BJP supports Team Anna on 3 contentious issues

New Delhi, Aug 27 (PTI) India's main opposition party BJP
Saturday said it found considerable merit in three contentious
issues raised by Team Anna, including covering the entire
bureaucracy and Citizens' Charter for public grievances under
Lokpal(central anti-corruption ombudsman) and favoured
Lokayuktas(state anti-corruption ombudsman) in the states.
However, it said inclusion of Prime Minister under Lokpal
should be with the exception of certain areas like national
security.
These views were forcefully expressed by Arun Jaitley,
Leader of the Opposition in the Rajya Sabha(Upper House of
Indian Parliament) during debate on the Lokpal issue in the
House.
Besides, the party was against the phone-tapping powers to
be given to any institution, except in matters of national
security. Jaitley said it was conveyed to Team Anna when they
met the party leaders.
Jaitley found "greater merit" in having a Citizens'
Charter for redressal of grievances of the common man. He said
several state governments have already started work in this
area.
On the demand of the Anna Hazare-led civil society for
having the entire bureaucracy under the Lokpal, he said there
is considerable merit in it. "All public servants must be made
accountable... When we are including the Prime Minister (in
the Lokpal)..."
Responding to a specific enquiry by Finance Minister
Pranab Mukherjee whether there can be a central law for
Lokayuktas in the states, Jaitley, an eminent lawyer, said
there can be enabling laws. While there is merit in this,
Lokayuktas should not be appointed by the Centre.
Jaitley said, "We have heard some not-so-complimentary
statements against MPs" and urged members to show maturity
without getting provoked.

Asserting that the country needs a strong Lokpal, Jaitley
said, "The current political impasse must end. The time has
now come to raise the bar of accountability in Indian
democracy."
"We have to find a solution which is consistent with our
Constitution," he said, urging members to rise to the
occasion.
Jaitley said civil society has a role. "We have options to
agree or disagree. Nobody can dispute that Parliament is
supreme in making laws," he said.
He cautioned that the Government must not get provoked by
civil society in drafting any legislation, and said, "Our
actions and responses should decide for our maturity."
Jaitley said the Government's draft of Lokpal must be
seriously reconsidered which says that the Prime Minister will
be accountable under Lokpal only after he ceases to be in
office.
"I do not think the world's largest democracy can afford
to experiment with this," he said, while supporting the demand
to bring the Prime Minister within the purview of Lokpal
keeping certain functions relating to intelligence, national
security and foreign policy out of it.
On the issue of inclusion of higher judiciary under
Lokpal, he said there was need for a National Judicial
Commission, because judges should not appoint judges. He also
found problem with the Judicial Accountability Bill.
While executive must not interfere with judiciary, the
issue of judges' appointment cannot be left to them, he said.

On the conduct of MPs within the purview of Lokpal, the
BJP leader said any Lokpal Bill should necessarily be
compatible with Constitutional authority.
He said it has been proved that Parliament is competent
enough to take strong action against misconduct of MPs inside
the House and cited examples of how 11 MPs were removed for
taking Rs 5,000 only.
Jaitley, however, said the conduct of MPs outside the
House should be included under Lokpal.
Regarding the delegation of quasi-judicial powers to the
Lokpal, Jaitley said a serious examination of this is
required. It is a matter of legislative drafting and can be
worked out, he said.
He pointed out that punishment for complainant was harsh
in case it was proved false, but it was less for the corrupt.
It must be oversight and looked into, he said.
Jaitley said there is need for having a genuine redressal
mechanism as it will improve the quality of governance. "It is
a step towards good governance. We must come up with
procedures which are fair and effective," he said.
He said an average man confronts corruption as a way of
life and thus it was necessary to have a law as people were no
longer willing to accept status quo on corruption in the
country.
He reminded that the Lokpal Bill had actually been once
passed by the Lok Sabha in 1969, but the law could not be
enacted as the Rajya Sabha could not pass it after Parliament
was dissolved after split in the Indian National Congress.

Sitaram Yechury (CPM) said he agreed 'in-principle' with
the three issues raised by team Anna but they will have to be
implemented through constitutional procedures.
He said he wanted a new bill to be presented before
Parliament which should be a "combination of best features of
all the bills" including the Jan Lokpal Bill.
On the issue of bringing the lower bureaucracy under the
purview of the proposed Lokpal, he said the bureaucracy at all
levels must be under it but all of them cannot be covered
under one authority.
He said for the citizen's charter, the Government can come
up with a separate law for which there can be a reference in
the Lokpal Bill.
Yechury agreed with the demand of having a separate
Lokayukta for states and said their appointments should be the
privilege of the respective state government and authorities
there.
He said selection process of the Lokpal should be
broad-based and should not be government-heavy. "The Prime
Minister should be under the Lokpal but with certain
safeguards," he said.
The Left MP said that the definition of corruption should
also be changed and widened with the inclusion of acts of
omission under the purview of the Prevention of Corruption
Act.
He said for enhancing accountability of the judiciary, a
National Judicial Commission should be established.

