Do you think the institution of Lokpal, as envisaged under the Lokpal and Lokayukta Act, 2013, is efficacious enough to curb corruption in India? State the inadequacies in the legislative framework, if any.

The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013: Objectives and Structure

The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013, aims to establish an independent and impartial anti-corruption watchdog. It mandates the constitution of a Lokpal at the Union level and Lokayuktas at the state level. The Lokpal is composed of a Chairperson and eight members, with a significant representation from the judiciary and civil society. Its primary function is to inquire into allegations of corruption against public servants, including ministers, high-ranking officials, and those in public sector undertakings.

Efficacy of the Lokpal: Strengths

• Independent Investigation Powers: The Lokpal possesses the power to initiate investigations suo moto or on the basis of complaints received from the public. This independence is crucial for impartial scrutiny.
• Broad Scope of Inquiry: The Act covers a wide range of public servants, including those holding constitutional positions, which enhances its potential impact.
• Legal Protection for Whistleblowers: The Act provides protection to whistleblowers who expose corruption, encouraging transparency and accountability.
• Framework for Prosecution: The Act establishes a framework for prosecution of corrupt public servants, ensuring that investigations lead to tangible action.

Inadequacies in the Legislative Framework and Implementation Challenges

Despite its potential, the Lokpal’s efficacy has been severely hampered by several inadequacies and implementation challenges:

1. Delays in Constitution and Operationalization

The Act was passed in 2013, but the appointment of the Lokpal remained stalled for years due to disagreements over the selection process and lack of consensus on the selection committee members. This delayed the institution's operationalization and undermined public confidence.

2. Narrow Definition of ‘Public Servant’

The definition of 'public servant' under the Act has been criticized for being too narrow, excluding several individuals who wield significant public power. This exclusion weakens the Act's scope and effectiveness. The exclusion of private citizens involved in corrupt activities has also been questioned.

3. Issues with Asset Disclosure

The Act mandates the declaration of assets by public servants, but the verification process is weak. Lack of robust mechanisms for verifying these declarations hinders the detection of illicit wealth.

4. Lack of Adequate Infrastructure and Resources

The Lokpal suffers from a lack of adequate infrastructure, manpower, and financial resources. This limits its ability to effectively investigate complex corruption cases.

5. Limited Powers of Search and Seizure

While the Lokpal can recommend prosecution, it lacks the power to directly conduct searches and seizures or arrest individuals. This dependence on other agencies can slow down investigations.

6. Appointment Process Concerns

The selection committee, comprising the Chief Justice of India or a judge of the Supreme Court, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, and several independent members, has been subject to criticism regarding potential biases and delays in appointments.

Comparison with Other Anti-Corruption Bodies

Comparing the Lokpal with other anti-corruption bodies highlights its shortcomings. For example, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has broader powers, including the ability to arrest and conduct searches, but it often faces allegations of political interference. The Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, while promoting transparency, relies on citizen activism for enforcement. The Lokpal needs to be strengthened to bridge the gap between its mandate and its actual capabilities.

Suggestions for Improvement

• Streamline Appointment Process: Establish a more efficient and transparent selection process for Lokpal members, ensuring timely appointments.
• Broaden Definition of ‘Public Servant’: Expand the definition to include individuals exercising public power, even if not formally employed by the government.
• Strengthen Asset Verification: Implement robust mechanisms for verifying asset declarations, including independent audits and cross-referencing with other databases.
• Enhance Investigative Powers: Consider granting the Lokpal limited powers of search, seizure, and arrest, subject to judicial oversight.
• Increase Resources and Infrastructure: Provide the Lokpal with adequate financial resources, manpower, and technology to effectively conduct investigations.
• Promote Citizen Engagement: Encourage citizen participation through awareness campaigns and accessible complaint mechanisms.

Body	Powers	Limitations
Lokpal	Investigates corruption allegations, recommends prosecution.	Limited powers of arrest/search, dependent on other agencies.
CBI	Investigates, arrests, searches.	Susceptible to political interference.
RTI Act	Promotes transparency, citizen access to information.	Relies on citizen activism for enforcement.