From: "Mayank Gandhi" <mayankgandhi04@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, June 24, 2011 9:40 PM
To: "urvi sukul singh" <usukulsingh@hotmail.com>
Subject: Fwd: Government Lokpal Bill Vs Jan Lokpal Bill: Comparative Chart
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: IAC - Mumbai
> Date: Friday, June 24, 2011
> Subject: Fwd: Government Lokpal Bill Vs Jan Lokpal Bill: Comparative Chart
> To: Vidya Vaidya , Nitin Gadekar , Nitin Wadhwani , Naresh Karmalker ,
> mohammed imtiyaz mogal , Anil Joseph , Bhawesh Patel , nitin jaswani ,
> Neeta Sukhtankar , Hanumant Rao , Sudesh Pawar
> Cc: Piyush Bhatia , Aditya Paul , Naresh Thakur , Ruben Mascarenhas ,
> Ruben Mascarenhas , Varsha dosti trust , Santosh Awatramani , Ravi
> Srivastava , Naga Srinivas , Kevin Gala , Smit Malkan , Ashwin
> Parthasarathy , khushvi gandhi , A
>
>
> Friends ... pl study this appended email which highlights the two
> versions of the Lokpal Bill Drafts. Note, this time the GoI version
> is set to attack all registered and un-registered NGOs. The
> punishment for 'frivolous complaints' is two years imprisonment, but
> the minimum punishment for corrupt person is only six months. All
> lower level public officials will not be covered by the Lokpal, there
> is no talk of strengthening the Lokayukta; so the citizen has no
> recourse for day to day corruption and extortion; the common man
> remains where he is.
>
> Please give widest possible publicity to this note and inform and
> lecture all you meet.
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Neeraj Kumar
> Date: Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 12:42 PM
> Subject: Government Lokpal Bill Vs Jan Lokpal Bill: Comparative Chart
>
>
>
>
> Govt's Lokpal Bill Vs Jan Lokpal Bill: Comparative Chart
> Rather than gunning for the corrupt and corruption, government's
> Lokpal seems to be gunning for those who complain against corruption.
> How will Government's Lokpal work?
> Suppose some citizen files a complaint to Lokpal against some corrupt
> government servant.
> Before the investigations actually start, the government servant can
> file a cross complaint against the citizen straight to the special
> court, without any preliminary enquiry by any agency, that the
> complaint is false or frivolous. The government will provide free
> advocate to the government servant to file this case. The citizen will
> have to defend himself on his own!
>
>
>
> Then there is stiffer punishment for the complainant than the corrupt
> government servant. If the Special Court concludes that the complaint
> is frivolous or false, the citizen faces a minimum of two years of
> punishment. But if the corruption charges against government servant
> are proved, there is a minimum of six months of punishment for the
> corrupt government servant!
>
>
>
> Government's Lokpal will have jurisdiction over all NGOs in the
> country but it will have jurisdiction over less then o.5% of all
> government employees.
> Government argued that the Lokpal would get overwhelmed with too many
> cases if all public servants were brought under its ambit. So,
> government has restricted its jurisdiction only to 65,000 Group A
> officers. Also, state employees will not be covered by Lokpal. There
> are 4 million central government employees and 8 million state
> government employees.
>
>
>
> In sharp contrast, all NGOs are covered under government's Lokpal,
> small or big, whether in state or centre. Even unregistered groups of
> people in remote villages are covered under the ambit of Lokpal. So,
> in a remote village, if a group of youngsters detect corruption in
> panchayat works using RTI, the youngsters can be hauled up by Lokpal
> but Lokpal would not have jurisdiction over Sarpanch, BDO or their
> corruption.
>
>
>
> Whereas Lokpal would not have jurisdiction over Delhi government
> officials, it would have jurisdiction over all RWAs in Delhi. All
> small neighborhood groups who raise donations to do Ramlila or Durga
> Puja would be under Lokpal's scanner.
>
>
>
> Lokpal could haul up activists from any of the farmers, labour,
> anti-corruption, land, tribal or any other movements. All the
> movements – whether registered or not, are under the jurisdiction of
> Lokpal.
> There are 4.3 lakh registered NGOs. But there would be several million
> unregistered groups across the country. Lokpal would have jurisdiction
> over all of them.
> No one can dispute the fact that corruption in NGOs needs to be
> addressed. But how can you leave most public servants out of Lokpal's
> purview but bring NGOs upto village level within its purview?
>
>
>
> Issue
> Our view
> Government's view
> Comments
>
> Prime Minister
> Lokpal should have power to investigate allegations of corruption
> against PM. Special safeguards provided against frivolous and
> mischievous complaints
> PM kept out of Lokpal's purview.
> As of today, corruption by PM can be investigated under Prevention of
> Corruption Act. Government wants investigations to be done by CBI,
> which comes directly under him, rather than independent Lokpal
>
> Judiciary
> Lokpal should have powers to investigate allegation of corruption
> against judiciary. Special safeguards provided against frivolous and
> mischievous complaints
> Judiciary kept out of Lokpal purview.