Yechury demanded that the Lokpal Bill should have
provisions to probe corporates and the nexus among them,
bureaucrats and sections of the corporate media.
Satish Chandra Mishra (BSP) said there should be
provisions of reservation for the scheduled castes in the
proposed Lokpal.
He said though his party respected the Anna Hazare and his
movement, the country cannot bypass the Constitution and
democratic procedures.
On the issue of bringing lower bureaucracy under the
Lokpal, Mishra said it was "impractical" to do so.
Tiruchi Siva (DMK) said his party favoured inclusion of
the Prime Minister under the purview of Lokpal but with
certain riders.
On the issue of bringing judiciary under the Lokpal,
he said while immunities have been granted to judiciary by the
Constitution, the proposed judicial accountability bill should
be strengthened so that judges can come under "scrutiny".
At the same time, he said appointment of judges be made
more transparent.
Both Siva and Tariq Anwar (NCP) wer for thorough scrutiny
of the Lokpal Bill by the Standing Committee.
Baishnab Parida (BJD) said the Prime Minister should come
under the purview of the proposed anti-graft law but with
certain exceptions. Judiciary, however, should not be brought
under its ambit.
Sukhendu Sekhar Roy (Trinamool) said Lokayukta should be
set up through state legislations in keeping with the federal
structure.
Roy too said PM should not be under the ambit of Lokpal
while in office. Shivanand Tiwari (JD-U) also participated in
the debate.
Ramgopal Yadav (SP) said there were many laws already to
deal with corruption cases. He said his party is not in
agreement with many provisions of the Jan Lokpal Bill drafted
by civil society which rather than of checking corruption
promote wrongdoings.
The Jan Lokpal Bill says that the 10-member Lokpal
institution will have five members from judiciary and rest
from the civil society, he said, questioning what was the
guarantee that these five members from the civil society would
be of impeccable integrity.
He said the Lokpal institution should have proper
representation of SC/ST/OBC and added that NGOs and media
should be brought under the ambit of lokpal.
D Raja (CPI) blamed corporate houses for magnifying
corruption in the present time. "Now we hear about big scams
involving mind-boggling sums of money...this enormous growth
in corruption is because of the corporate houses which has a
lot of influence on government of the day," he said.
Raja said his party is of the view that the Lokpal Bill is
"weak" and suggested a strong anti-corruption legislation
after studying all existing laws.
He said the Prime Minister should come within the ambit
Lokpal. On Lokyukta in the states, he said states should not
be compelled for it rather provided a model framework which
could guide them formulate Lokyukta institution of their own.
Raja blamed the coterie surrounding Anna Hazare for
complicating the issue and advised the government to negotiate
directly with the Gandhian.
Paul Manoj Pandian (AIADMK) said his party president and
Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jaylalitha has already said that the
Prime Minister should be out of the ambit of Lokpal as he is
already covered by IPC and Prevention of Corruption Act. On
Lokyukta in states, he said it should be left to them.
Nominated member Shobhana Bhartia said though there was a
need to weed out corruption, the most effective Lokpal could
not be a panacea for the wrongdoings.
She favoured inclusion of the Prime Minister under the
purview of the Lokpal Bill, but insisted that passage of such
an important bill should not be done in a haste.
"We can wait a little longer...The proceedings at the
Ramlila Maidan should not be hanging on our head," she said.
Bhartia, however, disapproved the inclusion of judiciary
and the lower bureaucracy under the ambit of the Lokpal Bill.
Asom Gana Parishad's Birendra Prasad Baishya backed
Hazare's movement and said the Prime Minister should be
brought under the ambit of the Lokpal Bill.
While favouring a strong Lokpal at the Centre, he said
Lokayuktas should be set up in the states and added that AGP
was in favour of inclusion of the judiciary.
Satyavrat Chaturvedi (Cong) said although the Prime
Minister volunteered to come under the ambit of Lokpal, the
Cabinet thought it would not be in the interest of the
country.
Advocating an effective anti-corruption legislation, he
said the government should not take any decision in haste.
He took strong exception to the speakers from the
platform of Anna Hazare's spitting venom against MPs and said
"if they failed to keep their tongue in check, we can also
give them a strong reply."