Jan Lokpal Bill and issues it overlooks.

Anna Hazare’s India Against corruption move has seen phenomenal mass support. I have been disapproving this campaign right from the beginning. I think it is misguided.  Am I against eliminating corruption? The answer is No. Am I against Anna’s methods? Not entirely.  I have serious objections to the Jan lokpal bill as proposed by the IAC.  What you read next is an outcome of my degree in political science, my ideological lineage of Mills and Berlins, my faith in democracy as better system of governance than anything else (and my understanding goes beyond Lincoln’s simple and popular idea of democracy. That is for school kids).  Supporters of Anna Hazare would give a damn to my arguments, for they are angry, agitated and only concerned with eliminating corruption. This zeal has narrowed their efforts and discoursed towards the soul goal of seeing a corruption free India, irrespective of a  grand police’s creation they are supporting -yet It’s wonderful and I appreciate their fervour. Dear Fellow Indians, I too want a corruption-free India like you do, but our ways differ.

By creating one office that overpowers all the institutions of this republic, the Jan lokpal bill is clearly inconsistent with the constitution. Different institutions of democracy are founded with the aim of keeping mutual check and balance and therefore the idea of separation of powers.  Hazare’s Jan Lokpal give immense powers to the lokpal , and offers  the lokpal protection against judicial review. As against this, Aruna Roy's version of the lokpal bill is indeed sensible, where it proposes five specialised institutions.

Anna’s methods are somewhere inappropriate. His statements like having faith in parliament but not in its members, having faith in judiciary only, corrupt persons to be hanged; are populist and sensational.  Citizens undoubtedly have the right to participate in law making, but  there  must be dialogue and will to negotiate from all parties. IAC is adamant on getting only its version of jan lokpal bill passed into law. A bill drafted by handful of civil society activists cannot be termed into a national law. Lets not forget, Democracy is also about choice, so other versions and opinions must also be reflected in the final draft.  IAC indeed has massive public support  yet that should not be taken for granted, as being a majority support.

A majority of IAC support comes from the rhetoric of ‘making a corruption free India, and not necessarily for the provisions of bill it has drafted.  IAC may love to bask in its glory now but they are unaware of a dangerous example they are setting. For the critics of IAC, and from viewpoint of government, any civil society movement henceforth  may not be taken seriously .  State is  always eager to put citizens under its control at any given opportunity. It might just become thicker to popular concerns!!  

Does my criticism mean that we have to support the government’s version of the bill?  By no means.  Government’s version is really pathetic.  Its lokpal will turn out as a mere symbol.  And citizens have right to resort to every means to express their opposition, even hunger strike. Government should not be hegemonic.  I only hope that common people are well aware of the cause they uphold and its consequences. .

 For whatever strange reasons, people of this country seem convinced that Anna’s Jan lokpal will uproot corruption.  Given that Indian society is yet not as liberal and modern as I would want to see it, any attempt to address social problem is best achieved through higher and stringent policing rather than letting go of attitudes that cause social problem.  This is where in gatherings it is not uncommon to  let military rule us to discipline us, or revoking punitive measures of the ancient and medieval times. We are a spare a rod and spoil the child nation.  Often we ignore the root cause of problems and attach normative values to it, thereby making logical solutions very difficult to implement.  Corruption cannot be eliminated by  strong policing, It requires policies that will discourage the practice of corruption itself, as well  written by  Barun Mitra and Mohit Satyanand. Bribes are paid to expedite processes. We are all aware of how slowly files move in public offices, as a piece of paper has to move through numerous tables for XYZ permissions and approvals. The bureaucratic hassles must be reduced to speed up approvals, wherein the practice of bribery will dampen. 

It is wise if government and IAC  and other civil society groups come together and draft a sensible, balanced and serious bill. This bill must be supportive of existing anti-corruption and accountability measures rather than overriding it. Alternatively, there must also be a debate on whether we need a lokpal office at all, as argued by Madhumati Mitra of Accountablity Initiative, New Delhi.   

In this entire drama, the most amazing outcome has been popular expression.  Never in recent times have people from all walks of life have taken to streets in such large numbers. Such political participation is welcome. Corruption is a serious issue after all. Let’s tackle the menace sensibly.