> Government wants this to be included in Judicial Accountability Bill
> (JAB). Under JAB, permission to enquire against a judge will be given
> by a three member committee (two judges from the same court and retd
> Chief justice of the same court). There are many such flaws in JAB. We
> have no objections to judiciary being included in JAB if a strong and
> effective JAB were considered and it were enacted simultaneously.
>
>
>
>
> MPs
> Lokpal should be able to investigate allegations that any MP had taken
> bribe to vote or speak in Parliament.
> Government has excluded this from Lokpal's purview.
> Taking bribe to vote or speak in Parliament strikes at the foundations
> of our democracy. Government's refusal to bring it under Lokpal
> scrutiny virtually gives a license to MPs to take bribes with
> impunity.
>
>
>
>
> Grievance redressal
> Violation of citizen's charter (if an officer does not do a citizen's
> work in prescribed time) by an officer should be penalized and should
> be deemed to be corruption.
> No penalties proposed. So, this will remain only on paper.
> Government had agreed to our demand in the Joint committee meeting on
> 23rd May. It is unfortunate they have gone back on this decision.
>
> CBI
> Anti-corruption branch of CBI should be merged into Lokpal.
> Government wants to retain its hold over CBI.
> CBI is misused by governments. Recently, govt has taken CBI out of
> RTI, thus further increasing the scope for corruption in CBI. CBI will
> remain corrupt till it remains under government's control
>
> Selection of Lokpal members
> 1. Broad based selection committee with 2 politicians, four judges and
> two independent constitutional authorities. 2. An independent search
> committee consisting of retd constitutional authorities to prepare
> first list. 3. A detailed transparent and participatory selection
> process.
>
>
>
> 1. With five out of ten members from ruling establishment and six
> politicians in selection committee, government has ensured that only
> weak, dishonest and pliable people would be selected.
> 2. Search committee to be selected by selection committee, thus making
> them a pawn of selection committee
> 3. No selection process provided. It will completely depend on
> selection committee
> Government's proposal ensures that the government will be able to
> appoint its own people as Lokpal members and Chairperson.
> Interestingly, they had agreed to the selection committee proposed by
> us in the meeting held on 7th May. There was also a broad consensus on
> selection process. However, there was a disagreement on composition of
> search committee. We are surprised that they have gone back on the
> decision.
>
>
>
>
> Who will Lokpal be accountable to?
> To the people. A citizen can make a complaint to Supreme Court and seek
> removal.
> To the Government. Only government can seek removal of Lokpal
> With selection and removal of Lokpal in government's control, it would
> virtually be a puppet in government's hands, against whose seniormost
> functionaries it is supposed to investigate, thus causing serious
> conflict of interest.
>
>
>
>
> Integrity of Lokpal staff
> Complaint against Lokpal staff will be heard by an independent authority
> Lokpal itself will investigate complaints against its own staff, thus
> creating serious conflicts of interest
> Government's proposal creates a Lokpal, which is accountable either to
> itself or to the government. We have suggested giving these controls
> in the hands of the citizens.
>
> Method of enquiry
> Method would be the same as provided in CrPC like in any other
> criminal case. After preliminary enquiry, an FIR will be registered.
> After investigations, case will be presented before a court, where the
> trial will take place
>
>
>
> CrPC being amended. Special protection being provided to the accused.
> After preliminary enquiry, all evidence will be provided to the
> accused and he shall be heard as to why an FIR should not be regd
> against him. After completion of investigations, again all evidence
> will be provided to him and he will be given a hearing to explain why
> a case should not be filed against him in the court. During
> investigations, if investigations are to be started against any new
> persons, they would also be presented with all evidence against them
> and heard.
>
>
>
> Investigation process provided by the government would severely
> compromise all investigations. If evidence were made available to the
> accused at various stages of investigations, in addition to
> compromising the investigations, it would also reveal the identity of
> whistleblowers thus compromising their security. Such a process is
> unheard of in criminal jurisprudence anywhere in the world. Such
> process would kill almost every case.
>
>
>
>
> Lower bureaucracy
> All those defined as public servants in Prevention of Corruption Act
> would be covered. This includes lower bureaucracy.
> Only Group A officers will be covered.
> One fails to understand government's stiff resistance against bringing
> lower bureaucracy under Lokpal's ambit. This appears to be an excuse
> to retain control over CBI because if all public servants are brought
> under Lokpal's jurisdiction, government would have no excuse to keep
> CBI.
>
>
>
>
> Lokayukta
> The same bill should provide for Lokpal at centre and Lokayuktas in states
> Only Lokpal at the centre would be created through this Bill.
> According to Mr Pranab Mukherjee, some of the CMs have objected to
> providing Lokayuktas through the same Bill. He was reminded that state
> Information Commissions were also set up under RTI Act through one Act
> only.
>
>
>
>
> Whistleblower protection
> Lokpal will be required to provide protection to whistleblowers,
> witnesses and victims of corruption
> No mention in this law.
