Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
The Lok Ayukta, modeled after the Swedish ombudsman, is an institution established in various Indian states to address grievances against public functionaries and investigate allegations of corruption. Envisioned as a crucial pillar of ethical governance and accountability, the performance of Lok Ayuktas across states has been markedly uneven. While some states have witnessed effective utilization of these institutions, others have seen them remain largely ineffective due to limitations in their powers, lack of independence, and inadequate infrastructure. This disparity raises concerns about the overall efficacy of anti-corruption mechanisms in India.
Variations in Powers and Jurisdiction
The effectiveness of Lok Ayuktas is significantly impacted by the powers conferred upon them by respective state legislatures. These powers vary considerably.
- Karnataka: The Karnataka Lok Ayukta Act, 1984, is often cited as a robust model. It possesses powers akin to a civil court, including the ability to summon witnesses, demand documents, and conduct raids.
- Maharashtra: The Maharashtra Lok Ayukta Act, 1971, initially lacked the power to investigate the Chief Minister. This limitation was a major criticism. Amendments in 2019 brought the CM under its purview, but implementation remains a challenge.
- Uttar Pradesh: The Uttar Pradesh Lok Ayukta Act, 1975, has been criticized for its limited scope and lack of teeth. It primarily focuses on recommending action to the government, lacking the power to enforce its findings directly.
- Delhi: The Delhi Lokpal Act, 2015, faced significant legal challenges regarding its scope and powers, particularly concerning its jurisdiction over central government employees.
Factors Contributing to Uneven Performance
Several factors contribute to the inconsistent performance of Lok Ayuktas:
- Independence: A lack of financial and administrative independence hinders effective functioning. Many Lok Ayuktas rely heavily on the state government for resources, compromising their impartiality.
- Appointment Process: The appointment process, often involving political considerations, can undermine the credibility of the institution.
- Coverage of Public Functionaries: The extent to which public functionaries are covered under the Lok Ayukta’s jurisdiction varies. Some states exclude certain categories of officials, limiting its scope.
- Infrastructure and Staffing: Inadequate infrastructure and insufficient staffing hamper the ability of Lok Ayuktas to handle the volume of complaints received.
- Implementation of Recommendations: Even when Lok Ayuktas make strong recommendations, their implementation by the government is not always guaranteed.
Comparative Analysis – State Models
| State | Powers | Independence | Effectiveness (Rating - Low, Medium, High) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Karnataka | Civil Court Powers | Relatively High | High |
| Maharashtra | Limited initially, expanded in 2019 | Medium | Medium |
| Uttar Pradesh | Recommendatory | Low | Low |
| Himachal Pradesh | Investigative & Prosecution | Medium | Medium |
Recent Developments and Challenges
The push for a Lokpal at the central level, fueled by the anti-corruption movement led by Anna Hazare in 2011, brought renewed attention to the need for effective anti-corruption institutions at both the central and state levels. However, the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013, has faced its own challenges in implementation. Many states are yet to establish Lokayuktas as per the Act’s provisions. Furthermore, the lack of coordination between Lokayuktas and other anti-corruption agencies, such as the CBI and the state vigilance commissions, hinders effective investigation and prosecution of corruption cases.
Conclusion
The uneven performance of Lok Ayuktas underscores the need for a comprehensive overhaul of these institutions. Strengthening their independence, expanding their jurisdiction, ensuring adequate resources, and streamlining the appointment process are crucial steps. Furthermore, effective implementation of their recommendations and fostering greater coordination with other anti-corruption agencies are essential to enhance their effectiveness. A robust Lok Ayukta system, coupled with a strong Lokpal at the center, is vital for promoting ethical governance and combating corruption in India.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.