Kerala Lokayukta

New Delhi: Despite stiff opposition raised by the United Democratic Front (UDF) members and their subsequent boycott, the Kerala Assembly on Tuesday, August 30, passed the controversial Lok Ayukta (Amendment) Bill, which seeks to make the executive the appellate authority over reports by the anti-corruption watchdog.

The criticism levelled by Opposition against the tweaking of the existing law is to do with the understanding that new changes will clip the wings of the Lok Ayukta, as its directions to the government in the cases of corruption would only be recommendatory in nature. The governor or chief minister can basically overrule the Lok Ayukta given that the directions will not be binding on the government. This, the Opposition says, is to encourage corruption, and to save corrupt politicians and government officials, according to The News Minute.

After hours-long heated arguments and debates in the Assembly on Tuesday, the Opposition announced its boycott of the day’s proceedings, saying that it did not want to witness the “killing” of the anti-corruption agency by the government using its brute majority in the assembly.

Before walking out of the House, Leader of Opposition V.D. Satheesan said it was a “black day” in the history of the state assembly.

“The Opposition cannot support the attempt made by the government to eliminate and weaken an anti-corruption agency. We are registering our stern opposition against passing this Bill…we will fight it tooth and nail,” he said.

When the Congress-led opposition alleged that the Bill, which carries away the rights of the constitutional agency, would weaken the anti-corruption mechanism in a democratic system, the CPI(M)-led Left Democratic Front (LDF) government reiterated that the amendment was made to bring the state Lok Ayukta Act in accordance with the Union government’s Lokpal Act.

The UDF was particularly critical about the new amendments introduced in the Bill after it was sent for consideration by the Assembly Subject Committee.

“Some new changes were made in the Bill in connection with the competent authorities to whom the Lok Ayukta should make its recommendations after it was sent to the Subject Committee last week. It was in violation of the Assembly procedures,” the UDF pointed out.

Also read: Kerala Minister K.T. Jaleel Resigns After Lokayukta Report Says He Abused Power

Congress legislators Ramesh Chennithala and P.C. Vishnunath raised a point of order saying that the changes in the Bill were in violation of the rules, but Speaker M.B. Rajesh rejected it and gave a ruling in this regard.

Law minister P. Rajeeve rubbished the claims of the Opposition, saying that the Subject Committee had the power to make changes in the Bill.

Arguments in favour and against the amendments

While the law minister said that the changes were aimed at bringing the Kerala Lok Ayukta on par with other states and to streamline its processes, the Opposition is least convinced.

According to The News Minute, Rajeeve had said on August 25, “The first Pinarayi Vijayan government had taken up the issue, but now the advocate general has said that the present powers of the Lok Ayukta stand in the way of natural justice and are also not in tune with the Constitution. Besides, there are two judgments to this effect from the Kerala high court. Based on all this, the amendment to the Kerala Lokayukta Ordinance was sent to the governor.”

The Opposition leader Satheesan argued that it was not right to give powers to the legislative assembly to reject or accept the findings of the Lok Ayukta which was evolved through a judicial procedure. This, Rajeeve in the assembly countered by saying that when the House discusses the agency’s findings, it could become a public debate.

The Opposition also asked if the Bill was passed, how could it be expected that the assembly take a decision against the chief minister if he is found guilty by the anti-corruption watchdog in any case. As per the Bill passed on Tuesday, the state assembly will be the competent authority to take s decision on the Lok Ayukta’s findings against the chief minister.

The tweaking of the law also drew criticism from non-politicians too. “To kill is easy, but to give life is difficult. If the powers are tweaked, the best thing is to dissolve this institution as it costs a huge sum of money to the exchequer. And to keep it going without powers is of no use, hence it is better to wind it up,” former Kerala Upa Lok Ayukta (retired Justice) K.P. Balachandran told The News Minute.

As per the Kerala Lok Ayukta (Amendment) Ordinance, 2022 – which was refused to be re-promulgated by governor Arif Mohammed Khan recently – the state government could either accept or reject the declaration by the anti-corruption agency in the cases, finding those holding public office as guilty.

“The governor, chief minister or the state government would be the competent authority and he or it may either accept or reject the declaration, after giving an opportunity of being heard,” it had said.

“Where the competent authority is the governor, or the chief minister or the government of Kerala, he or it may either accept or reject the declaration, after giving an opportunity of being heard,” the ordinance had said.

In other cases, the competent authority shall send a copy of such a report to the government which may either accept or reject the declaration after giving an opportunity of being heard, it had added.