> According to govt, protection for whistleblowers is being provided
> through a separate law. But that law is so bad that it has been badly
> trashed by standing committee of Parliament last month. The committee
> was headed by Ms Jayanthi Natrajan. In the Jt committee meeting held
> on 23rd May, it was agreed that Lokpal would be given the duty of
> providing protection to whistleblowers under the other law and that
> law would also be discussed and improved in joint committee only.
> However, it did not happen.
>
>
>
>
> Special benches in HC
> High Courts will set up special benches to hear appeals in corruption
> cases to fast track them
> No such provision.
> One study shows that it takes 25 years at appellate stage in
> corruption cases. This ought to be addressed.
>
> CrPC
> On the basis of past experience on why anti-corruption cases take a
> long time in courts and why do our agencies lose them, some amendments
> to CrPC have been suggested to prevent frequent stay orders.
> Not included
>
>
> Dismissal of corrupt government servant
> After completion of investigations, in addition to filing a case in a
> court for prosecution, a bench of Lokpal will hold open hearings and
> decide whether to remove the government servant from job.
> The minister will decide whether to remove a corrupt officer or not.
> Often, they are beneficiaries of corruption, especially when senior
> officer are involved. Experience shows that rather than removing
> corrupt people, ministers have rewarded them.
>
>
>
> Power of removing corrupt people from jobs should be given to
> independent Lokpal rather than this being decided by the minister in
> the same department.
>
> Punishment for corruption
> 1. Maximum punishment is ten years
> 2. Higher punishment if rank of accused is higher
> 3. Higher fines if accused are business entities
> 4. If successfully convicted, a business entity should be blacklisted
> from future contracts.
>
>
>
> None of these accepted. Only maximum punishment raised to 10 years.
>
>
> Financial independence
> Lokpal 11 members collectively will decide how much budget do they need
> Finance ministry will decide the quantum of budget
> This seriously compromises with the financial independence of Lokpal
>
> Prevent further loss
> Lokpal will have a duty to take steps to prevent corruption in any
> ongoing activity, if brought to his notice. If need be, Lokpal will
> obtain orders from High Court.
> No such duties and powers of Lokpal
> 2G is believed to have come to knowledge while the process was going
> on. Shouldn't some agency have a duty to take steps to stop further
> corruption rather than just punish people later?
>
> Tap phones
> Lokpal bench will grant permission to do so
> Home Secretary would grant permission.
> Home Secretary is under the control of precisely those who would be
> under scanner. It would kill investigations.
>
> Delegation of powers
> Lokpal members will only hear cases against senior officers and
> politicians or cases involving huge amounts. Rest of the work will be
> done by officers working under Lokpal
> All work will be done by 11 members of Lokpal. Practically no delegation.
> This is a sure way to kill Lokpal. The members will not be able to
> handle all cases. Within no time, they would be overwhelmed.
>
> NGOs
> Only government funded NGOs covered
> All NGOs, big or small, are covered.
> A method to arm twist NGOs
>
> False, Frivolous and vexatious complaints
> No imprisonment. Only fines on complainants. Lokpal would decide
> whether a complaint is frivolous or vexatious or false.
> Two to five years of imprisonment and fine. The accused can file
> complaint against complainant in a court. Interestingly, prosecutor
> and all expenses of this case will be provided by the government to
> the accused. The complainant will also have to pay a compensation to
> the accused.
>
>
>
> This will give a handle to every accused to browbeat complainants.
> Often corrupt people are rich. They will file cases against
> complainants and no one will dare file any complaint. Interestingly,
> minimum punishment for corruption is six months but for filing false
> complaint is two years.
>
>
>
> Please distribute this link to your friends and others who might be
> interested. You can also download the PDF from here
> <http://www.box.net/shared/oakrbzxf35c2znx4xi3j>.
>
>
>
> -- Praful Vora, Volunteer & Coordinator - Mumbai, IAC. (Cell: +91 90 0401
> 7654)
> I will FAST FOR INDIA with Anna Hazare for a Corrupt free India... Will
> you?
> Blog: http://indiaagainstcorruption.org/blog/ Link:
> http://indiaagainstcorruption.org/
> Message and Attachments checked free of virus and worms with Quick
> Heal AntiVirus+ 2010 v11.0 Auto Update.
>
> Friendly reminder......
> Please delete my 'e-mail address' from this message, if you plan to
> forward it.
> PLEASE use Bcc: for any "group" e-mailing, instead of To: or Cc:.
> If you help keep our addresses private, our privacy can be protected
> and we might be able to cut down on spam and phishing.
>
> Please add 'IndiaAgainstCorruptionMumbai@gmail.com' to your "address
> list / safe sender list". Otherwise, your mailbox filter or ISP may
> stop you from receiving these emails.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Regards
> **
> *Mayank Gandhi*
> * 09920788909*
> <http://mayankgandhi04.blogspot.com/>
>
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rti4empowerment/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rti4empowerment/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
rti4empowerment-digest@yahoogroups.com
rti4empowerment-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
rti4empowerment-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
No comments:
Post a Comment