Anna Hazare: anti-corruption crusader

It is not for the first time that social activist Anna Hazare has taken on the government to press for his demand by launching indefinite fast. 

In Maharashtra, Hazare is a house-hold name synonmous with fight against corruption. Before leaving for Delhi, Hazare declared at a rally here that he would not return to the state unless his demand for an effective Lok Pal bill is met by the Centre.
 Hazare launched his first hunger strike way back in 1989 to protest against erratic power supply and insufficient voltage in rural areas, that were resulting in burning of water pumps and damage to crops.
 Hazare conducts all his campaigns from his village Ralegan Siddhi in Ahmednagar district, where he had also implemented various water conservation projects.
In 1993-94, when Sharad Pawar was the chief minister, Hazare again went on a fast to fight against corruption in government departments. One reason for corruption was rampant transfers of officials, and his fast compelled the state government to adopt a transfer policy, by which an official is transferred only after he complets three years in that posting.
 During the Shiv Sena-BJP government, Hazare launched a similar fast to force it to appoint an inquiry commission to probe corruption charges against two ministers. The government finally relented, although it did not accept names of panelists which Hazare had asked for. The commission eventually exonerated the ministers of corruption charges.
 During the Congress-NCP rules, three cabinet ministers lost their berths after Hazare levelled allegations of corruption against them. He also went on fast against them in Mumbai, which forced the government's hands.
 In one case, however, the then Social Welfare Minister Baban Gholap filed a defamation case against Hazare, who could not prove his allegations and was given three months jail term as sentence by a court.
Jail for Hazare 
Hazare went to jail, but under huge public pressure, the state government had to release him without putting any conditions. Hazare was also instrumental in forcing the state government to enact Right to Information Act (RTI) in 1998 itself.
 One of his protest action and fast compelled the state government to enact a law to ban liquor shops in villages if 50 per cent of women of that village made such a demand.
 Hazare's critics say that he makes impossible demands and tries to encroach upon legitimate powers of the government or the legislature.
Whenever the state government appointed inquiry panels in past, he wanted to nominate members of such panels. If those panels concurrred with his views, then that was fine and he was vindicated.
But if those panels come to contrary conclusion, the Hazare would question the very integrity of members of such panels. Perhaps, the same is happening in case of Lok Pal bill.

Anna Hazare - Anti-Corruption Movement

Power Situation during 1985-86 became extremely critical. The farmers were unable to lift water from the wells inspite of its availability due to insufficient voltage to run pumps. The motors were getting burnt due to fluctuations and the crops were getting affected. There was scant response from the govt. inspite of continuous follow-up. On 28th Nov. 1989 Mr. Hazare was forced to undertake fast for seeking redressal. After 8 days of his fast , his health deteriorated and was admitted in the civil hospital at Ahmednagar. As there was, no response inspite of action from his side, the farmers from three tehsils became furious and they started road block agitation. Fearing that if the agitation takes a wrong turn, something untoward may take place. He appealed to the agitators from the hospital bed that they should not resort to unfair means, damage the national property and inflict any harm to the passengers. The agitation should be peaceful. The police authorities did not expect huge participation and there was meager police force available.

However, they were proved wrong and more than 10000 men and 1200 women participated in the agitation. The agitators had offered police to take them to jail. However, since enough transport was not available with the police, the police tried to remove the road block. Due to improper treatment meted out to the agitators, there was scuffle between police and the agitators and the police resorted to lathi-charged on agitators. This action on the part of police irritated them and they pelted stones on the police force. Since the situation was going out of control, additional force was called and police opened fire on the agitators in which 4 farmers died on the spot and 7 farmers sustained severe injuries. He felt sad on hearing this news in the hospital. The agitation was meant for awakening the government and there is no harm in carrying out such agitations in democracy. He had decided to end his life during the fast itself, but Senior Officials of the government and even Ministers persuaded him to give up his fast as they feared that if agitation continues, lot many farmers may lose their life and in order to save the life of innocent farmers, he withdrew his fast.