When the Left government had come up with an Ordinance earlier this year to amend the existing Lok Ayukta Act, which had come into being 23 years ago, the Opposition Congress and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) alleged that the government decided to curb the powers of the agency as complaints about its several irregularities were pending before it.

They had also claimed that the agency was considering seriously the charge that the money from the Chief Minister’s Distress Relief Fund was disbursed among underserved persons.

During the tenure of the previous LDF government, the then higher education minister K.T. Jaleel had to resign from the cabinet, days after the state Lok Ayukta’s finding that he had abused his position as a public servant to favour a relative.

(With PTI inputs)

New Delhi: Goa’s outgoing Lokayukta Justice (Retired) Prafulla Kumar Misra told the Indian Express that he is “completely disenchanted” with the state government’s lack of action on even one of the 21 reports that he submitted against public functionaries during his nearly four-and-a-half-year tenure as the Lokayukta.

“If you ask me in one sentence my experience in dealing with these complaints as Lokayukta in Goa, I will say they should abolish the institution of Lokayukta,” Justice Misra told Indian Express. “Why should public money be spent for nothing? If the Lokayukta Act is being thrown into the dustbin with such force, then it’s better to abolish the Lokayukta.”

Out of the 191 cases received, 133 were disposed of. Among the 58 pending cases are 21 in which he sent reports to the government, but the action taken reports are still awaited, the report said. His recommendations included “initiation of disciplinary action, transfer, detailed investigation by ACB or a declaration that an elected functionary is unfit to hold office”, the report added.

A few months ago, Misra wrote a letter to governor Satyapal Malik to prosecute former chief minister Laxmikant Parsekar and two other senior officials in the Goa’s mining lease renewal case. They had “hastily cleared” 31 mining lease renewals in one day (January 12, 2015) – the same day that an ordinance which made lease available only by auction was taking effect. This was one of the strongest reports filed by Misra.

Before addressing the issue to the governor, Misra had reportedly sent a report to the state government which rejected his report that recommended an FIR be registered by the directorate of anti-corruption branch against Parsekar, former mines secretary Pawan Kumar Sain and former mines director Prasanna Kumar Acharya in the mining lease renewal case.

Misra did not spare even the late former Goa chief minister Manohar Parrikar of “avoiding responsibility” in probing Pandurang Madkaikar’s disproportionate assets case – his then cabinet minister and current BJP MLA.

Manohar Parrikar and Laxmikant Parsekar. Photo: PTI/File

“Many cases (were) coming to Lokayukta where the police were not registering FIRs,” Misra told Indian Express. For instance, in the Lalita Kumari case, the Goa Lokayukta ordered disciplinary inquiry against Calangute PI Nolasco Raposo for not registering an FIR in a theft case, even after the complainant submitted CCTV footage of the incident. In this case, the apex court had ruled that registration of an FIR is mandatory under Section 154 CrPC (cognizable offences), Misra said.

According to the Indian Express report, Misra said the Lokayukta Act needs urgent intervention, and “lacks teeth” in its current form, and is “not good enough for Goa”. “It does not have the powers of prosecution that the Karnataka and Kerala Acts have, nor does it have a provision for contempt of the Lokayukta’s orders.”

Misra said his security protocol was withdrawn on the eve of his retirement, which “came as a surprise”, and which he saw as a “churlish response” to his reports.

On Monday, the former Lokayukta left his official residence with his wife Bharati, without the traditional farewell and left for his native Odisha. His term as the Goa Lokayukta ended on September 16, and now the state government is on a hunt for a new Lokayukta.

Also Read: Lokpal Is All Ready to Attack Corruption, but Lacks Teeth to Bite

Prior to this four-and-a-half years stint as Lokayukta, he was chairman of the Goa Human Rights Commission for five years. He was appointed a judge of the Orissa high court in January 1996, and moved on to the Madras high court in June 2001. He was elevated as chief justice of the Patna high court on August 12, 2009.

Last month, chief minister Pramod Sawant, according to a Times of India report, said the government will write to the high court for appointment of a new Lokayukta.

Former Supreme Court justice Sudershan Reddy was the first Goa Lokayukta – appointed in March 2013 – who resigned within seven months citing personal reasons, according to news reports. Three years later, on April 24, 2016, justice Misra was appointed as Goa’s second Lokayukta.

An endless wait for the appointment of a Lokayukta is not a new story for Goa. Even this time, local news reports indicate a delay in the process of appointing a Lokayukta. Petitioner advocate Rodrigues alleged that government is reportedly not keen to appoint the next Lokayukta so as to give public officials a free hand to indulge in acts of corruption and maladministration, reported HeraldGoa.