|
| Q&A: Rajni Ranjan Jha, Banaras Hindu University | | 'Anna's model of the Lok Pal is too complex to work' |
| Sreelatha Menon / New Delhi Dec 18, 2011, 00:50 IST |
|
Rajni Ranjan Jha, professor of political history in Banaras Hindu University, is a storehouse of information on the institution of ombudsmen across the world. The civil society benefited from his knowledge. He tells Sreelatha Menon the Bill needs more fine-tuning or it would not work.
You have studied ombudsman models of various countries. Which did you find the most suited for India?
I think we can consider the South Korean model. The country has 16 ombudsmen, which deal with different subjects. They have tried to compartmentalise the problems that they want the ombudsmen to look at. India can also learn from South Korea’s different innovations.
There is a one-portal system through which any grievance is directed through a single portal to the person concerned, without the person running around. This is done with the support of information technology. We have an 11-member Lok Pal, but we don’t know how the work would be divided yet.
For 35 years, you have been researching and working on the subject of ombudsmen across the world, even as you taught political history at Banaras Hindu University. What hooked you to the subject?
I was acquainted with the subject when the first Lokayuktas were appointed in Maharashtra in 1970, followed by Bihar and Rajasthan. There were instances there that got me interested. The Bihar Lokayukta, S V Sohani, who was the former chief secretary of the state, investigated two ministers — a former chief minister and the then irrigation minister, Chandrashekhar Singh, who later became the chief minister.
The government stopped cooperating with the institution it had created. The Lokayukta had to struggle hard. The appointment itself was challenged by the Opposition in court. The High Court upheld it, but the government then allowed the ordinance on the Lokayukta to lapse. Later, it was re-promulgated on court orders. And, after these unsavoury experiences, no Lokayukta in Bihar ever tried to lay hands on powerful people.
So, was it the failure of the Lokayukta that got your attention?
No, it was a mixed experience. Where the chief ministers were interested, Lokayuktas worked. When Digvijay Singh was the Madhya Pradesh chief minister, a minister had to resign after an order from the Lokayukta there.
In Karnataka, under Ramakrishna Hegde, his two ministers resigned. When the chief ministers did not interfere, it worked. That got me interested, too.
Once the Lok Pal comes into practice, what should be the role of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Central Vigilance Commissioner (CVC)?
These are problematic areas. As Anna Hazare rightly says, these must be autonomous, away from the control of the government. The second Administrative Reforms Commission also recommended the CVC be associated with the Lok Pal. It should be one of the members of the Lok Pal. The Lok Pal can give these bodies cases emanating from complaints, or the ones it makes suo motu. While the CBI should be independent, it is dangerous to make an investigative agency totally independent. There is a need to control it. It should get instructions from the Lok Pal.
What about the mammoth size of manpower the Lok Pal would need? Wouldn’t that ensure more corruption?
The Lok Pal that would emerge would be the size of a secretariat. It may be difficult to manage. Hazare may not be aware of the administrative problems this entails.
What about the division of Grades A, B and C among the Lok Pal, and some other institution?
In 1966, when we first made the Lok Pal Bill, it was a composite scheme, in which the Lok Pal looked at politicians and senior bureaucrats, while the lower bureaucracy was looked after by the Lokayuktas, both being connected through a common cord. Later, it was realised in a federal structure, in which states had already begun making their own Lokayuktas, a single mechanism would not work.
Now, Hazare’s people are insisting the lower bureaucracy come under the purview of the Lok Pal. That would increase its size.
My apprehension is it would be difficult for one ombudsman to look at so many people. What Team Anna suggests is a complex organisation, the impact of which needs to be assessed before we actually launch it. We need to think and think.
What about grievances? Should these be under the Lok Pal? Now, they are bringing a different Bill.
Grievances should definitely be under the Lok Pal. That is the primary area of jurisdiction for ombudsmen around the world. Corruption happens when governance fails. So, if grievances are addressed, you nip corruption in the bud. I feel grievances should be added to the Lok Pal as a separate chapter. Of the 11 Lok Pal members, one could be for grievance redressal.
If the CVC and the CBI can be autonomous and cover the political class and bureaucracy, why do you need a Lok Pal? Can’t they have enough staff and look into all the cases?
You should make them autonomous, but under the charge of the Lok Pal. The Lok Pal would be a supervisory authority, asking the CBI and the CVC to gather evidence, and it would scrutinise these if there is merit in a case.
Should the Lok Pal prosecute, too?
Hazare says it should have such powers. The other option is to have special courts for corruption, like the one in Philippines, where the Lok Pal can refer cases. Let that court try. Whether the Lok Pal recommends prosecution to the Supreme Court or to a special court, the initiation of the process of prosecution can be started by the Lok Pal. So, if you look at the issue closely, it is not as simple as the various versions of the Bill make it appear. As for its size, it would depend on how you view it, and what functions you give it.
Which Asian countries have a Lok Pal-like system?
Pakistan does. Its ombudsmen are called Mohtasid. They operate at national and state levels and have many branches. There are also some separate ombudsmen for banking, and one for Azad Kashmir.
In Sri Lanka, there is one, while Bangladesh is in the process of getting one. Nepal has the Janch Booch Kendra, while in South Korea, as mentioned earlier, there are 16 ombudsmen for various subjects such as corruption, grievances. Sweden has one of the first ombudsmen, and there are many there, all appointed by Parliament. While one looks at equality, one looks at child issues, one at armed forces, and so on.
Did Hazare’s people or the group led by Aruna Roy approach you for advice?
Yes, I met Arvind Kejriwal thrice, when the National Campaign for Peoples’ Right to Information had a workshop in Delhi. They were debating the number of ombudsmen, when I told them they were asking the wrong question. Numbers follow the powers you want to give the ombudsmen, I said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Read Business news in |  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertisements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Content Guide
