Anti-corruption institutions in India, such as the Lokpal and Lokayuktas, are established to investigate and address complaints of corruption against public officials, ensuring accountability in governance. These institutions play a crucial role in promoting transparency, strengthening public trust, and deterring misuse of power. This article aims to study in detail the structure, functions, and challenges of anti-corruption institutions in India.
Meaning of Redressal of Grievances
- Redressal of Grievances refers to the process of addressing and resolving complaints or issues raised by individuals or groups, ensuring justice and fairness.
- It involves identifying the nature of the grievance, investigating its validity, and taking appropriate corrective measures.
- In a governance context, grievance redressal mechanisms are essential for maintaining transparency, accountability, and trust between citizens and authorities.
- These mechanisms often include platforms like public complaint systems, ombudsman offices, and online portals to provide timely and effective solutions to grievances.
About Anti Corruption Bodies in India
- Corruption in government systems has been a significant concern in India, fostering strong public sentiment for greater transparency and accountability.
- With increasing awareness of the detrimental effects of corruption, the country has implemented several measures to combat it.
- Among these are the creation of the Lokpal, the strengthening of anti-bribery laws, and amendments to existing legislations to address the involvement of facilitators and intermediaries in corrupt practices.
- Anti-corruption agencies serve as the backbone of India’s fight against corruption.
- These publicly funded institutions are tasked with investigating and addressing complaints against corrupt public officials.
- Despite widespread perceptions of corruption being normalized, these agencies play a pivotal role in promoting accountability and integrity by enabling the judiciary to take action against offenders.
The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013
- The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013, was enacted to tackle corruption at the central and state levels.
- Receiving Presidential assent on January 1, 2014, and coming into force on January 16, 2014, this act was a response to concerns about the lack of independence in India’s investigatory authorities.
- However, delays in the establishment of the Lokpal have led to criticism, as it appeared to undermine the act’s intent.
- Section 63 of the Act mandates every state to establish a Lokayukta within a year of the Act’s commencement.
- Although Lokayuktas have been instituted in all states, many state governments have deliberately weakened these bodies by failing to provide adequate infrastructure, budgets, and manpower.
- Additionally, several Lokayuktas lack prosecutorial or suo motu powers, and state-level laws remain unaligned with the central legislation.
Institutional Context of Ombudsman in India
- The ombudsman institution plays a crucial role in combating corruption.
- Originating in Sweden in 1809, the ombudsman system was adopted in Finland in 1920 and later introduced in India in 2014.
- In India, the ombudsman is known as the Lokpal (at the central level) and Lokayukta (at the state level).
- The term Lokpal and Lokayukta was first coined by L.M. Singhvi in 1963.
- The institution was envisaged to investigate and prosecute cases of corruption against public functionaries.
- The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013, was introduced after numerous attempts since 1968 to establish such a body.
- It gained momentum following the 2011 Anna Hazare-led anti-corruption movement, culminating in its passage in Parliament in 2013.
Eligibility and Jurisdiction of Lokpal
- The Lokpal comprises a chairperson and up to eight members, of whom four must be judicial members.
- At least 50% of the members must belong to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes, minorities, or women.
- The chairperson’s salary equals that of the Chief Justice of India, while members receive salaries akin to Supreme Court judges.
- The Lokpal has jurisdiction over all public servants, including the Prime Minister (with certain restrictions), Union Ministers, Members of Parliament, and officials of bodies funded or established by Parliament.
- However, complaints against the Prime Minister are subject to stringent conditions, including approval by two-thirds of the Lokpal members, and must relate to matters excluding security, international relations, or atomic energy.
Issues and Challenges
Despite its potential, the Lokpal and Lokayukta Act faces several challenges:
- Political Influence: The appointment process is susceptible to political manipulation due to the composition of the selection committee.
- Exclusion of Judiciary: The judiciary remains outside the ambit of the Lokpal, leaving a significant gap in the fight against corruption.
- Weak Whistleblower Protection: The absence of robust protections for whistleblowers discourages reporting of corruption.
- Harsh Provisions for False Complaints: Stringent penalties for false complaints may deter genuine grievances.
- Lack of Suo Motu Powers: The Lokpal cannot initiate investigations without a formal complaint.
- Overlapping Jurisdictions: The roles of Lokpal and other anti-corruption agencies like the CVC often overlap, creating inefficiencies.
Status of Lokayuktas in States
The effectiveness of Lokayuktas varies significantly across states. For instance:
- Kerala: Recent amendments weaken the Lokayukta’s authority, turning it into an advisory body.
- Karnataka: Despite being one of the first states to establish a Lokayukta in 1986, the post remains vacant.
- Delhi and Uttarakhand: These states have lacked Lokayuktas for years.
- Himachal Pradesh and Nagaland: These states have introduced amendments to delay appointments or justify vacancies, further weakening the institution.
Suggestions for Improvement
To strengthen anti-corruption institutions in India, the following steps are recommended:
- Enhance functional autonomy and resource allocation for the Lokpal and Lokayuktas.
- Ensure transparent and merit-based appointments to reduce political interference.
- Equip the Lokpal with suo motu powers and expand its jurisdiction to include the judiciary.
- Simplify the complaint process and strengthen whistleblower protections.
- Foster decentralized institutions to prevent excessive concentration of power.
- Promote public awareness and citizen participation to create a culture of accountability.
Conclusion
The Lokpal and Lokayukta Act, 2013, marks a significant step in India’s fight against corruption. However, for these institutions to fulfill their potential, issues related to political interference, resource constraints, and structural weaknesses must be addressed. Strengthening these anti-corruption bodies is essential for building a transparent and accountable governance system in India.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
What is the grievance redressal institution in India?
The grievance redressal institutions in India include mechanisms such as the Centralized Public Grievance Redress and Monitoring System (CPGRAMS), Lok Adalats, Consumer Dispute Redressal Forums, Ombudsman offices (e.g., Banking Ombudsman), and the Right to Information (RTI) Act framework. These institutions aim to address public complaints and ensure accountability, justice, and transparency in governance and service delivery.
