, and the state police's Anti-Corruption Branch, are not self-contained.
Powerless: Some bodies, such as the CVC or the Lokayuktas, are self-governing but lack any authority. They advise governments on two options: imposing departmental sanctions on any officer or prosecuting him in court.
Internal Transparency and Accountability: These anti-corruption bodies also have a problem with internal transparency and accountability. There is now no independent and effective process in place to monitor if the staff of these anti-corruption institutions becomes corrupt.
Powers of Lokpal:
It has the authority to supervise CBI and to give it orders.
If a matter has been reported to the CBI, the investigating officer in that case cannot be changed without Lokpal's permission.
Authorizes CBI to conduct search and seizure operations in connection with such cases.
The Lokpal's Inquiry Wing has been given the authority of a civil court.
In exceptional cases, Lokpal has the authority to seize assets, revenues, receipts, and benefits derived or obtained by corruption.
Lokpal has the authority to propose the transfer or suspension of public employees accused of corruption.
Lokpal has the authority to issue orders to prohibit the destruction of records during the preliminary investigation.
Limitations in the Power of Lokpal:
Political Influence: Members of Lokpal's appointing committee are members of political parties, putting Lokpal under political influence.
Ambiguous terms: There are no criteria for determining who is an "eminent jurist" or "a person of integrity," which skews the system of Lokpal appointment.
Whistle-blowers lack sufficient immunity: The Lokpal and Lokayukta Act 2013 failed to provide whistle-blowers with any type of tangible immunity. In circumstances where the accused is ruled innocent, the provision relating to the commencement of an investigation against the complainant discourages individuals from filing complaints.
Exclusion of Judiciary: The judiciary is excluded from the Lokpal's jurisdiction, which is one of the most significant flaws.
No constitutional support: The Lokpal has no constitutional support.
No appropriate appeals provisions: There are no adequate appeals provisions against Lokpal's acts.
Time limit for submitting a complaint: The Lokpal and Lokayukta Act further stipulates that no complaint against corruption can be filed after a time of seven years has passed since the alleged infraction occurred.
Way Forward
The establishment of the Lokpal has been a watershed moment in Indian politics.
The Lokpal and Lokayukta Act of 2013 has the potential to be a useful tool in the fight against the never-ending threat of corruption.
To improve its functional autonomy and effectiveness, the Lokpal should be granted constitutional standing.