Model Village as contemplated by Gandhiji was brought in reality by Shri Annaji at Ralegan Siddhi by his dedication. “Late Shri Achyutrao Patwardhan, the great freedom fighter, suggested to the government of Maharashtra that to commemorate the golden jubilee of Bharat Chhodo Andolan, it would be most befitting to create model villages like Ralegan Siddhi in every tehsil of the state. The government accepted this suggestion and declared to implement “Adarsh Gaon Yojana”. The Government entrusted this responsibility to him and Adarsha Gaon Yojana was started under his leadership . He travelled whole of Maharashtra and selected 300 villages to implement this scheme. While working in this scheme
he realised that development is getting hampered due to planned corruption in Govermnent machinery and he decided to fight against this corruption. He gave evidence against two ministers who had amassed wealth disproportionate to their income. However since the Govt was passive about this he started agitation and undertook fast for l0 days. Chief Minister intervened and he deleted these two ministers from ministry and appointed an Inquiry Commission. The Commission held both the ministers guilty but to save them the Govt appointed another commission who discharged them from the allegations. Though the ministers were discharged from the allegations, they had to loose their ministership which is the success of Mr.Hazare's agitation.
Mr.Hazare's gave evidence of corruption by Social Welfare Minister to the then Chief Minister. On 3lst July l999 the Chief Minister informed him that inquiry is being instituted about the charges leveled by him. He had given an interview to a local daily regarding this inquiry and based on this interview the concerned minister had filed a case in the court against Mr.Hazare for defamation. He was held guilty by the Court and the court had asked him to give an undertaking that he will not make such allegations in future.He refused to give such undertaking and preferred to go jail for 3 months as ordered by the court. He told the court that He was willing to give his life for truth. His punishment created commotion in public and scores of people started visiting Yerawada Jail.

He wanted to compelte his jail term but to give respect to the public feelings he accepted his release.In l992 Gandhji had told the court that if court feels that his actions for the freedom of the country are considered as anti government activities he was willing to undergo any punishment .Similarly he did not give bond to the court and accpeted punishment. He did not prefer any appeal against the court order immediately but due to public pressure he later made an appeal which was upheld by the Higher Court and rejected the suit of minister.Mr. Hazare asked the Govt. to conduct the inquiry against the minister which is still on.

In the regim of coaliation Government of Congress and National Congress Party, He had forwarded evidence of corruption about 4 ministers and had asked the Government to conduct inquiry. One of the ministers had made allegations about corruption in the institutions in which he was associated. Since there was no action from the Govt. he undertook fast for 9 dys in August 2003 at Azad Maidan. The minister concenred also started agitation at Azaj Maidan in Mumbai. At last the Government relented and Retired Suprement Court Judge Shri P.B. Sawant was appointed to conduct the inquiry. The commission conducted the inquiry and sent its report to Govt. on 22nd Februrary .
In the report the commission had observed ministers guilty and had held Mr.Hazare also guilty forirregularities but not a single charge of corruption was proved against him.Mr. Hazare has offered the Government that it should take action against him as well as the ministers based on the findings of the enquiry comissions.Though Govt has not taken any action on the Commission's report three ministers had to go and this is a big achievement of his agitation against corruption.

He felt that corruption will not stop merely by taking action against a few officers and ministers and it is necessary that a change should be brought about in the system, He believes that unless decentralisation of power takes place the system will not change.In order to bring change in the system he felt that information should be made available to people regarding Govt.'s actions which was not being provided to people on the ground of secracy. Here again he decided to follow Gandhiji's path and started Maun Vrat and later fast unto death. This brought pressure on the Govt. and both the Central as well as State Governments have enacted Right to Information Act. His whole life and work is based on Gandhian philosophy.
Prohibition Alcohol has ruined many families in rural India. The existing laws did not have teeth to ban the sale of alcohol in villages. So he decided to press the government to make a law for prohibition if 50% women demanded for it. Ultimately, women are the most affected lot if their husbands are drunkards.
By the new Act, the women of any village can collectively demand for ban on sale of alcoholic drinks in the village. If a minimum of 50% of women complain to the District Collector about their sufferings and request for total prohibition in the village, the Collector can hold ballot paper election in the village. There will be two signs on the paper – one being a bottle in standing position and another being in a horizontal position. The women will cast their votes. In the evening, the votes will be counted. If more votes are in favour of ‘horizontal bottle’, then the Collector will ban the sale of alcoholic drinks in the village and cancel the license of the seller.
In many villages, the licenses have been cancelled and total prohibition came into reality after this Act. In some villages, the alcohol sellers have manipulated the election with money power.
Anyhow, this Act has supported and strengthened the women. Women have become empowered due to this act and became fearless to come in open against the alcoholism. This Act has helped in organizing the women and fight against evils for a common good. Women’s empowerment is the need of the day.

