Confusion heaped upon confusion

Have you read the Lokpal Bill, 2011 ? It sets out such a tedious, cumbersome procedure that one would think the intention is to make certain that a complaint of corruption against a public servant gets lost in the maze ! Here's a step-by-step guide :


If there is a complaint of corruption against a public servant, the Lokpal will first decide whether to proceed in the matter or close it.That's step number one.


If it decides to proceed in the matter, it will order a preliminary inquiry to decide whether there exists a prima facie case to proceed in the matter.That's step number two. What is the difference between the first step and the second? Both require the Lokpal to "decide" whether to "proceed" in the matter. I too am trying to figure that out.


If the complaint is against a government servant (group A, B, C and D), the Lokpal will refer the matter  to the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) which will carry out the preliminary inquiry.The preliminary inquiry is to be concluded in 90 days( 3 months), and this period may be extended by another 90 days.


For all other public servants, the preliminary inquiry will be conducted by the Lokpal's Inquiry Wing.

Or by the CBI.

Or by any other agency.

Enough confusion , right ?

After making its preliminary inquiry, the CVC will submit its report to the Lokpal, but only for Group A and B government servants. That's step number three.

What happens to the report of the CVC's preliminary inquiry in respect of Group C and D government servants? On these reports, action will be taken by the CVC as per the CVC Act. 

As for the preliminary inquiry in respect of public servants other than government servants, the Lokpal's Inquiry Wing, or the CBI, or any other agency, will complete the inquiry within 60 days and submit its report to the Lokpal. Sixty days? Hadn't we just said preliminary inquiry to be concluded within 90 days? Obviously, the government is yet to make up its mind whether the preliminary inquiry is to be concluded within 60 days or 90 + 90 (180) days.


We are now at step four of the process. The Lokpal will consider the preliminary inquiry report, hear the public servant, and decide either to close the matter, or order disciplinary action against the public servant, or order an investigation into the matter. Who will take the disciplinary action against the public servant? The CVC. There's no time limit prescribed, by the way, for completion of action by the CVC in the cases referred to it for taking disciplinary action.

Who will carry out the investigation? The CBI or any other agency.Once the investigation has been concluded, the investigation report will be considered by the Lokpal. This brings us to step five of the process.It may decide to close the matter, or file a complaint in the Special Court, or initiate departmental proceedings against the public servant.


The complaint or the closure report will be filed in the Special Court by the Lokpal's Prosecution Wing, but disciplinary proceedings will be initiated by the "competent authority", not the Lokpal.


Interestingly, while the preliminary inquiry, the investigation and the disciplinary proceedings will be carried out by the CVC and the CBI, there is no provision in the Lokpal bill to ensure the autonomy of these organisations. So, as is the case now, both the CVC and the CBI will remain vulnerable to extraneous influences, including political pressure.


From step one to step six, do you see much of a role for the Lokpal? Is it any wonder that anti - corruption activists have described the Lokpal, as envisaged in the Lokpal bill, as a mere post office ? 


Since no measure for ensuring the autonomy of the CBI and the CVC has been proposed, the "post office" Lokpal will simply add another layer to the existing, dysfunctional anti-corruption machinery. Was this the outcome for which millions of people extended support to Anna Hazare and his team ? Is this the best the government could do after several rounds of discussions with Team Anna, examination by the Standing Committe, etc etc ?

An undemocratic people !

An interesting issue was being heatedly debated on TV channels yesterday. If the Parliament passes a Lokpal bill that provides only for a weak and ineffective Lokpal, do the people have the right to protest? Surprisingly, most participants, whether they be from the political arena or the media,  forcefully asserted that our democratic set up will be under mined if the supremacy of the Parliament vis a vis law making is questioned by people's movements like the Anna Hazare-led India Against Corruption and the laws/proposed laws protested against.

The argument is as follows: our Constitution vests the power to make laws in the Parliament. Ordinary people elect their representatives to the Parliament, and having once cast their vote for X, they should then  repose complete faith in the wisdom, experience, and bona fide of X, trusting him to make sure that the laws that the Parliament makes are the ones that serve best the people's interests.

They should not question his actions even when they smack of indifference to  what is best for the people in the people's own wisdom. He's becomes wiser than them, you see, once he's been elected by the very people whose wisdom  becomes suspect once they have cast their vote. Even if they cry themselves hoarse that what they want is not what he and other august Parliamentarians are planning to enact as law, they will not be heard. They"ll be told instead, in the supercilious tones that the clever use for those who are simple, that they must let Parliament do its job, that the Parliament knows best.

