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 former 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. 16:48 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, went on a fast-unto-death in April, demanding that this Bill, drafted by the civil society, be adopted. Four days into his fast, the government agreed to set up a joint committee with an equal number of members from the government and civil society side to draft the Lokpal Bill together. The two sides met several times but could not agree on fundamental elements like including the PM under the purview of the Lokpal. Eventually, both sides drafted their own version of the Bill.

The government has introduced its version in Parliament in this session. Team Anna is up in arms and calls the government version the "Joke Pal Bill." Anna Hazare declared that he would begin another fast in Delhi on August 16. Hours before he was to begin his hunger strike, the Delhi Police detained and later arrested him. There are widespread protests all over the country against his arrest.

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.

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. 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 practiceevery

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 lok pal 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.[1] The functionary is called by different names in different countries; its power and functions also vary. In the Scandinavian countries[2] (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 Lok Pal 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 investigative machinery making them dependent on the government agencies, which leaves enough scope for the politicians and the bureaucrats to tinker with the processes of investigation.

bjectives of the bill:[5] The Lokpal was visualized as the watchdog institution on ministerial probity. Broadly the provisions 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. o o 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. o 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. o Lokpal will have its own administrative machinery for conducting investigations. o 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 can not 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 Lok Sabha! 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.

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)

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 LOK PAL BILL. This Bill is an outcome of the findings of the Santhanam Committee for the Prevention of Corruption. The Administrative Reforms Commission in their interim report Problem of Redress of Citizens recommended the setting up of the institution of Lokpal in 1966. The LOK PAL BILL provides for speedy trials of corrupt practices by parliamentarians. Despite the fact that the LOK PAL BILL appears on the election manifesto of every major political party, 40 years later Indias parliamentarians are still dragging their feet over the implementation of the Bill. The Lok Pal Bill has been introduced 8 times in as many Lok Sabhas and has been put to an unnatural death thereafter. In 2001 this Bill was passed by the BJP cabinet, and then rejected in Parliament. In 2004 the Prime Minister Manmohan Singh himself admitted soon after the UPA Government came into power that the need for the Lokpal is much more urgent at present than ever before and promised to take effective action without further delay AS ON DATE, THIS BILL HAS STILL NOT BEEN PASSED.

CORRUPTION KILLS THE COUNTRY AND EVERY CITIZEN OF THIS COUNTRY. AS RESPONSIBLE VOTERS AND CITIZENS OF INDIA, LET US MAKE A START IN HELPING OUR COUNTRY DEAL WITH AND ELIMINATE CORRUPTION!! LET US PUT PEOPLE PRESSURE ON THE GOVERNMENT TO PASS THE LOK PAL BILL!! SALIENT FEATURES OF THE LOKPAL BILL. The Lokpal Bill (Bill No 90 of 1998) provides for the establishment of the institution of Lokpal to inquire into allegations of corruption against public functionaries and for matters connected therewith. It was enacted by Parliament in the Forty Ninth year of the Republic of India. The competent authority as defined in s 2 means In relation to: The Prime Minister, the House of People A member of the Council of ministers, other than the Prime Minister, the prime Minister A member of Parliament other than a Minister, means the Council of States in the case of a member of that Council and the House of the People in the case of a member of that House. The Lokpal Act, 1998 seeks to provide for setting up office of Lokpal with a Chairperson & two members for fixed terms of three years or until attainment of age of 70 years, whichever is earlier. The Lokpal under s 3 shall consist of a Chairperson who is or has been a Chief Justice or a Judge of the spreme Court, and 2 members who are or have been Judges of the Supreme Court or the Chief Justices of the High Courts. Lokpal will inquire into complaints filed by any persons other than Public Servant, alleging that public functionaries have committed an offence punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Cl 15 provides that the Lokpal shall have all the powers of a civil court for summoning and enforcing attendance, receiving evidence and issuing commissions for the examination of witnesses or documents. Lokpal shall not have any jurisdiction to conduct any inquiry into any allegation against the President, VicePresident or the Speaker of the House, the CJ or any other Judge of Supreme court ,the comptroller and Auditergenral of India, the Chief Election Commissioner or other Election Commissioners or the chairman or any other Member of the UPSC.[S.30]

Cl 11 provides that the Lokpal shall not inquire into any matter concerning any person if the Chairperson or any Member has a bias in respect of any such matter or person After conducting Preliminary scrutiny of complaints Lokpal can conduct inquiry . Inquiry is to be conducted in open court, and under special circumstances may be conducted in camera. Expeditious completion of inquiry within six months from date of receipt the complaint No obligation on Lokpal to maintain secrecy or restriction upon disclosure of information[s.15(3)] After completion of inquiry the Lokpal shall communicate its findings to the complainant, the public functionary and the competent authority. Under s 17 (1), after the conclusion of the inquiry the Lokpal shall determine whether any of the offenses alleged in the complaint have or has been proved to the satisfaction and by a report in writing shall communicate its findings to the complainant, the public functionary and the competent authority. (2) The Speaker, in the case of the Prime Minister or a member of the House of the People and the Chairman of the Counsil of States in a case of a member of that Council shall as soon as may be after the receipt of report under sub section 1 of s 17 cause the same to be laid before the House of the People, or the Council of States as the case may be, while it is in session, and if the House of the People or the Council of States, as the case may be, is not in session, within a period of one week from the reassembly of the said House or the Council as the case may be . (3) The competent authority shall examine the report forwarded to it under sub section (1) and communicate to the Lokpal, within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of the report, the action taken or proposed to be taken on the basis of the report. (4) The Lokpal shall present annually to the President a consolidated report on the administration of this Act and the President shall as soon as may be after and in any case no later than 90 days from the receipt of such report, cause the same, together with an explanatory memorandum to be laid before each House of parliament.