Jan Lokpal Bill: Why it's important ?

The Jan Lokpal Bill (Citizen's ombudsman Bill) is a draft anti-corruption bill drawn up by prominent civil society activists seeking the appointment of a Jan Lokpal, an independent body  that would investigate corruption cases, complete the investigation within a year and envisages trial in the case getting over in the next one year.

Drafted by Justice Santosh Hegde (former Supreme Court Judge and present Lokayukta of Karnataka), Prashant Bhushan (Supreme Court Lawyer) and Arvind Kejriwal (RTI activist), the draft Bill envisages a system where a corrupt person found guilty would go to jail within two years of the complaint being made and his ill-gotten wealth being confiscated. It also seeks power to the Jan Lokpal to prosecute politicians and bureaucrats without government permission.

Retired IPS officer Kiran Bedi and other known people like Swami Agnivesh, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, Anna Hazare and Mallika Sarabhai are also part of the movement, called India Against Corruption. Its website describes the movement as "an expression of collective anger of people of India against corruption. We have all come together to force/request/persuade/pressurize the Government to enact the Jan Lokpal Bill. We feel that if this Bill were enacted it would create an effective deterrence against corruption."

Anna Hazare, anti-corruption crusader, began a fast-unto-death today, demanding that this bill, drafted by the civil society, be adopted. The website of the India Against Corruption movement calls the Lokpal Bill of the government an "eyewash" and has on it a critique of that government Bill. It also lists the difference between the Bills drafted by the government and civil society.

A look at the salient features of Jan Lokpal Bill:
1. An institution called LOKPAL at the centre and LOKAYUKTA in each state will be set up

2. Like Supreme Court and Election Commission, they will be completely independent of the governments. No minister or bureaucrat will be able to influence their investigations.

3. Cases against corrupt people will not linger on for years anymore: Investigations in any case will have to be completed in one year. Trial should be completed in next one year so that the corrupt politician, officer or judge is sent to jail within two years.

4. The loss that a corrupt person caused to the government will be recovered at the time of conviction.

5. How will it help a common citizen: If any work of any citizen is not done in prescribed time in any government office, Lokpal will impose financial penalty on guilty officers, which will be given as compensation to the complainant.

6. So, you could approach Lokpal if your ration card or passport or voter card is not being made or if police is not registering your case or any other work is not being done in prescribed time. Lokpal will have to get it done in a month's time. You could also report any case of corruption to Lokpal like ration being siphoned off, poor quality roads been constructed or panchayat funds being siphoned off. Lokpal will have to complete its investigations in a year, trial will be over in next one year and the guilty will go to jail within two years.

7. But won't the government appoint corrupt and weak people as Lokpal members? That won't be possible because its members will be selected by judges, citizens and constitutional authorities and not by politicians, through a completely transparent and participatory process.

8. What if some officer in Lokpal becomes corrupt? The entire functioning of Lokpal/ Lokayukta will be completely transparent. Any complaint against any officer of Lokpal shall be investigated and the officer dismissed within two months.

9. What will happen to existing anti-corruption agencies? CVC, departmental vigilance and anti-corruption branch of CBI will be merged into Lokpal. Lokpal will have complete powers and machinery to independently investigate and prosecute any officer, judge or politician.

10. It will be the duty of the Lokpal to provide protection to those who are being victimized for raising their voice against corruption.

LokPal Bill: Analysis

“Corruption will be out one day, however much one may try to conceal it: and the public
can as its right and duty, in every case of justifiable suspicion, call its servants to strict
account, dismiss them, sue them in a law court, or appoint an arbitrator or inspector to
scrutinize their conduct, as it likes.”        -Mahatma Gandhi (1928)

INTRODUCTION:

India is a country where honesty and integrity in public and private life have been glorified and
upheld in great epics such as the Vedas, Upanishads and in the books and practices of every
religion practiced here.

Yet, India today is one of the most corrupt countries in the world.