What IS the Parliament's job? Is it to enact laws that promote the welfare of the people , or is to enact laws that the Parliamentarians THINK achieve that objective? If it is the former, and indeed it is, then it is the people's right to articulate what best promotes their welfare. If what  people say they want  is at odds with what the elected representatives think is good for the people, then  in a system which is by the people, of the people, and FOR the people, it is the people's view which should prevail.How then can it be unconstitutional for the people to protest against a proposed law that they do not perceive as serving its stated purpose, and to articulate what they think its contours should be?

Are they to remain silent simply because they cast their vote and elected to the Parliament men and women who appear, as a class, to be  interested only in perpetuating a status quo that is hurting ordinary men and women ? Can they only speak when its time to cast their vote again? The wise men and women who drafted our Constitution would have declared that to be a travesty of the spirit of the Constitution, which states clearly, unambiguously, and emphatically that the people are the source of all sovereign power that is exercised in their name. They can speak, demand, and protest as and when the Parliament or any other organ of the government is perceived to be acting against their interest.

The reason why so many elected representatives, media personalities, intellectuals and academics are reacting so strongly to the people's protest against a weak Lokpal, and going to the extent of describing it as unconstitutional, is that all these years, they have arrogated to themselves all the wisdom of 1.2 billion people. It is as if they, and they alone, know what is best for the "people", as if they are in a distinct and superior and select class. So now when the "people" speak, they are aghast. The reaction is no different from that of the ruler who'd look askance at the ruled asking him questions. We, the people, remain the "ruled", notwithstanding our having won independence from the British decades ago, and the "rulers" remain, notwithstanding the departure of the British!!

In the history of our nation, we are at a cross roads. Either we let ourselves be "ruled" or we decide what is good for us, we decide what we want, we make ourselves heard whether by casting our votes or in a myriad other ways.

We, the people, are the democracy -----how can we be accused of being undemocratic?  So, speak up !!

Lending a helping hand

Have you heard of MILAAP (http://www.milaap.org/) ? It's an online platform that enables you to lend to India's working poor. It’s a loan that you extend, a helping hand, not a donation. I wasn't very certain when I made my first loan a few months ago that it'd be returned, so the mail from MILAAP two months later that the first repayment installment by the borrower had been credited to my account brought a smile to my face.The second installment was paid the next month, and I'm now exceedingly confident that the whole amount will be re paid as scheduled. 

The borrower is Veena Prakash, a 28-year old from Byrathi, Karnataka, earning her living as a tailor. She wanted to expand her business making bags, cushions, mats and boxes, and needed Rs 50,000 to invest in machinery which would help her cut down costs by 5%, increase revenue by 8%, and enable her to employ fifteen people, so that the loan wouldn't mean a better life for Veena’s family alone; she would be helping families of fifteen others.

There was Partner involvement from Indus Tree Crafts Foundation, which is a not-for-profit social business that connects artisans and agricultural workers with a niche urban market. I have been a satisfied consumer of Indus Tree products so when I saw that they are Veena's partner, my level of comfort with the idea of making a loan to a completely unknown person increased.

So I and another lender extended a loan to Veena which she will re pay in twenty four months ----the first two installments have already been credited into my MILAAP account, and I can either redeem this credit or re lend to another borrower. Of course, I will re lend this amount because that option is compelling in the simplicity of its logic -----if I keep the entire amount that I originally lent to Veena in circulation, I can help many more Veenas who are looking not for charity but a hand up.

My choice this time is Asma Mistri, a 29 year-old mother living in Bantra village in West Bengal. She is an artisan who earns her living doing zari embroidery on fabric. Her family has no access to electricity, which means they rely on kerosene lamps ,often paying upto thrice the actual price of kerosene. She hopes to install a solar energy system at home with a loan of Rs 10,000 to overcome these problems.

This is how MILAAP works.

Milaap partners with established organizations that have a strong presence at the grass roots and a deep understanding of the 150 million Indian households with no access to water, sanitation, healthcare, education and energy. Milaap and its field partners design customized loan programs and Milaap then shares requirements, backgrounds and photos of all borrowers. The online listing of borrower profiles enables the lender to select the cause and the borrower of his choice and give a loan of minimum USD 50 or Rs 1000. 

Every month, Milaap sends the total loan collected to its various field partners who disburse the loans. Throughout the loan cycle, the field partners regularly monitor the progress of the borrowers and collect repayments from the borrowers. Milaap makes monthly deposits of the repaid loan instalments into the lender's Milaap account. At the end of the loan cycle, the lender can choose to withdraw the repaid loan amount or decide to relend it to another borrower on Milaap. Through re-lending, a small loan goes a long way and gathers impact.

Its so much better than a one time donation, isn't it? Of course, charitable donations have their place, but if the working poor of India can be empowered to become completely self dependent and capable of living their lives with dignity, with access to clean drinking water, sanitation, education and medical care, wouldn't that be so much better?  Can we, the privileged middle class, who have every need taken care of, and still have enough money to splurge on movies,music, books, vacations, gourmet food, luxury brands etc etc not pledge to extend our less fortunate brethren a helping hand ? 

