#dnaEdit: Acting consistently

The new rules framed by the NDA government for the Lokpal “search committee” represent a marked improvement from the ones notified by the previous government in its tearing hurry to constitute the Lokpal before its term ended. The Centre has omitted a dubious provision in the earlier rules that constrained the search committee to shortlist names from among a list of candidates provided to it by the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT). The tight 30-day deadline for the search committee to recommend names to the actual “selection committee” when vacancies arise has been scrapped. Another provision that mandated the search committee to propose three times the number of candidates, as vacancies, has been diluted and made only desirable. The UPA government’s haste backfired after search committee members, retired Justice KT Thomas and jurist Fali S Nariman, withdrew. They pointed fingers at the restrictive rules, that in Thomas’ words precluded the possibility of selecting the “most competent, the most independent and the most courageous” candidates for the nine-member Lokpal.

In sum, the scrapping of the earlier rules giving the DoPT and the government a backdoor entry to Lokpal selection, restores the original spirit — of a two-tier selection process independent of political influence — in which the Act was conceived. Such glaring dichotomy between legislations and their notified rules have often been struck down by the higher judiciary as ultra vires (beyond the powers) of the respective Act. By junking the UPA’s rules, the BJP, which was critical of it while in Opposition, has stayed consistent to its position and bolstered its credibility. In contrast, Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, who mourned that his plans to introduce six anti-corruption legislations in Parliament and later as ordinances were frustrated by the BJP, was silent on his government’s flawed Lokpal rules. The Congress’ biggest failing was this yawning gap between its rhetoric and actions. The Modi government must take advantage of this hindsight. It must quickly constitute a search committee, knowledgeable in public administration matters and anti-corruption mechanisms, and institute the Lokpal at the earliest.

Already, eight months have elapsed since the Lokpal legislation was enacted.

However, the new Lokpal selection rules are far from perfect. These have failed to address Section 4(3) in the Lokpal Act that allows the selection committee, comprising the Prime Minister, Lok Sabha speaker, the Lok Sabha’s Leader of the Opposition, the Chief Justice of India, and an eminent jurist to consider any other person other than those recommended by the search committee. In the interests of transparent functioning, the selection committee must record in writing the reasons for rejecting search committee recommendations and opting for its own candidate. The Lokpal Act has not mandated time-bound investigations and is silent on financial autonomy for the CBI. There is much scope to streamline the Lokpal Act. Among recent laws, the Lokpal, Land Acquisition and the Rights of Forest Dwellers Acts are unique; they resulted from agitational methods that saw wide civil society participation. The political class was caught napping when these movements emerged and the attempts at crushing or ignoring the longstanding demands reflected poorly on the governments in charge. But the enactment of these legislations was a moment which reflected the supremacy of Parliament and an acknowledgment of democratic aspirations. Now the onus is on the Modi government to allow the Lokpal to function smoothly and to consistently distance itself from the ambivalence and the myopia of the UPA regime.