Updates from the meeting of 23rd May of the joint committee

Updates from the 23rd may meeting of the joint committee.

ISSUE	Government’s response/decision
Powers of contempt to get its orders implemented and power to summon	Government agreed
It shall have the powers to recommend, on an annual basis, the number of special courts required under section 4 of Prevention of Corruption Act, to ensure that the trial in any case is completed in less than a year. The recommendations shall be binding on the government.	Government agreed that Lokpal may recommend but recommendation should lack of infrastructure. We said that we could examine how to overcome these issues but we would not agree to making it advisory. not be binding. We asked them why it could not be made binding? We were told that it was due to three reasons: because Parliament may or may not agree to sanction expenditure, High Courts may not appoint judges and there could be
Notify list of moveable and immoveable assets of accused, if during or at the time of conclusion of investigations, Lokpal believes that prosecution is likely to be initiated. These assets cannot be transferred after such notification. Loss to exchequer quantified at the time of conviction, could be recovered from sale of these assets.	Government agreed. But at what point should notification be issued, this would be decided after studying Bihar Special Courts Act. Also, some principles may be laid down on how the loss would be assessed by the court.
Recommend stay of any activity, if during investigations, Lokpal is satisfied that the allegations against such activity are likely to be sustained. If Government does not accept it within 30 days, Lokpal may get a stay order from HC against that activity.	In principle, government agreed. However, this needs to be appropriately formulated.
Direct transfer of any official, if his continuance is likely to adversely affect investigations.	Government agreed to make this power advisory. However, we are in favor of making it binding.
Powers to issue appropriate directions to prevent destruction of records during investigations, or to prevent the public servant from secreting the assets allegedly acquired by him through corrupt means.	Agreed
If the allegations against any minister are substantiated after any enquiry or investigations, then for non-criminal misconduct, Lokpal would submit its report to the President with its recommendations.	Agreed
Lokpal shall have powers to delegate any of its powers and functions barring those which are specifically to be performed by the benches of Lokpal.	There was a long discussion on this issue. Government’s vision of Lokpal is an 11 member body, which will have quasi judicial powers and that body will pass all orders. That is very different from our vision. Such a model would create problems as that would overburden Lokpal with immense workload and make Lokpal unwieldy. Our vision of Lokpal – an institution headed by 11 member body. This body would have quasi judicial powers but primarily be a supervisory body. There will be many officers under that body, who would be designated authorities under this Act and would themselves also have quasi judicial powers under this Act. Government would examine it and revert.
Every complaint shall have to be compulsorily disposed by Lokpal. No case is closed, all records related thereto shall be made public. complaint could be disposed without giving an opportunity of being hear to the complainant. If any	Agreed
There shall be complete transparency during investigations also. However, such records, which could impede the process of investigations, would not be disclosed. But after the completion of any investigation or enquiry, all records related to a case, shall be made public.	Agreed
Lokpal shall publish, every month on its website, the status of cases, received, disposed, closed, reasons for closure and list of cases pending.	Agreed
Any complaint against a staff of Lokpal shall be enquired into within a month of its receipt and if found correct, the staff shall be summarily dismissed from the job. If any criminal case is made out, the same shall be pursued.	Agreed.
The minimum punishment shall be raised to one year of rigorous imprisonment and maximum should be raised to life imprisonment.	No agreement on life imprisonment
Punishment shall be higher if the status or rank of accused is higher.	No agreement
Lokpal shall be responsible for providing protection against professional or physical threat or victimization to whistleblowers, victims of corruption and witnesses whether within or outside the government.	Agreed in principle that Lokpal should be nodal agency. However, it would be examined at what stage is the pending whistleblower Bill of the government. It would be examined whether whistleblower protection should be provided in this Act or in the other Act. If it is provided in the other Act, that Act would also be discussed and finalized by this committee only.
If any asset is subsequently found to be owned by a public servant, which was not declared, it would be deemed to have been obtained through corrupt means unless he proves otherwise.	Agreed
If any asset is subsequently found to be in possession of any public servant, it shall be deemed to be owned by him/her unless he proves otherwise.	Agreed
After each elections, the Lokpal shall verify the assets declared by each candidate with his declared sources of income in his tax returns. Those undeclared shall be investigated against.	Only elected representatives and not all candidates. Agreed.
No rules shall be made without the approval of Lokpal. Lokpal shall have power to make rules and regulations with respect to its own functioning.	Agreed
All records of Lokpal shall be open barring the following: 1. Such portions of any records which if released during any ongoing investigations, could impede the process of investigations. However, after completion of investigations, they would be disclosed. 2. Such records which could affect national security or 3. Such records which would disclose the identity of a whistleblower and could compromise his/her security.	Agreed
If anyone makes a complaint which lacks any evidence or basis and is held by Lokpal to be meant only to harass someone, the complainant shall be fined. However, merely closure of a case due to lack of evidence shall not be held against a complainant.	Agreed

On the rest of the points, brief discussions took place, and the issue were postponed for further examination.