All of us can, notwithstanding inflation and a thousand competing demands,  budget for small loans that go a long way. Lets all do it ! I hope to meet you all on MILAAP !!

            http://www.milaap.org/how-it-works-questions

The privileged lot!

After election to Parliament, our representatives become entitled to certain amenities which are intended to enable the Members of Parliament to effectively perform their duties and responsibilities. We, the people of India, pay for all these amenities ------ a salary of Rs 50,000 per month, rent free residential accommodation in prime locations in the nation's capital, free water, free electricity, free telephone calls, free business class air travel, free first class rail travel, constituency allowance etc etc.It has been estimated that if monetary values are imputed to all the 16 components of an MP's package, then an MP's annual cost to the public exchequer  is a little less than Rs 50 lakhs!

If you earned roughly Rs 50 lakhs a year, would you still want a Ration Card that entitles you to buy wheat and rice and kerosene and sugar from Fair Price Shops ? Our MPs do, it seems ----- for the convenience of the Members of Parliament, a Sub-Office of the Delhi Rationing Department is provided in the Parliament House so that the MPs can obtain  Ration Cards.There's also an L.P.G. Service Counter and a branch of Kendriya Bhandar for the sale of essential commodities.

A privileged lot, our MPs ! The tax payer would be well within his rights to ask whether the MPs conscientiously perform the role assigned to them in a democratic nation. Do they attend the Parliament when it is in session? Do they participate in Parliamentary debates and discussions and thus contribute to law making? Do they ask questions and through other means such as Notices and Motions call the attention of the government to matters of public interest? The answer is a resounding No. 

But wait, there is worse to come. Recently, many of our MPs have been arrested on charges of corruption ----Suresh Kalmadi, A Raja, Kanimozhi, Amar Singh, to name a few.Interestingly, they continue to remain eligible for all the amenities that they were were availing of prior to their arrest.

If a Public Servant who is a Government Servant is arrested for having committed any offence and remains in custody for 48 hours or more, he stands suspended from office, and his salary and allowances get reduced to half immediately.If an MP, who is also a Public Servant, is  arrested for having committed  an  offence and remains in custody for 48 hours, should he not stand suspended from Parliament and his salary and allowances curtailed? Hypothetically speaking, an MP could get arrested shortly after he gets elected. For the whole term of 5 years then, he will draw full salary and other benefits even if criminal proceedings against him have been initiated in the competent court. 

One could argue that a person's salary and allowances as an MP should only be disallowed if he gets disqualified as an MP. Well, the law says that a person gets disqualified as an MP only if the court convicts him of the offence for which he was arrested. The criminal justice system being heavily over burdened by cases, this could take several years ! So not only does the MP draw full salary and allowances and other benefits during his tenure as an MP, he also gets to enjoy all the pensionary benefits, notwithstanding the fact that a criminal case against him is plodding its way in the competent court. Surprisingly, the law does not even provide for recovery of the salary and allowances that he has already drawn  if the MP is disqualified upon conviction for a criminal offence.


Its time that we, the people, demanded that the Representation of the People Act, 1951 be amended ----- to provide for curtailment of the salary and allowances if the MP's performance is not satisfactory, or if he gets charge sheeted for a serious offence. 

For more details on the amenities of MPs, please see this link ---- http://164.100.47.132/LssNew/members/AMENITIES.aspx  and here is a link to the Representation of the People Act, 1951 ---
http://lawmin.nic.in/legislative/election/volume%201/representation%20of%20the%20people%20act,%201951.pdf

Rahul Gandhi, aap RML mein kyon?

Yet another terror blast. Eleven lives lost, scores injured, hundreds traumatised, millions wondering whether we will ever again live with a sense of security in the land of our birth.

The Prime Minister and the Home Minister have made statements that one does not really need to hear because, tragically enough, the very same statements are made every time a terror blast takes place.

Rahul Gandhi is visiting the RML Hospital, where the injured are being taken to receive medical care. Is there a single good reason for his visit? Is the RML Hospital not equipped to take care of the injured? Will the doctors and other medical staff  discharge their duties better because Rahul Gandhi is visiting? Will the injured get any relief from pain? Will those who have lost their limbs get them back? Will the family members forget even for a millionth of a fraction of a second the pain of their loved ones ?

Does he not realise that his visit throws all arrangements at the hospital awry, and that the police force will have to step up security measures, move away relatives and friends of those injured in the blast and others receiving medical care at the hospital? Are the doctors to attend to the patients or to brief him?

When will our leaders cease to make empty gestures? 

