Should all existing anti-corruption agencies be merged into Lokpal / Lokayukta ?

The problem:

   There are multiplicity of anti-corruption agencies at the level of central government and state government. However, governments have left critical loopholes in the functioning of each of these agencies to make them ineffective. That is the reason why no honest investigation and prosecution takes place in any corruption case and the corrupt go scot free.

The following four deficiencies stand out in our anti-corruption system. For details on deficiencies in our anti-corruption systems, please read Annexure 1.

1. Most of our agencies like CBI, state vigilance departments, internal vigilance wings of various departments, Anti-corruption Branch of state police etc are not independent. In many cases, they have to report to the same people who are either themselves accused or are likely to be influenced by the accused. For instance,

• The Chief Minister of Punjab is the Minister in charge of Vigilance Department of Punjab. Interestingly, the same vigilance department is also investigating charges of corruption against himself and his family and is prosecuting them. Can we expect the vigilance department to do any honest investigations or prosecution?
• Please read detailed report in Annexure 2 to see how despite huge unaccounted cash being recovered from the house of a top NHAI officer, Kamal Nath denies permission to register a case of corruption against him. Coal Ministry just sat on CBI’s repeated requests to prosecute the officer who was to become the CMD. Railways just sat on CBI’s request to prosecute one of its top employees involved in railway recruitment scam.

2. Some bodies like CVC or Lokayuktas are independent, but they do not have any powers. They have been made advisory bodies. They give two kinds of advise to the governments – to either impose departmental penalties on any officer or to prosecute him in court. Experience shows that whenever any minister or a senior officer is involved, their advice is rarely followed.

3. Governments have deliberately created plethora of anti-corruption agencies and given them fractured mandates. This is one of the main reasons to render them ineffective. For instance,

• At central government level, in the same case of corruption, CVC is supposed to look into the vigilance angle of senior bureaucrats and departmental vigilance is supposed to look into the role of junior bureaucrats. As if junior and senior bureaucrats indulge in corruption separately.
• Again in the same case, whereas these two agencies enquire into the matter from vigilance angle, CBI investigates into the same matter from criminal angle i.e corruption angle. Now, the vigilance and corruption angles are almost the same. The two agencies broadly do the same enquiries and investigations.
• According to the Lokpal model proposed by Government of India, CVC will enquire into the role of bureaucrats and Lokpal will look into the role of politicians, as if politicians and bureaucrats indulge in corruption separately.

Firstly, this kind of fractured mandate creates confusion. Secondly, enquiries and investigations into any case go on and on for years. For instance, in street lighting case of Common Wealth case, first an enquiry was done by CVC, then CBI investigated into the same case and then it was again enquired into by Shunglu committee. Thirdly, if two agencies arrive at conflicting conclusions on the same case, it only weakens the case against corrupt people. The final beneficiaries of this confusing system are the corrupt people who never get punished.

4. In addition, there is the problem of internal transparency and accountability of these anti-corruption agencies. Presently, there isn’t any separate and effective mechanism to check if the staff of these anti-corruption agencies turns corrupt.

      That is why, despite so many agencies, corrupt people rarely go to jail. Corruption has become a high profit zero risk business. There is absolutely no deterrence against corruption.

The Proposal:

     Jan Lokpal Bill proposes that at the level of Central Government, an institution called Jan Lokpal should be set up. Likewise, in each state, Jan Lokayukta should be set up. Jan Lokpal will accept corruption complaints against Central government departments and Jan Lokayukta will accept complaints against departments of respective state government.

Independence of Jan Lokpal and Jan Lokayukta:

Jan Lokpal and Jan Lokayukta would be completely independent of the governments. Their independence would be ensured through the following measures:

• Administrative independence: They will be independent agencies like Central Election Commission, Comptroller and Auditor general of India and Supreme Court. Therefore, no politician or a bureaucrat will be able to interfere with its functioning.
• Financial independence: Their expenses will be charged to the Consolidated Fund of India/State. They will be provided whatever expenses they require.
• Manpower: They will have powers to assess their manpower requirements and employ them either from existing government servants (who can come on deputation basis) or directly from the market.

Single anti-corruption agency:

Anti-corruption branch of CBI, CVC and departmental vigilance wings will be merged into Lokpal. Anti-Corruption Branch of Police, state vigilance departments would be merged into Jan Lokayuktas. In 1986, when Karnataka Lokayukta was created, all existing anti-corruption and vigilance agencies in the state were merged into Lokayukta.

Presently, we have institutions of Lokayuktas in 18 states. They are merely advisory bodies. They neither have resources nor powers. They will be replaced with Jan Lokayuktas through Jan Lokpal Bills.

No more advisory bodies:

Jan Lokpal and Jan Lokayukta will not be advisory bodies. They will have powers to start investigation or prosecution in any case. For that, they will not need permission from any government agency.

Jan Lokpal and Jan Lokayukta will also have powers to impose departmental penalties on bureaucrats.

Critique of our proposal	Our response
Rather than merging them into Lokpal, why don’t you improve the functioning of these agencies and let them function separately?	Firstly, how do you improve their functioning in their present positions? Departmental vigilance and CBI lack independence. Should we make them independent? CVC is an advisory body and does not have teeth. Should we make the recommendations of CVC binding? If that be so, this is exactly what we are effectively doing by merging them into Lokpal– making them independent and making their advice binding. Next question is “why merge?” Because the present system of fractured mandate – one agency enquiring into the vigilance role of junior bureaucrat, another agency enquiring into the vigilance role of senior bureaucrat and another agency investigating their criminal roles – all in the same case, is a sure recipe for killing a case. Any case of corruption should be handled holistically by the same agency.
Some people say that CBI should not be merged into Lokpal. “After all, CBI is not that bad.” Some people say that CVC should not be merged into Lokpal. “If you want to investigate any case holistically, why don’t you create separate cadre for Lokpal but don’t merge existing agencies into Lokpal.”	Do we agree that the present agencies are ineffective? Rather than punish corrupt, they end up protecting them? Then why should we waste so much money and manpower on these agencies and create more posts for Lokpal? Why can’t we redeploy them and use them in Lokpal?

For additional information on this issue please click here to download the Annexure.