Bringing public servants under a scanner which makes them strictly accountable is the start of a
movement against corruption in India. And one significant step in attacking the spectre of
corruption in India will be the implementation of the lokpal bill.

The Indian Lokpal is synonymous to the institution of Ombudsman existing in the Scandinavian
countries. The office of the ombudsman originated in Sweden in 1809 A.D., and adopted
eventually by many nations 'as a bulwark of democratic government against the tyranny of
officialdom'. Ombudsman is a Swedish word that stands for "an officer appointed by the
legislature to handle complaints against administrative and judicial action. Traditionally the
ombudsman is appointed based on unanimity among all political parties supporting the proposal.
The incumbent, though appointed by the legislature, is an independent functionary - independent
of all the three organs of the state, but reports to the legislature. The Ombudsman can act both on

the basis of complaints made by citizens, or suo moto. She/he can look into allegations of

corruption as well as mal-administration.

The functionary is called by different names in different countries; its power and functions also
vary. In the Scandinavian countries2 (Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Norway) he is called the
'Ombudsman'. He can take cognizance of the citizens' grievance by either directly receiving
complaints from the public or suo moto on the basis of information provided by the interested
persons, or from newspapers, etc. However, in the U.K. the functionary - known as the
Parliamentary Commissioner - can receive complains only through members of parliament.

The ombudsmen can investigate a complaint by themselves or through any public or private
agency. After investigation, in Sweden and Finland, the Ombudsman has the power to prosecute
erring public servants; whereas in Denmark, he can only order prosecution. However, the power
of prosecution is very rarely used. The strength of the ombudsman lies in the publicity attached
to the office, and the negative view that attaches itself to all that the office scrutinises. In Sweden
and Finland, ombudsmen can also supervise the courts. In other countries, their authority is only
over the non-judicial public servants. In almost all the cases they deal with complaints relating to
both corruption and mal-administration.
 

HISTORY:

The misdeeds committed during the Emergency remind us of the necessity of including the PM

within the purview of the Lokpal.

The basic idea of the LokPal is borrowed from the office of ombudsman, which has played an

effective role in checking corruption and wrong-doing in Scandinavian and other nations.3

In early 1960s, mounting corruption in public administration set the winds blowing in favour of

an Ombudsman in India too.

The Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC) set up in 1966 recommended the constitution
of a two-tier machinery - of a Lokpal at the Centre, and Lokayukt(a)s in the states.4 The ARC
while recommending the constitution of Lokpal was convinced that such an institution was
justified not only for removing the sense of injustice from the minds of adversely affected
citizens but also necessary to instill public confidence in the efficiency of administrative
machinery. Following this, the Lokpal Bill was for the first time presented during the fourth Lok
Sabha in 1968, and was passed there in 1969.

However, while it was pending in the Rajya Sabha, the Lok Sabha was dissolved, resulting the first death of the bill. The bill was revived in 1971, 1977, 1985, 1989, 1996, 1998, 2001, 2005 and most recently in 2008.

Each time, after the bill was introduced to the house, it was referred to some committee for
improvements - a joint committee of parliament, or a departmental standing committee of the
Home Ministry - and before the government could take a final stand on the issue the house was
dissolved.

There are as many as 17 states where the institution of Lokayukta has been constituted,
beginning with Orissa in 1971. However the power, function and jurisdiction of Lokayuktas are
not uniform in the country

In some States it has been applicable to all the elected representatives including the CM. in some other states legislators have been deliberately kept out of his purview. Often, lacunae have been left in legislation creating the office, apparently to keep the elected representatives outside meaningful jurisdiction of the Lokayukta, even when the laws appear to include them. Lokayuktas have not been provided with their independent investigate machinery making them dependent on government agencies, which leaves enough scope for the politicians and the bureaucrats to tinker with the processes of investigation.

Objectives of the Bill:

The lokpal was visualized as watchdog institution on ministerial probity. Broadly the provision of different bills empowered the lokpal to investigate corruption cases against political persons at the Central level. Some important features of the Lokpal Bill have varied over the years; in its most recent avatar, the bill contains the following.

• The main objective is to provide speedy, cheaper from of justice to people.

• Members:

Lokpal is to be a three member body with a chairperson who is or has been a chief
justice or judge of the Supreme Court; and its two other members who are or have been
judges or chief justices of high courts around the country.