If Rahul Gandhi is so concerned about the victims of the terror blasts, why does he not ask the government to take concrete, meaningful measures to improve internal security? Why does he not press for police reforms?  

There ought to be a statutory requirement that so long as the police authorities do not publicly declare that a visit to the site of the terror attack or the hospitals will no compromise the investigation or the interests of the victims of the attack, no one who is not directly connected with the investigation will visit the site or the hospitals, including Ministers, Members of Parliament and other VIPs. 

Simple anti corruption measures that work

Anti corruption measures are not always about enacting new laws or setting up new institutions. Small and simple measures work equally well.

The measures taken by Sanjay Bhatia, Commissioner of Sales Tax, Maharashtra, are a very good example of how existing laws can be better implemented by the existing institutions through small and simple changes. 

Sales Tax officials had discretionary powers to reduce a penalty imposed on a trader for late payment of tax  from Rs 10,000 to Rs. 100. The discretionary powers were scrapped and  mandatory penalty of Rs 5000 imposed for late payment. Immediately, the percentage of timely payment rose from 35 per cent to 90 per cent.

At least 2,000 traders queued up daily for the mandatory C form for tax declaration, which could not be easily obtained without paying a bribe. The Commissioner got the C form uploaded on the the department's website and also made arrangements to have the forms delivered at the trader's doorstep. 

 Besides, decisions on transfers are now being taken by a committee so that even a clerk gets to have a say in an Additional Commissioner's transfer.

The extent of corruption that these and other simple measures  have been able to control can be measured by the fact that in just one year, the Sales Tax revenue increased by nearly 30 per cent! 

For those of us who wish to make a meaningful contribution to the ongoing people's anti corruption movement, here is an excellent opportunity. Please get in touch with your IAC city coordinator, and as a group, request the local Sales Tax department to introduce similar changes. If their response is lukewarm, lets talk about it through the media, the IAC platform, social media such as Facebook etc ------ and create enough momentum to overcome inertia!

9 lakhs or 900 crores?

( Old Post, Re Published )

In February 2006, Arvind Kejriwal submitted his resignation from government service. In August 2011, about 5 years later, the government discovered that it was owed Rs 9 lakhs by Arvind Kejriwal, which is inclusive of interest amounting to Rs 5 lakhs  on the amount of roughly Rs 4 lakhs which the government says Arvind Kejriwal wrongly drew as salary. 

It does not bother me a great deal whether or not the government is technically correct in its interpretation of the provisions regarding Study Leave, and in its conclusion that Arvind Kejriwal violated the terms and conditions of the bond he signed when he proceeded on leave and was therefore not entitled to draw salary for that period.  That is a matter which can be resolved quickly enough.

What truly bothers me is that the government has made this momentous discovery at a time when Arvind Kejriwal is being hailed as one of the chief architects of a people's movement which may just change the rules of the game where participatory democracy and accountability in governance are concerned. Instead of welcoming the long - awaited awakening of the people, especially of the comfortably fed and housed middle class, the rulers have "elected" to turn a deaf ear to the voice of the people and launch what they mistakenly consider "persecution" of the people's hero.

What short shortsightedness, what utter lack of perspicacity! Do they not understand that a man who has won the hearts and heads of the people with his deep rooted commitment to public good, courage of conviction, sincerity of purpose, willingness to sacrifice and acumen to lead will not be cowed down by a notice from the Income Tax authorities?

The Income Tax authorities would be better advised to expend their energy, time and ingenuousness on recovering the thousands of crores owed as Income tax dues by Individuals and corporates. Under the FRBM Rules, 2004, the Union Budget now includes a statement  "Tax Revenues raised but not realised", a euphemistic manner of stating the bald truth about the income tax dues that the government is unable to recover from defaulters. The statistics are mind boggling. Individuals owe the government Rs 57,932 crore, and corporates owe another Rs 51,553 crore ----- a grand total of Rs 109, 485 crores of Income Tax not paid which the government finds itself unable to recover!

As per the Union Budget, an amount of Rs 42,949 crore is not even under dispute, which means that the government can employ any means it chooses, including coercive measures such as attachment and sale of the defaulter's property, to recover this amount. Of this, Rs 828 crore is the undisputed amount owed by individuals to the government for more than 10 years ! 

Would you not agree that the Income tax authorities should focus their efforts on recovering these dues? The political bosses may desire action that is politically expedient. They may direct that an ill-advised  notice be sent by the Income tax authorities in a vain attempt to discredit Arvind Kejriwal. The Income tax authorities, surely, should know better. What should be their priority ----the 9 lakhs that Arvind Kejriwal may or may not owe, or the nearly 900 crore that have been pending recovery for more than 10 years?

Do take a look at Annex 11 of the Union Budget ----- http://indiabudget.nic.in/ub2011-12/rec/annex11.pdf .