• Appointment:

The chairperson and members shall be appointed by the President by warrant under his
hand and seal on the recommendation of a committee consisting of the following persons.
It's not clear whether the committee has to make a unanimous decision or a majority
decision will do. (a) The Vice-President (Chairman) (b) The PM (c) The Speaker of LS
(d) Home Minister (e) Leader of the House, other than the house in which PM is a
member. (f) Leaders of Opposition of both the houses.

• Independence of the Office:

In order to ensure the independence of functioning of the august office, the following provisions have been incorporated.

- Appointment is to be made on the recommendation of a committee.

- The Lokpal is ineligible to hold any office of profit under Government of India or

of any state, or similar such posts after retirement.

- Fixed tenure of three years and can be removed only on the ground of proven

misbehaviour or incapacity after an inquiry made by CJI and two senior most

judges of SC.

- Lokpal will have its own administrative machinery for conducting investigations.

- Salary of Lokpal is to be charged on the Consolidated Fund of India.

• Jurisdiction of Lokpal:

- The central level political functionaries like the Council of Ministers including the

Prime Minister, the Members of Parliament etc.

- He cannot inquire into any allegation against the PM in relation to latter's functions of national security and public order.

- Complaints of offence committed within 10 years from the date of complaint can be taken up for investigation, not beyond this period.

• Any person other than a public servant can make a complaint. The Lokpal is supposed to complete the inquiry within a period of six months. The Lokpal has the power of a civil court to summon any person or authority. After investigation, the ombudsman can only recommend actions to be taken by the competent authority. A number of safeguards have been taken to discourage false complains or complain of malafide intent.

• He can order search and seizure operations.

• He shall present annually to the President the reports of investigation and the latter with

the action take report has to put it before the both houses of parliament.

It may be noted that the Lokpal is supposed to investigate cases of corruption only, and not
address himself to redressing grievances in respect of injustices and hardship caused by
maladministration.

THE CURRENT SITUATION :

Very recently a highly discouraging phenomenon has come to light, that is, the prevalence of

corruption in the subordinate courts and even in High Courts. Probably due to this, the present

government has planned to bring the Judiciary within the purview of Lok pal; this is one reason
why the Bill has been referred to the Group of Ministers. However given the history of Lok pal
bill, there is a constant risk that the bill will simply lapse because no conclusion is reached
within the life of this LokSabha!

The political fraternity is understandably opposed to a Lok pal, since the purported target of the Lokpal is mainly the politicians themselves. The publicly stated reason for the current delay is that some important issues are as yet unresolved.6

CONCLUSION:

In the regular dispensation of government there are implicit and explicit ways that citizens can
voice their grievances and demand change. But these are often difficult. Within administrative
departments, for example, any decision of one official can be appealed to a higher official, all the
way up to the head of a department. However, this mechanism has inherent flaws. Higher officers enjoy departmental fraternity with those against whom complaints are made, and both
sail the same boat. Therefore their impartiality in judging appeals is always doubted. On the
legislative side, an individual can approach the member representing his constituency for his
demands. But given the absence of easy access of an ordinary citizen to his representative, this
has more remained a myth more than reality. Among the organs of state, the Judiciary has
proved itself to have highest credibility in protecting individual rights. However, due to
procedural complexities involved in court cases - right from filing a case to the delivery of final
verdict - there are inevitable delays of justice, which often are also denial of justice.

The existing devices for checks on elected and administrative officials have not been effective,
as the growing instances of corruption cases suggest. The Central Vigilance Commission (CVC)
is designed to inquire into allegations of corruption by administrative officials only. The CBI, the
premier investigating agency of the country, functions under the supervision of the Ministry of
Personnel, Public grievances and Pensions (under the Prime Minister) and is therefore not
immune from political pressures during investigation. Indeed, the lack of independence and
professionalism of CBI has been castigated by the Supreme Court often in recent times. All these
have necessitated the creation of Lokpal with its own investigating team in earliest possible
occasion.

Therefore, there is a need for a mechanism that would adopt very simple, independent, speedy and cheaper means of delivering justice by redressing the grievances of the people. Examples from various countries suggest that the institution of ombudsman has very successfully fought against corruption and unscrupulous administrative decisions by public servants, and acted as a real guardian of democracy and civil rights.